LOL, how? Please tell me how my "logic" (which isn't logic because it is basic science that a 9th grader could tell you that sapphire is harder than a rock) is flawed
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Corning Again Criticizes Sapphire as Potential Alternative to Gorilla Glass
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
LOL, how? Please tell me how my "logic" (which isn't logic because it is basic science that a 9th grader could tell you that sapphire is harder than a rock) is flawed
Hmm, where to begin. "Hardness" has little to do with resistance to shattering. There's only a tentative correlation and it's inverse. Rubber will conduct electricity given enough of it. Keep going though, it's clear that you have a deep background in materials.
You're right actually, hardness doesn't have anything to do with shattering, it's a good thing it can't shatter thought.
Materials scientists everywhere disagree with you but I suppose that doesn't matter anymore.
I suppose posting your evidence doesn't matter anymore either, because on the internet what you say is Fact! It's funny how i asked you multi-able times to post evidence and yet you haven't? Or maybe the better word is can't?
When you point one finger at someone, 3 fingers point back at you... try it
I posted evidence hypocrite.
I posted evidence hypocrite.
I'm not a hypocrite. But thanks. Maybe you need to look up the definition of that.
My point was that just because you state something, that also does not make it fact. When have you had a 1mm piece of Sapphire that was 1' by 1' and threw it against a rock. And yet to state clearly that it wouldn't shatter. You can't possibly know this.
Typo? It's Saint Gobain I think. As to your comments, I think I'd prefer harder at the expense of impact strength. My iPhone 4 is three years old and doesn't have a scratch on it, which is the way I like it. My wife on the other hand has a fair amount of scratches, though still not too bad. She keeps hers in a purse whereas I don't put anything in the pant pocket I put my phone in. Were it made out of sapphire, I might worry less about that.
About the only thing you would have to worry about with sapphire would be sandpaper style nail "files". I remember reading about someone commenting that they were worried about using a file on a ring near a sapphire and someone commented back that they should be more worried about the file than the gemstone. Though not entirely true, it did give me a better grasp on how hard these things really are.
You are right, i haven't actually done this, tho before i continue on i believe i said something along the lines of i doubt it would crack, if i didn't i apologies. Anyway the reason why i believe it wouldn't is because the amount of force that it cracked in the video that the other guy posted was 161 pounds i believe, so unless you can throw that hard i doubt it would be damaged, unless of course you where throwing it at a diamond rock.
You're right, other than posting the commonly accepted definition of the word "shatter" and video evidence of a sapphire plate shattering in such a way that exactly meets this definition, I guess I haven't provided anything.
And yet no it didn't match it at all. Your arrogance and pride is making you think it did and yet it obviously didn't, BTW where are your scientist?
From Dictionary.com:
Shatter:*to break (something) into pieces
So you're telling me that didn't happen in the video? This "doesn't match at all" with the video?
I get it, I'm ruining your Internet super hero mojo, but you're really embarrassing yourself here.
Well, of course there is no confirmation of these products. Or else you would be posting your personal gripes on a website called "MacConfirmations".
I did say "I think" which means I am speculating. And as much as you think I care about your personal gripes. I truly don't. So... Again, I THINK that apple will come out with a TV. And a watch. And they will use sapphire glass for these products.
Pieces, do you remember the pics I posted earlier? It has crack all over from just 1 blow, that vid showed i believe three pieces, 1 of which was very small, a crack is a very clean "cut", But a shatter isn't, you are looking way too far into it.
I'm looking at it quite simply. Doesn't matter if it's 3 pieces or a million pieces, big or small. As long as it's plural it falls within the definition of shatter.
And that's why you are wrong, science is never simple. Also it has to do with the way it breaks. If it is a strait break it is a crack, if it goes out wards like that pic I showed that's a shatter. Another thing you fail to realize is that it could simply be a second crack.
If you think dictionary.com is a source for an indepth scientific term then you just fail. It's a simple definition and that's all.
I don't care if you're right or wrong, the fact that you are just about every other post in half this thread has made me seek out if I can ignore you.
Also, there are no facts, just theories, so everyone here saying otherwise is wrong.
Edit: Ignore list
Last edited:
I don't care if you're right or wrong, the fact that you are just about every other post in half this thread has made me seek out if I can ignore you.
Also, there are no facts, just theories, so everyone here saying otherwise is wrong.
And the other guy that has almost as many post as me? Seems a bit bias no? And a fact is something that can be proven, so if you can prove something it is a fact
That's probably because the Mac computers are already configured and don't need to be fixed. So people talk about how and why they use them, not how to make them work in the first place.
And the other guy that has almost as many post as me? Seems a bit bias no? And a fact is something that can be proven, so if you can prove something it is a fact
Other guy likely to get the ignore too, but a quick google of "sapphire shatter" makes it appear you are the wrong one. A fact is not something that can be proven, because every "proof" is based on a theory. The temperature outside is not a fact because the theory of thermal expansion and thermodynamics are used in making that determination. "scientific fact" is a term, but it's just a theory that is so well tested, nobody bothers anymore, but it is never a fact, any one experiment can invalidate the theory at any time. Heck, our existence in general is still a theory. There are no facts in science, testable theories are as good as it gets.
Last edited: