Topic: GOLD can now be made in laboratories and what it means for bitcoins - page 2. (Read 3660 times)
May 02, 2014, 07:01:53 AM
We need someone to build a blockchain collider. Then we're in business.
May 02, 2014, 06:18:48 AM
@OP: The title you have is misleading - Gold can no more be produced by bacteria than I can from my crap. Unless you are completing transmutation in a nuclear reactor or the heart of a star you cannot create new amounts of an element. At the moment the cost is so great that it isn't worth it so there will be little change to the end supply of gold meaning that it won't affect Bitcoin in any way.
May 02, 2014, 06:12:49 AM
These bacteria collect gold particles, they not make them. The title is misleading.
We have been throwing gold away bit by bit in our bins. Electronic products contains high percentage of gold in them. When they are discarded, the gold is lost. There is a gold recycling plant in Japan where they mined back those tiny traces of gold:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bU-NwowzVE
The bacteria can do just that, but in slower and smaller scale. May be in the future, we can buy prepackaged DIY gold extraction kits using enhanced generations of these microbes.
People here seem to have a lack of knowledge about chemistry. The bacteria are just separating the Au atoms from the AuCl solution. IT is not MAKING Au atoms out of thin air We have been throwing gold away bit by bit in our bins. Electronic products contains high percentage of gold in them. When they are discarded, the gold is lost. There is a gold recycling plant in Japan where they mined back those tiny traces of gold:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bU-NwowzVE
The bacteria can do just that, but in slower and smaller scale. May be in the future, we can buy prepackaged DIY gold extraction kits using enhanced generations of these microbes.
May 02, 2014, 06:11:48 AM
I thought that they were able to produce gold for 10+ years already, just that the price to produce is significantly more expensive than mining it.
Making gold is of trivial difficulty.
We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
and the odds are it will be radioactive.
May 02, 2014, 06:09:25 AM
These bacteria collect gold particles, they not make them. The title is misleading.
We have been throwing gold away bit by bit in our bins. Electronic products contains high percentage of gold in them. When they are discarded, the gold is lost. There is a gold recycling plant in Japan where they mined back those tiny traces of gold:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bU-NwowzVE
The bacteria can do just that, but in slower and smaller scale. May be in the future, we can buy prepackaged DIY gold extraction kits using enhanced generations of these microbes.
We have been throwing gold away bit by bit in our bins. Electronic products contains high percentage of gold in them. When they are discarded, the gold is lost. There is a gold recycling plant in Japan where they mined back those tiny traces of gold:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bU-NwowzVE
The bacteria can do just that, but in slower and smaller scale. May be in the future, we can buy prepackaged DIY gold extraction kits using enhanced generations of these microbes.
May 02, 2014, 03:45:58 AM
i think the amount of gold produced by this bacteria is next to miniscule.
May 02, 2014, 03:44:26 AM
guys please put facts into place.
no one can make gold. what this story about is detoxifying / cleaning the currently known dirty gold.
in other words, no big deal as the current 170k tonnes of gold will NOT become millions of tonnes in a few decades. it will stay around the same couple hundred thousand tonne amount, just that more % of that amount is now useful, rather than toxic.
no one can make gold. what this story about is detoxifying / cleaning the currently known dirty gold.
in other words, no big deal as the current 170k tonnes of gold will NOT become millions of tonnes in a few decades. it will stay around the same couple hundred thousand tonne amount, just that more % of that amount is now useful, rather than toxic.
May 02, 2014, 03:02:41 AM
We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
Maybe Butterfly Labs should advertise one for pre-order.
And, Brock Pierce can secure the VC. For marketing, invent a pseudonym like Wawaska Plutomi, having him pen a white paper...
May 02, 2014, 02:46:56 AM
Until they find strands of bacteria that can perform nuclear fusion, gold bugs can sleep peacefully.
May 01, 2014, 11:10:06 PM
thread title is bogus to actual content,, so should be deleted
and gold is over rated plenty of other metals will do the job
it has been used as a form of wealth storage but total value
of gold doesn't even come close to property, bitcoins
convertibility also trumps gold and other forms of currency
transfers by such a degree its not even worth comparing,
property transfers would be considered to slow also
though are used by companies to trade large sumes of
wealth so its not really the same market either.
and gold is over rated plenty of other metals will do the job
it has been used as a form of wealth storage but total value
of gold doesn't even come close to property, bitcoins
convertibility also trumps gold and other forms of currency
transfers by such a degree its not even worth comparing,
property transfers would be considered to slow also
though are used by companies to trade large sumes of
wealth so its not really the same market either.
May 01, 2014, 10:52:20 PM
...
Bit_Happy
I read a few months ago about a company in ICELAND mining BTC using cheap geothermal energy there. For cooling, they just have to open the roof and let all that cold air in...
I believe the same folks want to start a solar-powered plant (as you suggested) in Texas, see the second link below (both from Dec 2013):
http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-iceland-pool-2013-12
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/into-the-bitcoin-mines/
Bit_Happy
I read a few months ago about a company in ICELAND mining BTC using cheap geothermal energy there. For cooling, they just have to open the roof and let all that cold air in...
I believe the same folks want to start a solar-powered plant (as you suggested) in Texas, see the second link below (both from Dec 2013):
http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-iceland-pool-2013-12
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/into-the-bitcoin-mines/
May 01, 2014, 10:19:03 PM
Btw, according to wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_of_precious_metals (at the bottom of the page)
The first gold synthesis (granted, it was a radioactive isotope) was in 1924.
I dunno when the first stable isotope synthesis was, but it was probably a long time ago and nothing new.
Extracting gold from seawater is also very real.
But none of those methods are cost effective.
It's kind of like buying the computing power to brute force a bitcoin private key. It's possible, but not worth it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_of_precious_metals (at the bottom of the page)
The first gold synthesis (granted, it was a radioactive isotope) was in 1924.
I dunno when the first stable isotope synthesis was, but it was probably a long time ago and nothing new.
Extracting gold from seawater is also very real.
But none of those methods are cost effective.
It's kind of like buying the computing power to brute force a bitcoin private key. It's possible, but not worth it.
May 01, 2014, 10:12:50 PM
I thought that they were able to produce gold for 10+ years already, just that the price to produce is significantly more expensive than mining it.
Making gold is of trivial difficulty.
We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
Amazingly BTC is heading in the same direction as mining diff keeps shooting higher.
Someday we will see huge mining farms using solar power, perhaps they will also create some gold.
May 01, 2014, 10:10:18 PM
We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
Maybe Butterfly Labs should advertise one for pre-order.
May 01, 2014, 10:10:04 PM
...
madmadmax, I do not think even at FOFOA's $55,000 / oz that it would be profitable to make gold out of other elements.
Even if you take FOFOA's newer prediction of +/- $100,000 / oz, or "twoshortplanks" number of $133,000 would make it profitable. Read from the master himself:
fofoa.blogspot.com
Long & dense reading, tl;dr? But serious gold people need to check out his stuff. My suggestion?: start in October 2009.
Here's something to get you interested:
Note that the peak probability is $55,000 in non-hyperinflated dollars.
...
madmadmax, I do not think even at FOFOA's $55,000 / oz that it would be profitable to make gold out of other elements.
Even if you take FOFOA's newer prediction of +/- $100,000 / oz, or "twoshortplanks" number of $133,000 would make it profitable. Read from the master himself:
fofoa.blogspot.com
Long & dense reading, tl;dr? But serious gold people need to check out his stuff. My suggestion?: start in October 2009.
Here's something to get you interested:
Note that the peak probability is $55,000 in non-hyperinflated dollars.
...
May 01, 2014, 10:06:45 PM
I thought that they were able to produce gold for 10+ years already, just that the price to produce is significantly more expensive than mining it.
Making gold is of trivial difficulty.
We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.
The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
May 01, 2014, 09:55:53 PM
I thought that they were able to produce gold for 10+ years already, just that the price to produce is significantly more expensive than mining it.
May 01, 2014, 08:22:42 PM
...
Gold cannot be made by bacteria. Sorry, bacteria do not add protons to a nucleus. I am almost surprised to see such notions even being mentioned here, these "scientists", whatever they are doing (I did see one comment above about gold chloride being the feedstock for the process, uh, gold chloride).
Artificial diamonds will be a problem soon, though, for those looking to put money into diamonds.
Gold has a long bright future ahead of it. Until they can extract gold from seawater (and there is not as much there as people think) and/or the energy requirements for changing some metals (lead? mercury?) into gold become lowered by orders of magnitude, gold owners will be just fine.
EDIT: as "acoindr" just wrote!
Gold cannot be made by bacteria. Sorry, bacteria do not add protons to a nucleus. I am almost surprised to see such notions even being mentioned here, these "scientists", whatever they are doing (I did see one comment above about gold chloride being the feedstock for the process, uh, gold chloride).
Artificial diamonds will be a problem soon, though, for those looking to put money into diamonds.
Gold has a long bright future ahead of it. Until they can extract gold from seawater (and there is not as much there as people think) and/or the energy requirements for changing some metals (lead? mercury?) into gold become lowered by orders of magnitude, gold owners will be just fine.
EDIT: as "acoindr" just wrote!
May 01, 2014, 08:08:51 PM
I don't think this is the alchemy it insinuates. Apparently the bacteria feed on gold chloride a compound of gold and chlorine. So it seems to me the bacteria act more as a gold filter than gold transformer, the gold being already there.
Yes, as I understand a big (or the biggest?) source of the world's gold is in the oceans, but it's not very cost effective to extract. Now there is a way to turn an inexpensive compound which is not gold into gold. However, it's also not cost effective at today's prices and you need a nuclear reactor or particle accelerator to do it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_of_precious_metals#Gold_synthesis_in_an_accelerator
Kind of like all those stories a decade ago about how people were going to sift the oceans to extract the trace amounts of gold and other precious materials. Only that was found to be vastly more effort than it was worth.
Yes, as I understand a big (or the biggest?) source of the world's gold is in the oceans, but it's not very cost effective to extract. Now there is a way to turn an inexpensive compound which is not gold into gold. However, it's also not cost effective at today's prices and you need a nuclear reactor or particle accelerator to do it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_of_precious_metals#Gold_synthesis_in_an_accelerator
May 01, 2014, 07:45:12 PM
From the longer article at http://www.nature.com/news/gold-digging-bacterium-makes-precious-particles-1.12352 it sounds like the most they are hoping from here is to find a way to extract tiny amounts of pure gold from mining waste.
To me that sounds like it could end up being costlier than the conventional ways of finding gold for quite some time. If that is the case then this would have negligible effect on the price of gold — this method takes over once it becomes harder to mine gold conventionally.
It also sounds to me like it's got a good chance to being found completely impractical. Kind of like all those stories a decade ago about how people were going to sift the oceans to extract the trace amounts of gold and other precious materials. Only that was found to be vastly more effort than it was worth.
So it's interesting but I don't think any goldbugs should be dumping their hoards just yet!
To me that sounds like it could end up being costlier than the conventional ways of finding gold for quite some time. If that is the case then this would have negligible effect on the price of gold — this method takes over once it becomes harder to mine gold conventionally.
It also sounds to me like it's got a good chance to being found completely impractical. Kind of like all those stories a decade ago about how people were going to sift the oceans to extract the trace amounts of gold and other precious materials. Only that was found to be vastly more effort than it was worth.
So it's interesting but I don't think any goldbugs should be dumping their hoards just yet!
Jump to: