Upper size limit for Buckyballs

[Xitch13]

I'm having a discussion with a co-worker about the upper limits on the size of a Buckyball. He feels you could create a buckyball the size (surface area) of a bowling ball. I was pretty sure that once the the molecule got above a certain size the 'closeness' of the atoms and the massive numbers involved would create a gravity problem. The gravity of such a dense collection of atoms would defeat the molecular bonds.

 

Neither of us are chemists, but we both think we know more than we probably do . So we're both going to be hard to convince we are wrong. If there are any good sources you could point us to, it would be appreciated.

[5614]

Gravity would not be an issue unless the buckyball was extraordinary dense, which it would not be. Gravity has actually never been observed on an atomic level.

 

A standard buckminsterfullerene has 60 carbon atoms. That molecule, whilst a big molecule is absolutely minute next to a bowling ball. I know there is a fullerene with 540 carbon atoms, but that is still no where near a bowling ball. The huge number of carbon atoms required would be so massive I don't know if it would be practical or possible (in reality, not sure about in theory) to make. But this is certainly not due to gravity.

[insane_alien]

Atmospheric effects and the strain from bond angle deformation are probably the biggest challenges for making it besides the actual construction. you could possibly do it in space, which provides a vacuum so it doesn't get smashed apart and there are no gravitaional effects to make it structurally impossible(nothing to do with density but problems like why you cant have a 1000mile high tower of steel the width of a matchstick.)

 

Example: try making a (hollow) ball of tinfoil about the size of the earth. thats about the equivalent wall thickness to volume ratio.

[Daecon]

If you could keep it suspended without touching anything...

 

It would be like a giant bubble, wouldn't it?

[insane_alien]

Trans: no offence or anything but change your avatar for the love of all that is crispy. its freakin me out.

 

yeah i suppose you could make some sort of field to keep it suspended but since it is uncharged i think it would be easier to construct it in space.

[Daecon]

Hey!

 

This one better?

 

Honestly? I was changing it even before you posted that message!

[insane_alien]

its not AS creepy, i suppose it'll do.

[RyanJ]

As was stated I don't think there is a chemical limit to this - the cmulative effects of gravity and other forces may eventually make it impossible to make bigger ones. In space the only limit shoulod be technology and the number of carbon atoms you have.

 

This is the one to which 5614 was refering, pretty impressive and an add shape.

 

Cheers,

 

Ryan Jones

[Tartaglia]

This is not something I have really looked at for 15 years but the formation of these things is essentially multiple ring closures and I believe they are affected by rotational entropy considerations and may become more and more difficult as the ball becomes larger. I might add this is only my feeling and I can't really back it up with suitable references