In talking about the work done on e. coli, a non spherical cell, it says the methods had to be changed due to "turbulence" attendant to the e. coli's departure from sphericity of the earlier tested yeast cells.
My rough calcs show a Reynolds number in the range of 1e-6. The onset of turbulence happens at Reynolds numbers of ~2300 for pure water. The 1% sugar solution would have a negligibly higher turbulence onset Reynolds number.
I expect the need for different methodology wasn't turbulence, but the difference in drag presented by an elongated e. coli compared to a spherical yeast cell.
I just can't imagine why a submersible structural designer would select composites for this application. IMHO, this project was doomed from the moment of that design decision, even setting aside all the other idiocy.
Natural diamonds won't always fluoresce but the ones that do will do so in a variety of colors, and sometimes change depending on what wavelength is irradiating them.
• Scale: I'm aware of one company that operates over 700 CVD systems that each make 25 stones/run - there are at least 3 others of similar volume;
• Cost: the variable cost of making a 1ct finished brilliant (D-E,F-VVSI) is <$30US. Obviously, that cost is for ex-US production. See, for example, the recent demise of de Beers' Lightbox growth center in Oregon.
Naturals simply can't compete. They are forming a completely separate market involving a much smaller, extremely wealthy clientele.
The business case for synthetics is deteriorating as production costs bottom out and margins decline in an ongoing race to the bottom.
i.e. if there's a blanket ban, can you use your radio hidden in your house or can the government easily find out that the user they've noticed on the airwaves is located there and knock down your door?
I thought that was potassium nitrate. Which I bought a bottle of on Amazon when I was curing a ham.
Purpose and hope, even if the answer is utterly magical.