@@GemologyforSchmucks I posted the same question .. and then saw this reply so I deleted my question. :) Thanks again for another greatly informative video.
It is possible that some of the new Nano-Coatings made for aerospace and automotives finishes could have a higher RI than the oil you are using. I found information online that Titanium Dioxide two Refractive Indexes. Anatase: The refractive index of anatase TiO2 is 2.56 at 589 nm. Rutile: The refractive index of rutile TiO2 is 2.613 for \(n\omega \) and 2.909 for \(n\varepsilon \) at 589 nm. I don't know if this can be used with your Refractometer, but you might want to do some research. it just occured to me there might be a new technology that could be better than the traditional oil.
@@Joel-ym3ij thank you for bringing this up. I’ll discuss it with my research gemologist friends and get their input. Do you know if these substances are liquid or solids? Coating makes it sound like a solid to me. The purpose of the oil is to make a complete optical contact so that light can travel through the device into the stone. If there is an air gap (solid A, air, solid B) then i expect that would disrupt the function of the refractometer. My other suspicion is that it might be a pricepoint to functionality issue. 1.81 limit RI liquid is significantly more expensive than the 1.78 limit liquid. Once we get above 1.81, the other characteristics of the stones can usually be distinguished with other tests beyond RI, so it becomes functionally unnecessary (especially if it was expensive). Still definitely worth exploring though. Cheers and thanks for the astute comment.
Loved it! Great walk-through on your thought process/reasoning/deduction.
Thank you ~ hope it was helpful.
Какой же вы молодец и умничка! Дорогу осилит идущий❤
Love these videos. Keep them coming
Thanks, im glad you enjoy them ~ i intend to keep them coming (gradually though, as they take a boat load of time). Cheers~
I do love the delivery in these videos... I may have found my 2025 hobby
@@gogogirl2100 thank you~ im glad to be part of sparking an interest.
Where do you get a chart with all that info?
I got mine from AIGS when I was studying there.
@@GemologyforSchmucks I posted the same question .. and then saw this reply so I deleted my question. :) Thanks again for another greatly informative video.
It is possible that some of the new Nano-Coatings made for aerospace and automotives finishes could have a higher RI than the oil you are using. I found information online that Titanium Dioxide two Refractive Indexes.
Anatase: The refractive index of anatase TiO2 is 2.56 at 589 nm.
Rutile: The refractive index of rutile TiO2 is 2.613 for \(n\omega \) and 2.909 for \(n\varepsilon \) at 589 nm.
I don't know if this can be used with your Refractometer, but you might want to do some research. it just occured to me there might be a new technology that could be better than the traditional oil.
@@Joel-ym3ij thank you for bringing this up. I’ll discuss it with my research gemologist friends and get their input. Do you know if these substances are liquid or solids? Coating makes it sound like a solid to me. The purpose of the oil is to make a complete optical contact so that light can travel through the device into the stone. If there is an air gap (solid A, air, solid B) then i expect that would disrupt the function of the refractometer.
My other suspicion is that it might be a pricepoint to functionality issue. 1.81 limit RI liquid is significantly more expensive than the 1.78 limit liquid. Once we get above 1.81, the other characteristics of the stones can usually be distinguished with other tests beyond RI, so it becomes functionally unnecessary (especially if it was expensive). Still definitely worth exploring though. Cheers and thanks for the astute comment.