Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Science

Blackest Fabric Ever Made Absorbs 99.87% of All Light That Hits It (sciencealert.com) 53

Posted by BeauHD from the inspired-by-nature dept.
alternative_right shares a report from ScienceAlert: Engineers at Cornell University have created the blackest fabric on record, finding it absorbs 99.87 percent of all light that dares to illuminate its surface. [...] In this case, the Cornell researchers dyed a white merino wool knit fabric with a synthetic melanin polymer called polydopamine. Then, they placed the material in a plasma chamber, and etched structures called nanofibrils -- essentially, tiny fibers that trap light. "The light basically bounces back and forth between the fibrils, instead of reflecting back out -- that's what creates the ultrablack effect," says Hansadi Jayamaha, fiber scientist and designer at Cornell.

The structure was inspired by the magnificent riflebird (Ptiloris magnificus). Hailing from New Guinea and northern Australia, male riflebirds are known for their iridescent blue-green chests contrasted with ultrablack feathers elsewhere on their bodies. The Cornell material actually outperforms the bird's natural ultrablackness in some ways. The bird is blackest when viewed straight on, but becomes reflective from an angle. The material, on the other hand, retains its light absorption powers when viewed from up to 60 degrees either side. The findings have been published in the journal Nature Communications.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blackest Fabric Ever Made Absorbs 99.87% of All Light That Hits It More

Blackest Fabric Ever Made Absorbs 99.87% of All Light That Hits It

Comments Filter:

  • It's like, how much more black could it get? (Score:5, Funny)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Friday December 05, 2025 @10:05PM (#65838705)
    And the answer is 0.13%.

    What? We're you expecting a different answer?

  • meet 30,000 watt light bulb [hackaday.com].

    Let the endarkening commence.

  • Heat (Score:3, Insightful)

    by RitchCraft ( 6454710 ) on Friday December 05, 2025 @10:13PM (#65838715)

    The article doesn't say anything about heat absorption. I wonder if the fabric traps most of the heat associated with the light as well? I'm assuming it would.

    • The Nature article's abstract mentions the absorption is in the visible-light range, from 400 nm to 700 nm wavelength. As you said, the article does not mention anything about heat (i.e., infrared radiation) but surely the fabric would emit heat as a blackbody at a nonzero Kelvin temperature. And in this case, the blackbody literally would appear black.

    • The heat and the light are not physically different things. If the light is absorbed, then the object that absorbed it was heated by that amount of energy.

      If the heat escaped, that would mean the light was reflected, and it wouldn't be black, it would be white. (Or a mirror, depending on how consistent the angle of reflection is)

      • The heat and the light are not physically different things. If the light is absorbed, then the object that absorbed it was heated by that amount of energy.If the heat escaped, that would mean the light was reflected, and it wouldn't be black, it would be white. (Or a mirror, depending on how consistent the angle of reflection is)

        Yes and no.

        Visible light carries energy, and hence, yes, absorbing visible light will heat the fabric. However, at temperatures less than a thousand degrees or so, most of the heat energy is carried in infrared light. Since the fabric is specified as being black in visible light, it may or may not be absorbing in infrared.

        • Re:Heat (Score:4, Informative)

          by theshowmecanuck ( 703852 ) on Saturday December 06, 2025 @02:17AM (#65838977) Journal
          Infrared are longer wavelengths. Probably too long to be trapped the way they describe. I immediately wondered about microwaves, i.e. radar. But those are way longer waves, so no as well. The reason they can put a mesh screen you can see through in the door of a microwave oven, is because the wavelength of those radio waves (that is really what they are) are so long they can't get through. Finally, black items can radiate heat, you just can't see it. So sure, if it trapped enough visible light, it could be 'converted' to a longer wavelength (infrared) as the fabric tries to shed the extra energy.
      • Almost none of this is correct.

        The heat and the light are not physically different things.

        Strictly speaking they are entirely different things. Light is radiation in the visible portion of the em spectrum. Heat is the kinetic energy of atoms or molecules, so not the same. In laymans terms heat can also be used to describe infrared radiation, so in this case only is it the same as light.

        If the light is absorbed, then the object that absorbed it was heated by that amount of energy.

        Depends. Lots of

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jbengt ( 874751 )

          Strictly speaking they are entirely different things. Light is radiation in the visible portion of the em spectrum. Heat is the kinetic energy of atoms or molecules, so not the same.

          Strictly speaking, heat is energy transferring from one body/system to another due to a temperature difference between them. So it can be electromagnetic radiation.

          • We're getting into semantics here but my understanding is that when talking about heat transferrence between bodies by infra red, or any type of radiation for that matter, the radiation acts as the intermediary by which heat flows from one body to the other. The radiation itself isn't usually described as heat.

            Regardless of this, the point I'm making still stands, in that light and heat are not considered the same thing in physics.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by jbengt ( 874751 )
              Well, this thread was getting into semantics before I added my 2cents. I was trying to comment on your comment about layman's terms when your definition of heat is itself layman's terms and is more a definition of thermal energy (no offense meant, I tend to be pedantic)
              But you're right in that light and heat are not synonyms. Still, if you're talking about black body radiation, you're talking about heat.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      The article doesn't say anything about heat absorption. I wonder if the fabric traps most of the heat associated with the light as well? I'm assuming it would.

      Well, the energy absorbed by the fabric has to go somewhere - typically it's converted to heat. Granted, it could be highly reflective elsewhere in the spectrum - like it could take that energy and convert it to IR light so it doesn't get hot.

    • It's mostly irrelevant anyway, Anish Kapoor has bought the exclusive rights to it so no-one else will ever get to play with it.

    • I assume it would too, but here's what I'm wondering: Can we use these microscopic structures to make solar panels more efficient somehow?

  • And what happens when you wash it?

  • Darkness blacker than black, and darker than dark...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

  • This University stuff is great and all, but when can I buy curtains made of this stuff?

  • Fuligiin (Score:3)

    by Jim.McGinness ( 38527 ) on Saturday December 06, 2025 @12:09AM (#65838881)
    Reminds me of Gene Wolfe - Shadow of the Torturer https://fancyclopedia.org/wiki... [fancyclopedia.org]
  • I mean, he's banned from purchasing the pinkest pink...

    • I think all open source licenses, of every sort, for anything, forever, should ban Anish Kapoor by name. Even long after he is gone.
      Just because he deserves to be an object lesson to others, for as long as human records exist
       

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      I think that's a bit of a joke. Isn't Kapoor the guy who thinks he has the exclusive right to develop artwork in stainless steel as well?

      Sure, the patent holder of VANTA Black may have accepted money from Kapoor for the right. But that makes Kapoor the idiot. How can one restrict the use of something if it is sold it in rattle-cans?

  • Here comes a new addition to their warddrobes.

  • And the answer is none. None more black.

  • How far is far enough? It ain't right.

  • Glad they added "that hits it".

  • I always wonder with these materials, how much heat they accumulate. If it absorbs 99% of light, does it warm up much when hit by average light? I think most material are absorbing like single digit percentages only?

  • How is it like compared to vanta black, which some arsehole patented?

    • What is important to note is that Kapoor didn't patent Vantablack. That would imply actually creating something.
      No, he simply licensed the patent. Then wrote the TOS to state he, personally, was the only person who could ever use it.
      Which is why, famously, he is sometimes excluded by name in other peoples TOS.

  • Why oh why won't cars make the top of their dashboards absorb at least 99% of light, so we don't get reflections in the windshield.

  • Once production is established, we need to improve the property values around the plant to the point where they have to relocate to another neighborhood so that plants making Cloud Dancer can move in.

  • Would it heat up more as it's absorbing more wavelength? would applications that have need of the properties benefit from this paint?

  • Bluejay feathers contain no blue pigment, from what I understand. The blue color comes from structures that block the reflection of other wavelengths. That's why when you look at them from behind they're not blue.

    Sounds like the same principle for the ultra-black.

Slashdot Top Deals

I am not an Economist. I am an honest man! -- Paul McCracken

Close