Have you read the source? :D Quote me whatever you think contradicts me. :D
How ironic. :D You blame me for projecting and couldn't even face the facts in the link I've shared... :D And I am projecting? :D You hipocrite... :D
You ignoring all my other points in the comments just proves my point. You haven't turned to God, clearly. Drawn in your arrogance then. I gave it an honest shot.
The part of the paper where it draws a clear distinction between graphene and carbon nanotubes (as I did). They are not the same thing. It's in the first paragraph.
A few years back, Tour developed a process for “unzipping” carbon nanotubes so that they transformed into graphene.
They have to be transformed to be graphene (or vice versa). So you didn't read or comprehend the first paragraph of the source you used. You're completely talking out of your ass, with all due respect.
And you still haven't addressed the issue of the quantity of material. So I already dismantled your arguments (and alleged evidence) and you don't have a rebuttal besides getting mad.
It's how the structure changes... From a tube to a 2d plane... Dude, read the whole paragraph... :D
Are you projecting something? Or just very unclear on physics? "Unzipping" is used to describe how a 3d tube is "unzipped", so it can become a 2d plane... Should I really explain terms that are explained in the same paragraph? :D
Anyway, bot. Stay humble. I am not getting mad... you seem confused... :D Why would I get mad about that? Read the whole thing, you might learn something...
I sent you a link with information that you are wrong. You are not willing to accept it? Then reap what you sow, hypocrite.
Obviously, your ignorance doesn't allow you to win this argument, and your arrogance doesn't allow you to lose it. You are a product of your own demise.
Have you read the source? :D Quote me whatever you think contradicts me. :D
How ironic. :D You blame me for projecting and couldn't even face the facts in the link I've shared... :D And I am projecting? :D You hipocrite... :D
You ignoring all my other points in the comments just proves my point. You haven't turned to God, clearly. Drawn in your arrogance then. I gave it an honest shot.
The part of the paper where it draws a clear distinction between graphene and carbon nanotubes (as I did). They are not the same thing. It's in the first paragraph.
They have to be transformed to be graphene (or vice versa). So you didn't read or comprehend the first paragraph of the source you used. You're completely talking out of your ass, with all due respect.
And you still haven't addressed the issue of the quantity of material. So I already dismantled your arguments (and alleged evidence) and you don't have a rebuttal besides getting mad.
Absolutely hilarious! :D
It's how the structure changes... From a tube to a 2d plane... Dude, read the whole paragraph... :D
Are you projecting something? Or just very unclear on physics? "Unzipping" is used to describe how a 3d tube is "unzipped", so it can become a 2d plane... Should I really explain terms that are explained in the same paragraph? :D
Anyway, bot. Stay humble. I am not getting mad... you seem confused... :D Why would I get mad about that? Read the whole thing, you might learn something...
Yeah, you don't even understand what I was saying to begin with about graphene and carbon nanotubes. Go back and re-read.
I sent you a link with information that you are wrong. You are not willing to accept it? Then reap what you sow, hypocrite.
Obviously, your ignorance doesn't allow you to win this argument, and your arrogance doesn't allow you to lose it. You are a product of your own demise.
Now stop bothering people.