The idea behind is that we can tune the bandgap. These BN nanotubes
have other advantages too.

Why then so much attention to carbon? Just because it was discovered
first?

Perhaps -- there's also the issue that carbon's probably cheaper. :-)

Carbon is cheaper as material but it doesn't mean automatically that end
product is also cheap.
It you read the article carefully, you will find a lot of advantages which
might play a crutual role and make BN nanotube applications much cheaper
than carbon. For example, temp stability to oxidation, properties
independence on diameter and number of layers the tube is made from (!), by
doping BN tubes, it is conceivable to have devices on single BN tubes which
have diameters on the order of nanometers and lengths on the order of
microns, etc.

All those could make applications much cheaper!

So my question remains. Why so much talks about carbon?

Historically, BN has had the potential to substitute for the "Wonder of
Carbon" for at least 75 years. There are papers that go back that far,
or nearly so. I remember reading such papers written in the 1950's.

For the most part, it (BN) has rarely done so (replace carbon). At least
not in large tonnages or poundages even.

Perhaps the old farts remember some of this history.

Perhaps, they let the history blind them.

I am not involved, but I would bet even money that BN will be presennt
with many limitations in this specific arena. I would even bet against
BN, for an affordable amount of money, of course.

It could be that BN has a happy future in nano-country. Go ahead and
spend the time trying to develop it, as you could become famous or rich.

I would look for something else to do with my time.

Jim

Thanks for the story -- haven't been keeping up on BN nanotubes
lately.
I guess it's because the BN nanotubes are much harder to make.
I've read that ball-milling and laser ablation has been making very
tiny trace amounts of them, but nothing with consistent properties
yet.

What about chiral vector affecting the BN nanotube properties?

I've read that BN nanotubes would have stronger tensile strength, have
oxidation resistance, have better bandgap properties, and have
accordion-like buckling characteristics for impact absorption. Gee, I
wonder if they can do the muscle-contraction thing under bi-layer
charge injection, like C-nanotubes can?

BN group is polar, unlike C, therefore I wonder if that can help
BN-nanotube cohesion, and adhesion to other polar molecules.

Striking a carbon arc in vacuum or helium is easy - graphite conducts
electricity. BN is an insulator.

Growing nanotubes by pyrolyzing simple volatile organics with a bit of
ferrocene vapor to give iron catalyst motes is easy. No known metal
or alloy system wll dissolve and recrystallize h-BN. Growing large
single crystal diamond HPHT is a matter of patience. To the best of
my knowledge, nobody has grown single crystal cubic-BN to even a
millimeter diameter.