Are there any examples of clear, transparent non-Newtonian fluids?

>>8012893
precum

File: asdgdghfaq.jpg (73KB, 471x600px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 471x600px

>>8012893
glycerin
polymer melt
silicone oil
...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Newtonian_fluid

>>8013685
What about something less viscous?

What can look like this, but be even more thicker and firmer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSl3M6uVB18

>>8014449
less viscous: np, mix glycerin with water in wanted ratio. theres no miscibility gap btw.

thicker and firmer as vidrelated: mmh, in any case glass.
but also polymer melt examples, because viscosity = f(T,...). id say nylon at 250°C is more viscous than this stuff, but also more sticky.

>>8015245
>glass

>>8015669
Fuck off

>>8015721
Fuck you

>>8015733
np, just joking. glass shows a kind of flow rating, but the stories about church windows are just persistent rumors. it is way slower and would take millions of years.

>>8015805
Nah, there are houses near the beach in my state that were abandoned a while ago that have glass "melting".

>>8015813
mk, maybe. this is a material science question then.

>>8015813
no it doesnt

File: glass.jpg (34KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 400x400px

>>8015669
>>8015805
Why does this rumor persist!

First, glass is an amorphous solid!
So it is a sub type of solid, not a liquid!

Second the reason old windows are thicker at the bottom is old manufacturing methods, also installers put the larger heavier parts at the bottom for obvious reasons. Pre 1600s flat glass was actually crown glass that was cut to remove the bullseye, thus it was not really flat as the closer to the center was always thicker. There were many attempts and methods to improve upon these short comings, the thickness change left undesirable distortions in windows.

I swear at times it is like I am the only person who took two semesters of glass engineering classes in college.

>>8015839
ur mum a amorphous solid

>>8012918
delicious example

>>8015839
what is the bullseye?

I don't know anything about glass manufacturing. I would love to read a dedicated book about it tho

>>8015839
>glass engineering classes in college
because you were the only asshole to take two god damn classes about fucking glass

File: bullseye1.jpg (55KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 600x512px

>>8015883
Basically they would blow glass following traditional methods then use some addition step to deform it into a flatter blob, then spin it. The spinning caused the hot glass to be stretched out to a disc. Once it cooled the would break the disk off, but there would be a mark in the center of the disc where the rod was attached and often some thicker ring like distortions in the nearby area.
They would then cut the glass by demand. The edges with the least distortion would be cut and sold to the super rich and the center parts were sold the regular rich folks. For larger windows they would have to use as much of the disc as they could. Which makes me wonder why I don't see more round windows in old buildings.

This pic shows the disc well. But those cut parts are not common cuts, looks like a modern version mimicking the old lower quality methods as those distorted cores were considered unsightly by the super rich back in the day. Likely someone wants their window to look very old fashion.

>>8012893

Shampoo

>>8015972
>Which makes me wonder why I don't see more round windows in old buildings.

Does your vast knowledge of engineering include an inkling of word work?