I found another site posting magnetic susceptibilities. Go to: http://www.reade.com/Particle_Briefings/magnetic_susceptibilities.html Unfortunately, the aluminum sulfates mentioned in George Harris=92 list below are not in this list. George Harris posted the following magnetic susceptibility list from the handbook of Chemistry and Physics (59 th edition - 1979) Carbon or diamond -6 Bismuth (solid) -280 Aluminum Sulfate (anhydrous) -93 Aluminum Sulfate Hydrate (Al2(So4)3.18H2O -323 Calcium Carbonate -38 Ammonium Nitrate -34 Ammonium Sulfate -67 Thanks for the additional information, but now I am bothered. I understood from other comments that bismuth was supposed to have the highest constant, but aluminum sulfate hydrate is shown with bigger numbers. Is there some independent reference where we can verify that number? Usually the CRC handbook gives the reference for the data. Could you please post that? Thanks. A small bit of discussion on the above materials. Aluminum sulfate hydrate is soluble in water but decomposes above 86 degrees C. So to get a reasonable solid piece, you could probably slowly, ever so slowly, evaporate a solution leaving behind a cake/crystalline mass. From that viewpoint, ammonium sulfate would be much easier to do something with. It decomposes at 235 degrees C. So you could spray onto a hot surface, building up a shape that would be pretty much void free or boil off the water to leave a solid cake with probably some porosity. The minus 67 number is still better than the minus 6 of carbon, even taking into account densities. My carbon rods are in from McMaster-Carr, so maybe this weekend I=92ll slice=92n=92dice up a test panel=92s worth. A quick test shows that they= are diamagnetic at least. Charles R. Patton charles.r.patton@........ _____________________________________________________________________ Public Seismic Network Mailing List (PSN-L)
Larry Cochrane <cochrane@..............>