Is japanese natural awasedo grit really friable?

[Brooksie967]

I am new to honing and some of this topic is still a bit over my head. It's unfortunate to see some of the responses posted above. I don't know enough or have enough experience to comment on what I think is happening with slurry particles. I greatly appreciate the information given by OP and the respectful arguments for and against the initial hypothesis.

Some of the comments above are disrespectful and, I feel, are out of line. If the topic is something that has been discussed before and has not been agreed upon doesn't mean it's something that someone else can't try to experiment with or try to figure out. If you have a problem with the thread then don't post in it. I have no argument with those who made arguments or respectful comments against the suggestions by OP. I have an issue with those who chose to make jokes about something because they disagreed with the suggestions made or with the post in general.

Some of the comments made above make someone like me second guess whether I should post questions or ask about different topics as I learn to hone.

We are all friends here. Don't take lighthearted jokes too seriously please.

Do we need to know the answer to this question? Nope. Does it make a spit if difference with regards to how I'm going to make things sharp and shiny in the future? Prob not. Is it cool to see your observations confirmed or proven wrong? Yep.

Talking with a friend off forum he made a good point: these are turning into tape threads! Thats ok and good to see people interested in what we all like doing but they really never do get anything resolved.

 

[rockviper]

If someone actually has to post their concern about comments in a thread, especially a honing thread, perhaps it's time for a refresher read of this.

 

[Steve56]

It can certainly be ungentlemanly at times.

Cheers, Steve

 

[HonerSimpson]

....

What puzzles me is why we keep referring to binders and abrasives. Nothing I've seen so far suggests that Jnats are comprised of components that can be so easily categorized as a binder and an abrasive. What's more, it's not clear that there aren't multiple types of components. Those parts of the stone which we blithely refer to as binders could easily be relatively soft (2-2.5 MOHs is what I've seen) or they could be quite hard (as high as 7 which is on par with an Arkie). As for the abrasive particles, if such a distinction really does exist, I couldn't find anything-yet- which definitively states that such a distinction exists; those particles may also be of various sizes and hardness and shape.

.....

I'm not a Geologist, but I have some modest understanding of this and I will give my take on the subject:

The Wikipedia page on Silicates gives a concise overview, IMO. There are a couple of points I will quote here:

Silicates comprise the majority of Earth's crust

In geology and astronomy, the term silicate is used to denote types of rock that consist predominantly of silicate minerals. On Earth, a wide variety of silicate minerals occur in an even wider range of combinations as a result of the processes that form and re-work the crust. These processes include partial melting, crystallization, fractionation, metamorphism, weathering and diagenesis. Living things also contribute to the silicate cycle near the Earth's surface. A type of plankton known as diatoms construct their exoskeletons, known as tests, from silica. The tests of dead diatoms are a major constituent of deep ocean sediment.
Silica, or silicon dioxide, SiO[SUB]2[/SUB], is sometimes considered a silicate, although it is the special case with no negative charge and no need for counter-ions. Silica is found in nature as the mineral quartz, and its polymorphs.

In general, the stones were are discussing are composed of small crystalline particles of various forms of silicates and silica. There will be other minority components, like iron oxide, which are unlikely to be significant, but we can keep this in mind also.

When we make a "slurry" we abrade the stone surface into small particles, either individual crystals of the various components or agglomerated "superparticles" of individual crystals.

The silica (SiO2) particles, quartz being one example, are generally "hard" (quartz is 7 on the Moh scale).

Many/most of the silicates will be "phylosilicates' where phylo means sheet like particles - weakly bonded sheet structures, like a deck of cards. These materials are "soft" as they separate easily (and certainly do so in the working of a slurry).
I think of these as "clays" or mica clay, and most likely what binds the silica particles together.

There are also "hard" silicates like garnet, that may be present in these stones, but indications are silica is the primary component and therefore the dominant abrasive.

 

[bluesman 7]

The way I see it is that the breakdown of the slurry when using JNats is a working theory. We can hone as if the theory is actually happening and never see evidence to the contrary. So practically speaking the theory is correct as far as we know. Nothing wrong with questioning the theory though, this is how science advances. Great thread IMO.

 

[SliceOfLife]

I would say the guy who gets best at honing isn't the illiterate who is shown what to do. He's the guy with no internet access who has spent his life using tools that he needed to have extremely sharp and learned honing out of necessity, not curiosity.
But that doesn't stop everyone else from being curious.
Will it make a new honer better if he knows exactly if, how and why abrasive particles in certain natural stones refine under their tools? Probably not. Are people who aren't necessarily interested in the same questions and answers as that new honer going to be curious about it? Yes. Is it the perfect discussion for a forum argument because there is an absence of absolute answers and yet plenty of vaguely related and possibly relevant information available online to spur on the conversation? Definitely.

I like Bluesman's take on it. Jnats are the sun and our razors are the Mayan calender. The grit will continue to break down until 3012, and then they will explode, cleansing the Earth of all the foul Film using heretics.

 

[Gamma]

Do potato particles break down when you slurry them?

 

[SliceOfLife]

Only if you slurry them with butter and onions.

 

[PGrevie]

LEarning to hone is achieved thru practical suggestions and lots of practice. Not scientific lectures. An illiterate person can learn to hone easily by being shown what is important to do, and what not to do. End of story. Thats my take on it. Its a simple thing to do and the practice is what will get you there. Your own observations and shave tests will tell you whats good or great or bad. The rest is academic. Academics is worthless when you are pondering something that cant be proven one way or the other. Has anyone proven if adding tape to the spine will increase or decrease friablity? How bout left handed and right handed honers, those who use 2 hands, bench honers vs hand honers? There has to be one accepted method that is superior! LOL. No there is not. As all of these variants can produce fine shaving edges. And these threads all end up with some very learned honers saying"I wouldnt say yes, but I couldnt say no".

I agree with this statement. I read this article out of curiosity and saw comments that I interpreted as being disrespectful to OP for bringing up a topic that had already been beat to death. My initial take was that maybe a newbie question I might ask is looked at the same because it has already been asked 1000 times before. I apologize if my comments were out of line. I may have gone on the defensive too easily and also failed to clarify myself properly.

 

[HonerSimpson]

.... a topic that had already been beat to death.....

Has there ever been a thoughtful, intelligent, respectful discussion on this topic on any public internet forum?

 

[Brooksie967]

Has there ever been a thoughtful, intelligent, respectful discussion on this topic on any public internet forum?

Not by people with any actual proof I suppose. You didn't respond to any of my comments about viewing the affect on a much larger surface like a wide beveled knife or chisel though.

 

[buca3152]

I agree with this statement. I read this article out of curiosity and saw comments that I interpreted as being disrespectful to OP for bringing up a topic that had already been beat to death. My initial take was that maybe a newbie question I might ask is looked at the same because it has already been asked 1000 times before. I apologize if my comments were out of line. I may have gone on the defensive too easily and also failed to clarify myself properly.

Thanks for clarifying. We have no intention of ridiculing a new honers questions. We love to talk about this hobby of ours and your welcome anytime.

 

[buca3152]

I would say the guy who gets best at honing isn't the illiterate who is shown what to do. He's the guy with no internet access who has spent his life using tools that he needed to have extremely sharp and learned honing out of necessity, not curiosity.
But that doesn't stop everyone else from being curious.
Will it make a new honer better if he knows exactly if, how and why abrasive particles in certain natural stones refine under their tools? Probably not. Are people who aren't necessarily interested in the same questions and answers as that new honer going to be curious about it? Yes. Is it the perfect discussion for a forum argument because there is an absence of absolute answers and yet plenty of vaguely related and possibly relevant information available online to spur on the conversation? Definitely.

I like Bluesman's take on it. Jnats are the sun and our razors are the Mayan calender. The grit will continue to break down until 3012, and then they will explode, cleansing the Earth of all the foul Film using heretics.

Perhaps a middle aged man with a wire beard and sensitive skin! Thats motivation enough!

 

[bluesman 7]

Ever listened to a bunch of guys at a party who know each other pretty well. Most would think there banter pretty disrespectful, taken out of context.

 

[HonerSimpson]

Not by people with any actual proof I suppose. You didn't respond to any of my comments about viewing the affect on a much larger surface like a wide beveled knife or chisel though.

Sorry, your comment appeared to be directed to Ian. I don't believe anyone is questioning the "effect." Alex gave a nice example in the OP. What we tried and failed to discuss is the explanation. And, I stated earlier, there is never "proof" only evidence. I did present some evidence and some explanation of my skepticism. Maybe it's just too much to expect an open minded discussion here.

 

[Gamma]

Proof is an acceptable word.

Proof
noun
1.

• evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

 

[HonerSimpson]

Full Definition of PROOF

1
a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact
b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning

 

[rockviper]

Our former Canadian Prime Minister summed up the defintion of a proof quite nicely....

 

[Gamma]

Full Definition of PROOF

1
a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact
b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning

You're missing a lot of the definition, but we don't really need to see all of it.

Thank you for proving my point; e.g., proof is in fact an acceptable term.

 

[HonerSimpson]

Sorry, I don't speak American and have no idea what you are on about.

For those who are genuinely interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence#Concept_of_.22scientific_proof.22