From: jasee on
Dave Higton wrote:
> In message <FMadnbl9UMLFkSzWnZ2dnUVZ7qudnZ2d(a)bt.com>
> "jasee" <jasee(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "JimK" <jk989898(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:c4d4bbc6-900b-4d05-85a7-52c0a35771e4(a)l25g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 27, 1:17 am, "Graham." <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>>>> "Andy Dingley" <ding...(a)codesmiths.com> wrote in
>>>> messagenews:97192e54-ac4a-4609-94bd-979674d2384d(a)r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> On 26 Mar, 14:10, "Tim" <timdownie2...(a)obvious.yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> What's the easiest was of restoring a mobile phone screen that
>>>>>> has just gone
>>>>>> very dull with lots of very fine scratches?
>>>>
>>>>> Micromesh abrasives. Axminster do a sampler pack.
>>>>
>>>>> Toothpaste doesn't work any more (for most brands), unless you
>>>>> find a really old-school smoker's toothpaste.
>>>>
>>>> Proper toothpaste contains china clay as an abrasive doesn't it?
>>>>
>>>
>>> silica
>>
>> sand? surely not (too abrasive)
>
> Depends on the particle size. Brasso, for example, is quite good
> in general terms because its abrasive particles are small. (I
> have no idea whether it's good enough for this job.)
>
> All surfaces, even mirrors, are entirely composed of scratches,
> just small ones.

And on the hardness of the material silica (silcon dioxide) is a lot harder
than China clay *basically aluminium silcate hydroxide)