Behind the paper: A bioengineering mission that led to a rendezvous with Anderson localization

Posted on behalf of Seung Ho Choi, Michelle Visbal and Young Kim, commissioned by Lina Persechini.
The paper in Nature Communications is here.

Capture

The field of biomedical optics and biophotonics has changed.  We felt it in the community.  “Much that once was is lost”.  This change might have originated from the perception that light in biological media is simply diffusing.  Such long-standing perception made everything seem trivial, which caused scientists and engineers to progressively lose interest in light transport in biological materials and structures.  In this story, we will tell you about the journey that led us to the observation of a totally unexpected linear optical phenomenon in biological systems:  Anderson localization of light (a phenomenon named after Nobel laureate Philip Anderson).

Initially, our research group was busy with realizing naturally occurring lasers (also known as random lasers) from biological and natural materials (such as bone and nacre of seashells).  In 2014, we happened to watch a Korean television news channel that made us come across a fluorescent silkworm.  This fluorescent silkworm opened an exciting prospect for investigating random lasing from a recombinant fluorescent organism.  We decided to fly to South Korea.  After presenting our ambitious proposal for high-tech biogenic lasers to the rural farmers there, we were able to receive the magical recombinant substances.  Using them, we obtained laser-like spectral lines, but was it really a lasing signal?  To address this question, we had to demonstrate additional lasers using different samples (later we realized that our first observation was not lasing).

However, we overlooked the fact that silkworms grow slowly eating mulberry leaves, and that these leaves can be harvested only once a year, in summer. For researchers with tight funding, an even more important issue than the topic of research can be the funding cycle; “To be, or not to be: that is the question”.  At that moment, we had to make a big decision.  We could not wait for the silkworms’ next life cycle to let them spin another batch of fluorescent silk.  Since we were not certain as to whether the silk had the capability to confine light, we decided to study a more fundamental optical phenomenon: Anderson localization of light.  During our random lasing study, we were able to observe a glimpse of extremely strong light–matter interactions from the lustrous reflection of native silk.  To investigate Anderson light localization with a minimal budget, we built our own transmission matrix measurement setup using components that were already comprised in other instruments. We had to combine three academic disciplines:  biomedical engineering, mesoscopic physics and structural biology.

Through our interdisciplinary approach, we held in-depth discussions, in particular with scientists in the field of mesoscopic physics.  When we were addressing peer-reviewers’ comments from hardcore physicists, one of our collaborators said “your work will be published, once your language is understandable to physicists”.  At the submission stage, we didn’t know what this really meant, but after multiple rounds of review, we completely understood it.  From a personal perspective, when combining several academic disciplines, different perceptions coming from different academic disciplines often appear to be conflicting.  Only once they completely understand each other, one discipline can realize the true meaning of the other.  At last, the reviewers in the field of mesoscopic physics were convinced of the experiment, analysis, theory and conclusion in our study.  Following this experience, we dream of a future where everyone realizes the beauty of others by overcoming differences between academic disciplines, religions, national origins, races, sexes and even species (humans and silkworms).

Seung Ho Choi, Michelle Visbal and Young Kim

Reference: Nature Commun. 9452 (2018doi:10.1038/s41467-017-02500-5

cocoons

Interactions: Conversation with Ben Still

Post by Iulia Georgescu.

Ben Still talks about his new book Particle physics brick by brick, an accessible and extremely enjoyable introduction to particle physics all LEGO fans will love – and who is not a LEGO fan?

Still

You have been involved with various outreach activities, how did you get the idea for this book?

The idea has been with me since 2009 when I first started participating in outreach as a newly appointed postdoc. I took it to the outreach team at Queen Mary, University of London and we fleshed out the ideas into workshops. These workshops and materials covered only a small portion of particles and used similar blocks to represent quarks in one instance and nucleons in another. They were fantastically popular.  Since then, I have had in the back of my mind an attempt to use a LEGO analogy to encapsulate as much of particle physics as possible. The result is Particle physics brick by brick.

Are you a LEGO fan? Which is your favourite set?

I am a huge fan, I got hooked as a kid.  I am an avid collector of the Architecture series, but I have to say that my favourite kit is the Saturn V rocket released recently in the Creator series.

Is LEGO a good tool to teach science in general? What is the best physics/science LEGO?

Sometimes you need a hook to get those otherwise disengaged in science to get involved and LEGO certainly helps bring in a broad audience. It made sense to me to use LEGO after many utterances of fundamental particles being the building blocks of nature. I think that the best use of LEGO in any sense, whether for teaching or for leisure, is creativity. I tried to stress in the book that with just the rules I cover you can be creative and build particles and chemical elements which don’t appear in the book. I think that LEGO is a great way of linking science with creativity and showing that science is about exploration.

Technic and Mindstorm are fantastic for the advanced technical creative, but I still love good old fashioned bricks.

In the book you explain particle physics in a very accessible way, but you do not shy away from abstract concepts that might intimidate the layperson. Who is this book for?

The book was officially aimed at ‘science interested adults’, but I think that teens from 14 years with an interest in science will find the book equally exciting. I did not want to shy away from the more abstract concepts because they are important, particle physics is abstract compared with our day-to-day lives. The book is structured, however, in a way that I hope eases the reader into the abstraction. I think the earlier chapters involving the history of the universe can be used with younger readers when hands-on with the LEGO as the workshops have shown in the past.

lego

What do you think are the biggest challenges in explaining particle physics to the general public? How to avoid the pitfalls of hype or misleading analogies?

Our everyday lives are deterministic, we know if we strike a football in a certain way it will follow a path which we can calculate. Particle physics lives in the quantum world where probability, not determinism, rules. In this world all sorts of weird wonderful and mind-bending things can happen because so much is possible if not probable. It is this separation from our daily experiences that makes particle physics a tough subject to get across sometimes. It would be much easier if we were living in the quantum world too because the goings on of particle physics would be day-to-day.

In the book I openly talk of the limitations of analogies and throughout admit to the shortcomings of the LEGO analogy I use. In a very real sense our scientific understanding is nothing but an analogy of the underlying fundamental laws of nature. New science is found at the edge of our knowledge and so understanding the limitations of any scientific analogy is the way that science progresses.

Continue reading