Fall MRS Meeting 2011: Bioinspired energy efficiency

Posted on behalf of Rosamund Daw (Senior Editor, Nature)


At the Fall MRS meeting this year we are enjoying unusually mild weather. I can remember Christmassy snow at MRS’s past where woolly hats were a must. This year, many of the attendees are wandering around without coats and I have even spotted one or two brave individuals wearing T-shirts.

Two major themes at this year’s meeting are energy and the interface of materials with biology and medicine. An intriguing presentation from Philseok Kim on Monday combined these themes in a talk describing a bio-inspired approach to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. [Adaptive and dynamic optical materials for improving energy efficiency of buildings; Kim, P., Kolle, M., Khan, M., Zarzar, L.D., Aizenberg, J.; Symposium V (Multifunctional Polymer-based Materials); 2011 MRS Fall Meeting].

Kim reflected on the concerted motion of cilia in lungs, and other hairy or high-aspect-ratio biological structures which respond and adapt to different environments. He has designed a biomimetic system in which polymeric ‘hairs’ are embedded in a hydrogel. The hydrogels can elicit a tunable response to a variety of stimuli, for example temperature, causing the hairs to stand on end or lie flat against their substrate.

Kim proposed that these structures could be used to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. Extended transparent arrays of hairs could be arranged in panels across windows. Once the temperature outside dropped to a certain level, changes in the molecular conformation of the hydrogels would stimulate the hairs to stand on end simultaneously mobilising an array of deformable micromirrors attached to their ends into a single flat panel to control light transmission, reflection and thermal gain.

I like the work because it applies biomimetics in a rather unexpected way. The final goal offers engineering challenges because effects on the molecular scale are used to elicit functionality on the metre scale. Still, if achieved, such ‘smart curtains’ could reduce need for energy-intensive heating and cooling of buildings.

Speaking Frankly: Steve Jobs and innovation

Frank Leibfarth is a graduate student trying to make his way through the academic maze. Find him contributing to the Sceptical Chymist or continue the conversation on Twitter @Frank_Leibfarth.


The premature passing of Steve Jobs has shaken the international community. Known as perhaps the greatest innovator of his generation, Jobs took Apple from bankruptcy to make it the largest company in the world, surpassing (briefly) even natural-resource giants like Exxon Mobil. The media coverage of Jobs’ death has been intense, culminating in the publication of the much-anticipated biography by Walter Isaacson. Through these numerous homages, we have gotten a sense of not only Jobs’ fierce competitiveness and intense leadership style, but also the motivations and inspirations which influenced him.

For all of Jobs’ extraordinary vision, however, almost every remembrance reiterates the fact that Jobs did not ‘invent’ anything. There were MP3 players before the iPod, smartphones before the iPhone (sorry Blackberry), tablets before the iPad, laptops before the MacBook Air; Jobs even took the idea for the graphical interface from Intel. These biographers and journalists, even those in Science, are missing the point. Jobs was revolutionary, he recognized opportunity where others failed, thought about how people will use the products not just what products they use and, in perhaps his biggest coup d’état (as I sit watching my mom shuffle between her iPhone and iPad), he made technology products so intuitive that they are even accessible to the baby boomers.

Jobs was our generation’s disruptive innovator, so why the criticism about his lack of ‘inventions’? In the technology field, perhaps more than anywhere else, the scientific process is on display for the world to see. Hypotheses are made, products developed, revaluated, and improved. Steve Jobs, like great scientists, had the vision to leapfrog the competition, pulling his field forward with each project he completed. Similar to science, Jobs’ brand of innovation did not happen in a vacuum. Popular culture makes lists of the ‘The Top 10 Inventors’, heralding the individual contributions of scientists and engineers, but it neglects the massive amount of time, talent, and manpower that went into disruptive innovations. Instead of talking about the iPod’s precursors as the true ‘invention,’ we should be focusing on the unparalleled superiority of the first iPod in comparison, where Steve Jobs introduced so many innovations that other manufacturers still haven’t caught up.

We as scientists understand the process of innovation. We have built an entire international discipline where the sharing of information in publications is prized and innovation credits both the innovator and those who inspired her/him. Listen to the science Nobel Prize speeches and hear the dozens of people each laureate mentions who were the inspiration for the work or collaborated to do much of it.

Understanding that innovation is the product of talented people working collectively should be self-evident. This is why countries fund basic research, because the innovations that eventually generate economic and social value are not the product of one ‘genius’. The perception that great discoveries and/or products are the product of mythical savant-like individuals flies against the foundations of the scientific process. Further, a general belief that we are waiting for those Jobs-like individuals gives governments an excuse to cut funding for basic research. We, as aspiring innovators, need to celebrate Steve Jobs for his unparalleled accomplishments and use his example as a reason to celebrate the scientific process.

Blogroll: Trouble brewing

[As mentioned in this post, we’re posting the monthly blogroll column here on the Sceptical Chymist. This is December’s article]

An oral history of pharma layoffs, the wonders of beer and some embarrassing artwork.

What do chemists do after they’ve just been laid off from their job in the pharmaceutical/chemical industry? Chemjobber is trying to gather useful information from people who have been through redundancy to “hear as much advice as possible for people who will be laid off”. Since the Layoff Project launch in mid-October, at the time of writing Chemjobber has been contacted by six people willing to tell their story. These have ranged from someone with 30 years’ experience to someone ‘freshly out of school’, and from someone clearly having an understandably tough time adjusting to life without “being able to discuss chemistry” to someone whose personal circumstances changed so drastically they could easily put the loss of work into perspective.

Wort. Mash. India pale ale. German wheat beer. You probably expect to see words like these in a blog post about beer, but how about gibberellic acid, enzyme inactivation, dextrin oligomers (with structures!) and isomerization? Regular Blogroll readers won’t be surprised to learn that the blogpost in question is by Martin Lersch, of Khymos. In his ~2,500 word post ‘Wonders of extraction: Brewing beer’, he takes readers through a thorough look at the first two steps of brewing beer: mashing and wort boiling. In his words, these “are really quite sophisticated extractions”.

And finally…what better way to decorate a new chemistry lab than to frost some pictures of molecules onto the glass doors, and onto a funky yellow glass artwork? Well, if you go ahead and decide to decorate your lab with molecular structures, perhaps you should check out at ChemBark what happened when Georgia Tech did this. If you don’t like five-valent carbon or triply bonded bridge head atoms on fused rings, you have been warned!

Reactions – Anders Østergaard Madsen

Anders Østergaard Madsen is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen, and works on crystal engineering using crystallographic techniques and computational approaches in the study of polymorphic molecular crystals.

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

It was not until my final high school year that I realized science was more interesting than art and literature. In fact, I did not fully understand chemistry in high school, and this annoyed me so much that I fought courageously to understand it. Do I understand chemistry today? Only vaguely – there are, fortunately, still vast amounts of uncharted territory to explore.

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

I would be physician; I admire these people who every day take responsibility for the health and life of other people.

3. What are you working on now, and where do you hope it will lead?

I am studying the stability and formation of polymorphic molecular crystals. Understanding the mechanisms behind the self-assembly and stability of solid-state materials at the molecular level is fundamental research – but with wide applications for design and manufacture of materials.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

There are so many! To mention one, I would like to have dinner with Tycho Brahe (1546-1601) – a Danish astronomer, and a leading figure of the scientific revolution. Tycho Brahe is credited with the most accurate astronomical observations of his time, and his data were used by Johannes Kepler, to derive the laws of planetary motion, one of the foundations for Isaac Newton’s theory of universal gravitation.

I have spent many holidays on the island Hven, where Tycho Brahe made his famous astronomical observations. Tycho was a very colorful person himself, and lived in a very important flourishing period of Danish history.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

The last thing I did in the lab was to perform a very meticulous X-ray diffraction single crystal measurement. I like to do very precise and redundant measurements. A saying goes that “Theory is a good thing, but a good experiment lasts forever!”

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one music album would you take with you?

I might stay for a long time on that desert island, so I have to bring something that will keep me thinking …. The collected works of Søren Kirkegaard would do. And a Bob Dylan music album… Blonde on Blonde (1966), thank you!

7. Which chemist would you like to see interviewed on Reactions – and why?

I have had the opportunity to collaborate with Professor David Eisenberg from UCLA. He is a very inspiring person with a knowledge that reaches far beyond chemistry. I am sure he would give some very interesting answers.

Reactions – David Lindsay

David Lindsay is in the School of Chemistry at the University of Glasgow, UK, and works on the synthesis, structure and reactivity of N-heterocyclic carbene-main group complexes, with a particular interest in developing main group-NHC complexes for new applications in organic synthesis.

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I enjoyed organic chemistry at school. I liked the order in the subject; the homologous series of alkanes and alkenes, the nomenclature for different functional groups, the way you could represent molecules on paper. I was fascinated by the power organic chemistry gave you to create new molecules. And I had brilliant teachers – they gave me the freedom to explore the subject, they answered every question I had and were always encouraging.

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

I would probably like to be a sports scientist and endurance sports coach. That way I would still be able to do research, indulge my inner geek in the scientific aspects of performance, and contribute to the growth and development of those I coached, and share in their successes – essentially, all the best aspects of an academic job.

3. What are you working on now, and where do you hope it will lead?

My research is focussed on the field of N-heterocyclic carbene complexes of main group elements; mostly boron at the moment. I hope the research will lead in many different directions, including using the complexes as catalysts, and maybe even in medicine. However, in such a new and relatively unexplored field, fundamental structure and reactivity studies are also very important, and we hope to make a contribution here as well.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

I think the 1965 Nobel Prize dinner would have been fun – RB Woodward and Richard Feynman were both fascinating characters. But I think I would choose Richard Feynman if I could have only one guest.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

I work in the lab a lot these days. The last reaction I did was the synthesis of an imidazolium salt, which will be used to form an NHC-borane complex.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one music album would you take with you?

Music album would be “The First Circle” by the Pat Metheny Group. Once you get past the comedy first track, it’s a brilliant album which loosely falls into the jazz category. The book I would take is “Underworld” by Don DeLillo. It’s a tour through American history from the beginning of the cold war to end of the 20th century, told through a mix of fictional and fictionalised historical characters, and their reaction to events like the Cuban Missile Crisis and Kennedy’s assassination. If I could cheat and have two books, I’d take also take “Earthly Powers” by Anthony Burgess.

7. Which chemist would you like to see interviewed on Reactions – and why?

Kevin Booker-Milburn, one of my old colleagues at Bristol, just to see him struggle to reduce his music collection down to one album.

Element of the month: Meteoric calcium

Calcium is one of the most abundant elements on Earth. It plays various roles in many organisms, whether for the contraction of muscle cells, preserving potential differences across membranes, as a co-factor for some enzymes, or a component of bones and shells, to name a few.

Yet, it is surprisingly scarce in the upper atmosphere. Why could that be? Don’t anxiously skip to the end of this post for the answer… this scarcity remains unexplained for now. In this month’s ‘in your element’ article (subscription required) John Plane, Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry at the University of Leeds, ponders on this mystery.

All of the calcium that is present in the upper atmosphere has actually been brought there by interplanetary dust particles entering the Earth’s atmosphere, in a process called ‘meteoric ablation’. The intriguing data is that the concentration of calcium is much lower than expected — about 200 times lower than that of sodium for example, whereas they are present in roughly the same concentrations in the Earth’s crust. Check out the article to find out how scientists measure metal concentrations in the atmosphere.

Could the interplanetary dust particles be depleted in calcium before they even come in contact with our atmosphere? Could it be that more volatile elements (such as sodium) get ablated from the meteorites much more easily than calcium? Or an effect of a peculiar atmospheric reactivity for calcium? Plane explains how some of these reasons are valid, but only to some extent — and so the depletion in calcium has not yet been entirely accounted for.

Anne

Anne Pichon (Associate Editor, Nature Chemistry)

Reactions – Philippe Hiberty

Philippe C. Hiberty is in the Department of Chemisty at Université de Paris-Sud, and works on method development and applications of valence bond theory

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

As a student, I was fascinated by quantum mechanics and especially the electronic structure of atoms and molecules. I followed the lectures of Professor Lionel Salem, who was a fantastic teacher, and from then on my dream was to enter his lab and do theoretical research.

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be and why?

I sure would be a motorcycle mechanic, or even better I would work in a motor development department. Opening a motor, finding what’s wrong, tuning it, is as creative as doing research.

3. What are you working on now, and where do you hope it will lead?

I am working on specific applications where valence bond theory can give insight while molecular orbital theory cannot. I do hope that this will lead to better understanding of chemical reactions and molecular interactions, and especially I hope to convince the chemists that both theories are complementary rather than rival.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

President Barack Obama, for sure. Not because he is supposed to be the most powerful man in the world — he certainly is not. But he is a true visionary, and he has restored the picture of United States that we, the French, are attached to: a country of tolerance, intelligence, freedom and progress.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

My last experiment dates back to the times when I was a student. I was such a terrible experimentalist that it is better for everyone’s security that I became a theoretician.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one music album would you take with you?

Book: « A la recherche du Soi » (In search of the Self) by Arnaud Desjardins.

Music album: Sonatas and Partitas for violin of J.S. Bach (including the celebrated Chaconne), played by Hilary Hahn

7. Which chemist would you like to see interviewed on Reactions – and why?

Roald Hoffmann. He has beautifully demonstrated the importance of quantum mechanics in chemistry, and he tremendously helped our understanding of chemical reactions and molecular structure by means of simple models. And those who know him personally know that he is even much more than a great chemist.

Materials Girl: Where did October go?!

[This is posted on behalf of Materials Girl, who wrote this on a plane last Monday]

Time flies when you’re away from the lab and working across the country in an entirely new habitat! Spending three months in a high-security military lab showed me another side of research – give or take the differences in being a summer intern versus a full-time government employee… Fast forward past my eye-opening summer and the new school year is in full swing. Hoards of undergraduates line the halls while beleaguered grad students* trot amidst them. It’s time to buckle down, start another new project, teach new classes, maintain my lab & student groups, squeeze in conferences, and pump out publications! With a first author paper now under my belt (!!), I am eager to maintain productivity and graduate in style. At least, that’s the plan.

*Speaking of which, PhD comics made a movie – and I’m one of the extras!

Lately, YouKnowWho has frequently been away from the office, so my TA duties have been extended to super-facilitator/undergraduate-wrangler. Also, as the ‘Lab Mom’ and recently incumbent senior-ranking grad student, I’ve been running the group as needed. While this is all fun, it takes a toll on research (and makes me vaguely consider a career in management). Currently I’m preparing for my first major symposium in Nashville, TN, but WORK will continue in full force once my talk is over and my fingernails grow back. The esteemed invited speaker is right before my turn onstage, so my blood pressure has been steadily rising as the session draws near.

So, if I don’t post, consider it a sign of productivity! That, or my newly acquired sleep apnea machine malfunctioned and I died in my sleep. (No, I’m not serious about death, but yes, I recently was diagnosed with severe OSA, despite fitting none of the common causes such as obesity, old age, and being male. This does however explain – and excuse? – my issues with being a zombie who falls asleep during all forms of presentations, lectures, attempted study/reading sessions, group meeting, and once even a final (I had to retake the class). It also makes for amusing stories, such as when YKW woke me up in the middle of class with a question (and a smirk). Oops. I was partially saved from mortification by knowing the answer, and lecture continued as I soon passed out again… Oops.)

All rambling aside, I was recently given a pep talk from a seasoned professor with whom I recently began collaborating. He said I need to relax and bask in the relative ease of grad school, plus have FUN and make mistakes while I’m young. Hey, that’s why I blog here, right?

The perfect peer

[This post is an abridged version of the editorial in the November 2011 issue — the full text can be accessed here, available for free to all registered users. We welcome feedback on our editorials in the comments section below.]

What makes the ideal referee report?

There is no simple answer to this question. An author probably hopes for a quick report that is positive, or at least constructively critical. An editor will most appreciate a report that provides insightful comments and helps to inform a decision. The perfect report for a reviewer is more difficult to define; perhaps one that is not misinterpreted, and ultimately improves a manuscript.

Reports simply stating that a manuscript should be accepted or rejected, without providing any justification are rarely useful. It is, for example, unlikely that two brief reports that say a manuscript is ‘great’ and recommend publication without any compelling reasons to back up these statements will outweigh a thoughtful and well-supported report that highlights lots of technical flaws.

Based on our experience of the process — taken together with feedback from our authors and referees — we suggest the following guidelines that try to satisfy the needs of everyone involved.

Reports should begin with a short summary of the work in question. This serves to focus the review, clearly stating how the work is viewed by the referee and highlighting differences between how the authors and readers will interpret the work.

Reviewers should state upfront if there are parts of a paper that they are uncomfortable evaluating. They are, however, welcome to provide opinion on areas outside their own expertise as such information can be valuable in judging general appeal of the work. Authors should keep in mind that an individual reviewer may have been chosen to represent a particular point of view.

The summary should be followed with a discussion of what has gone before, in an attempt to define the advance that has been reported. These comments are most valuable when backed by references. Following this, a summary of both the merits and problems of the research is useful. This can be far more instructive than writing a report with a particular outcome (accept/reject/revise) in mind.

A good report should clearly distinguish between the claims made and their importance versus the evidence presented in support of those claims. This brings us to another issue frequently raised in criticisms of peer review: the need for additional work. Although requests for additional experiments are regarded by some as a ‘tyranny’, such requests are often quite reasonable.

With this in mind, it may be useful to divide suggestions into different groups. First, and most important, is work that is considered necessary to support the specific claims of the paper: omitted control experiments or requests for complete characterization. Second are those that may allow broader conclusions and improve the appeal to a general audience. Third are those experiments that are not essential, but might provide interesting avenues for future studies.

Proofreading is not the role of referees. However, the writing should be as clear as possible, and reviewers are encouraged to point out areas where language is too specialized and could be improved without detriment to the scientific content of an article.

We realize that reviewing places a heavy burden on a researcher’s time, so we are extremely grateful to the reviewers without whom Nature Chemistry could not function.

You can read full the editorial here (registration is free).

Steve

Stephen Davey (Associate Editor, Nature Chemistry)

Reactions – Jagadese ‘JJ’ Vittal

JJ Vittal is in the Department of Chemistry at the National University of Singapore, and works on solid state and materials chemistry.

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I was introduced to chemistry by accident. My older brother advised me to take chemistry as my major for my bachelor’s degree so that I could get a job in his chemical company. However, I was overqualified when I applied to his company after I had obtained my MSc in chemistry. When I was at a different job interview I was advised to do PhD when they came to know that I was offered admission at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore and I had no choice but to take it!

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

I was very much interested and good at mathematics during my school days. Probably I would have been a math teacher in one of the schools in India or a bank employee.

3. What are you working on now, and where do you hope it will lead?

We are working on various aspects of solid state chemistry and materials chemistry. Currently, we are investigating some interesting solid state reactivities of metallomacrocycles and coordination polymers. Unexpected, unusual and unpredictable results always excite researchers. We hope that these studies will throw more light into the basic understanding on how an atom and a group of atoms in the solids respond to external stimuli during structural transformation.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

I wish to dine with the great Indian mathematical legend Srinivasa Ramanujan Iyengar (1887-1920). Originally I had known that he was a mathematical genius, but I learned a lot about him when I read the book The Man Who Knew Infinity: A Life of the Genius Ramanujan by Robert Kanigel. Ramanujan lived indeed his life in mathematics and for mathematics. He was also a strict vegetarian, a diet which I have no problem with!

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

I usually check the crystals grown by my students. I do solve and refine crystal structures on a regular basis. I used to collect the crystallographic data but not anymore! Last time I really did something in the wet lab was about 14 years ago when my undergraduate student didn’t know how to synthesize (Ph4P)[Co(SC{O}Ph)3] and isolate the product.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one music album would you take with you?

I don’t want to do any serious reading in a deserted island! I read the famous historical Tamil novel Ponniyin Selvan by Kalki long time ago. I would be happy to read this again, which is about the story of Rajaraja Chola, one of the greatest kings of the Chola Dynasty in South India. I love to listen to 70’s and 80’s Tamil and Hindi songs as well as English pop music. Taking just one music album may not be possible. If you insist, I would be happy to take Michael Jackson’s Thriller.

7. Which chemist would you like to see interviewed on Reactions – and why?

I would suggest Prof. Richard J. Puddephatt who is an outstanding and wonderful organometallic chemist. For the past 10 years or so he has turned his attention to supramolecular chemistry and crystal engineering. I know Dick well and he has been a long time collaborator. I would like to hear his views on some of these questions posed here.