First actual image of chemical bonds on the molecular level

[Nik]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8225491.stm

:thumbsup:

Very cool stuff, especially how they get the image.

 

[sandorski]

cool

 

[Druidx]

I Like the sound of this part

"That will help in particular in the field of "molecular electronics", a potential future for electronics in which individual molecules serve as switches and transistors."

 

[Schadenfroh]

neat!

 

[Appledrop]

kinda cool, but a repost from OT a few days ago : http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2330416&enterthread=y

 

[Jaskalas]

I would just like to know, how can they verify what this image is presenting? It strikes me that what it presents might not be fully understood or accurate.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: sandorski
cool

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I would just like to know, how can they verify what this image is presenting? It strikes me that what it presents might not be fully understood or accurate.

It's an old and well understood technique, just a refinement. The structure of the molecule was determined long ago. What would have been shocking is if they had a result other than they expected.

It's akin to the question "how can we know what we see is reality". One can't know at an absolute level, but when we look through a telescope it's a pretty safe bet that what looks like Jupiter is just that.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I would just like to know, how can they verify what this image is presenting? It strikes me that what it presents might not be fully understood or accurate.

The BBC article doesn't completely cover the How and the Why. I'm sure that, if you talk to the professionals in this field actually working on this thing, they could tell you.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I would just like to know, how can they verify what this image is presenting? It strikes me that what it presents might not be fully understood or accurate.

basic atomic theory, more or less, readily explains the image conceptually (though i have no doubt the details are far, far more intricate).

for atoms and molecules, there are attractive and repulsive forces at work. when an atom or molecule is far away, attraction dominates, but if it gets too close, repulsion dominates. after all, atoms and particles stick together, but they can only get so close to each other.

thus, based on where the CO tipped AFM is positioned on the pentacene, there will be a certain amount of attraction or repulsion it measured as deflection in the cantilever arm via capacitors (at least that's how our nanoindenter at school works).

if you place the tip anywhere on outside of the pentacene, it will largely interact with only the outer atoms, leading to a very strong response. however, as you move inside, the interaction forces become symmetrical, leading to a much smaller response (hence why the inside is dark and the outside is bright).

i'm sure there's much more to it, but i'm fairly certain that's the basic idea.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I would just like to know, how can they verify what this image is presenting? It strikes me that what it presents might not be fully understood or accurate.

It's an old and well understood technique, just a refinement. The structure of the molecule was determined long ago. What would have been shocking is if they had a result other than they expected.

It's akin to the question "how can we know what we see is reality". One can't know at an absolute level, but when we look through a telescope it's a pretty safe bet that what looks like Jupiter is just that.

Science! It works, bitches! :thumbsup:

Anyway, this is an interesting development. I hope that they can refine and expand this technique to be able to view other, more reactive molecules.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

More molecular goodness:

Artificial life is only months away, says biologist Craig Venter
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...nce/article6804599.ece

?Assuming we don?t make any errors, I think it should work and we should have the first synthetic species by the end of the year,? he said.

Am I the only one who gets just a little nervous when the word "errors" is mentioned in conjunction with the phrase "synthetic species"?! :Q lol...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
More molecular goodness:

Artificial life is only months away, says biologist Craig Venter
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...nce/article6804599.ece

?Assuming we don?t make any errors, I think it should work and we should have the first synthetic species by the end of the year,? he said.

Am I the only one who gets just a little nervous when the word "errors" is mentioned in conjunction with the phrase "synthetic species"?! :Q lol...

Without having read it, I'd assume he meant errors that prevented it from Living.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
More molecular goodness:

Artificial life is only months away, says biologist Craig Venter
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...nce/article6804599.ece

?Assuming we don?t make any errors, I think it should work and we should have the first synthetic species by the end of the year,? he said.

Am I the only one who gets just a little nervous when the word "errors" is mentioned in conjunction with the phrase "synthetic species"?! :Q lol...

Resistance is futile!

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
More molecular goodness:

Artificial life is only months away, says biologist Craig Venter
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...nce/article6804599.ece

?Assuming we don?t make any errors, I think it should work and we should have the first synthetic species by the end of the year,? he said.

Am I the only one who gets just a little nervous when the word "errors" is mentioned in conjunction with the phrase "synthetic species"?! :Q lol...

Without having read it, I'd assume he meant errors that prevented it from Living.

Thank you Capt. Obvious.

Next time I'll be sure to put the "LOL" in ALL CAPS. :roll:

 

[Harvey]

Kewl! :thumbsup:

Maybe it's the answer to the financial crisis... Invest in chemical bonds.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
More molecular goodness:

Artificial life is only months away, says biologist Craig Venter
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...nce/article6804599.ece

?Assuming we don?t make any errors, I think it should work and we should have the first synthetic species by the end of the year,? he said.

Am I the only one who gets just a little nervous when the word "errors" is mentioned in conjunction with the phrase "synthetic species"?! :Q lol...

Without having read it, I'd assume he meant errors that prevented it from Living.

Thank you Capt. Obvious.

Next time I'll be sure to put the "LOL" in ALL CAPS. :roll:

You're welcome. Don't be nervous, it's just a 100 ft Gorilla they're making...

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Kewl! :thumbsup:

Maybe it's the answer to the financial crisis... Invest in chemical bonds.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I almost LOLed... almost