Physicists Solve a 50-Year Mystery About a Critically Important Molecule
An electric dipole moment is a measure of polarity—a crucial determinant for many physical properties of any system, such as its boiling point or solubility. Given its importance, the new result, published last month in Physical Review A, presents exciting opportunities for applications across a wide range of fields, from quantum computing to astrophysics.
At our core, we're all made of molecules. Anything we do—whether it's picking up a cup of coffee or digesting coffee after taking a sip—can be explained in terms of molecular interactions. This is of obvious interest to scientists, and for a host of reasons. For one, knowing how different molecules interact either with each other or with their environment can reveal a lot about their respective characteristics, akin to how physicists study different particles using large particle colliders.
But another reason is that the interaction itself—in this case, the dipole moment—helps scientists understand completely different systems in unexpected ways. 'In chemistry, dipole moments affect everything from bonding behavior to solvent interactions,' said Boerge Hemmerling, a physicist at the University of California (UC), Riverside, and paper co-author, in a statement. 'In biology, they influence phenomena like hydrogen bonding in water. In physics and astronomy, the dipole moments can be harnessed to make neighboring molecules interact, for instance, with the goal to create a quantum entanglement between them.'
The dipole moment of AlCl, in particular, shows promise across a wide range of applications, added Stephen Kane, an astrophysicist at UC Riverside and study co-author, in the same statement. 'Accurate dipole moment data improves how we interpret molecular signatures in starlight,' said Kane. 'The ratio of aluminum to chlorine in stars, as revealed through AlCl measurements, provides critical clues to stellar nucleosynthesis and the material history of these celestial bodies.'
For the experiment, Hemmerling and his team built a customized laser vacuum system they had been developing for more than seven years, enabling them to perform high-precision spectroscopy. They generated beams of AlCl in a vacuum inside the setup, picking apart the molecule to better understand its chemical underpinnings and behavior. Eventually, they arrived at the value of 1.68 Debye (the unit for measuring dipole moments) for the dipole moment of AlCl.
It may seem strange that such a fundamental number took nearly a century to lock down, but it turns out the estimate was really close. In 1956, chemist David R. Lide estimated the dipole moment of AlCl at 1.5 Debye—a mere 0.18 Debye away from Hemmerling's result. The closeness demonstrates the validity of existing theoretical models while also offering some clues as to how the accuracy can be improved even further, Hemmerling said in the same statement.
'From improving our understanding of distant stars to enabling next-generation quantum computers, the precise measurement of AlCl's electric dipole moment is a foundational step toward unlocking future discoveries,' Hemmerling said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Violated Order on U.C.L.A. Grant Terminations, Judge Says
A federal judge in California ordered the National Science Foundation to reinstate millions of dollars in grants awarded to the University of California, Los Angeles, finding that the agency had tried to circumvent a ruling in June requiring restoration of the funds. In a pointed order on Tuesday evening, Judge Rita F. Lin wrote that the Trump administration had misleadingly framed its latest attempt to cancel the grants as suspensions. 'N.S.F. claims that it could simply turn around the day after the preliminary injunction' and freeze 'funding on every grant that had been ordered reinstated, so long as that action was labeled as a 'suspension' rather than a 'termination,'' she wrote. 'This is not a reasonable interpretation.' Judge Lin, a Biden appointee, noted in the order that the University of California system had lost around $324 million in grant funding earlier this year as the Trump administration began culling science funding for projects it considered out of step with the president's agenda. In the previous ruling in June, Judge Lin informed the Trump administration that it could issue cancellations of individual grants for coherent reasons, but not blanket terminations. But beginning on July 30, the administration sent out a round of letters announcing what Judge Lin described as 'en masse, form letter funding cuts,' targeting U.C.L.A. specifically, freezing more than $300 million in research funds. That sum appeared to include around $81 million in funding awarded by the N.S.F. The judge said that letters on the cuts echoed familiar grievances about the university's handling of diversity in admissions practices, alleged antisemitism on campus and policies surrounding transgender athletes — the same grounds on which the administration has tried to extract enormous settlements from Harvard and other universities in recent weeks. Judge Lin said that the Trump administration's freezing of university grants appeared designed more to suspend research the Trump administration has associated with liberal causes than to sincerely address concerns about racism or antisemitism. In a related case focused on grants from the National Institutes of Health, a federal judge in Massachusetts described the cancellations of those grants as discriminatory toward racial and sexual minorities and driven by animus toward vulnerable groups. He similarly ordered that funding restored in an impassioned ruling from the bench in June. In Judge Lin's ruling, she directed the government to return next Tuesday to update the court on its progress in complying with the order.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
One-size-fits-all pancreatic cancer vaccine showed promise in early trial
In an early trial, a one-size-fits-all vaccine showed promise in preventing hard-to-treat pancreatic cancers from coming back. Pancreatic cancer is of particular concern. The five-year survival rate is about 13%, and up to 80% of pancreatic cancers may come back. 'If you were to ask me what disease most needs something to prevent recurrences, I'd say this one,' said Dr. Zev Wainberg co-director of the University of California, Los Angeles, gastrointestinal oncology program, who co-led the Phase 1 clinical trial. The vaccine targets one of the most common genetic drivers of cancer: KRAS gene mutations. KRAS mutations occur in about one-quarter of all cancers, including as much as 90% of pancreatic cancers and about 40% of colorectal cancers. Their ubiquity makes KRAS mutations a great target for cancer therapies, but the mutations have long been considered impossible to target with drugs. To accomplish this, the vaccine uses short chains of amino acids called peptides that teach immune cells to recognize and attack cells with KRAS mutations. 'The critical step is engaging an immune response,' Wainberg said. Cancer vaccines are a growing field of research, but many of these vaccines are personalized to the patient. This means their tumor must be sequenced for a specialized vaccine to be created. The vaccine in the current study, however, doesn't need to be personalized and would be available off the shelf. Killing lingering cancer cells In the Phase 1 trial, published Monday in Nature Medicine, Wainberg and a team of doctors from across the country recruited 20 people with pancreatic cancer and five with colorectal cancer. (They chose to also include a few colorectal cancer patients because KRAS mutations are also a common driver of colorectal cancers, and people whose colorectal cancer is driven by these mutations are more likely to have a recurrence, Wainberg said.) Everyone in the trial had KRAS mutations and had undergone standard treatment — usually chemotherapy and surgery — to remove the bulk of their tumors. After surgery, blood tests showed that a smattering of cancer cells remained behind, referred to as microscopic residual disease, which is very common with pancreatic cancer. 'We are talking about cancer that is so microscopic that we can't see it on scans,' said Dr. Scott Kopetz, a professor of gastrointestinal medical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. These cells can travel elsewhere in the body and grow into metastasized tumors, prompting an often fatal cancer recurrence. Chemotherapy can kill some of these cells, but some usually remain in the body. 'Realistically, if we want to kill every last cancer cell and really make people cured, you need to engage the immune system,' said Stephanie Dougan, an associate professor of cancer immunology and virology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. 'We've just been really bad at getting an immune response in pancreatic cancer.' Post-surgery, everyone in the trial got up to six priming doses of the experimental vaccine, called ELI-002 2P. Thirteen also received booster shots. The whole process took 6 months. About 85% — 21 of the 25 participants — mounted an immune response to the KRAS mutations, and about two-thirds of those patients had an immune response that appeared to be robust enough to stave off lingering cancer cells. What's more, in nearly 70% of people in the trial, the vaccine appeared to trigger an immune response not just to KRAS mutations, but to other tumor cell targets that were not in the vaccine. A few people were 'super-responders' who mounted an abnormally strong immune response to the cells. 'Those people had the best outcomes,' Wainberg said. His team is currently running a randomized Phase 2 trial to test the durability of the vaccine and compare whether the vaccine is more effective than the standard of care, which would usually be monitoring the patient for a recurrence. In the Phase 1 trial, people with pancreatic cancer survived for an average of 29 months and lived recurrence-free for more than 15 months post-vaccination. 'That far exceeds the rates with resectable cancers,' said Wainberg, referring to cancers that can be removed with surgery. A growing field Cancer vaccines have been incredibly difficult to make, in part because cancer cells have a lot of the same proteins as healthy cells, making safe targets difficult to come by. Only recently has medical technology made the strides researchers needed to hone the treatment. Refined mRNA technology and gene sequencing becoming faster and cheaper has put cancer vaccines back into clinical trials, Dougan said. Personalized mRNA cancer vaccines are showing promise in both pancreatic and colorectal cancers, but a one-size-fits-all cancer vaccine would make treatment faster and cheaper. Past trials using peptide vaccines have failed to prevent cancer recurrences. But the peptides in the new vaccine, called lipophilic peptides, have something past treatments did not — a tail. 'That tail sticks in the lymph nodes where immune cells get activated,' Dougan said. 'You need something to get the immune system going, and just injecting killed cancer cells or peptides doesn't work that well.' More advanced clinical trials will have to confirm the results of the Phase 1 trial, but promising results have been seen in other cancer vaccine trials as well and could pave the way for major breakthroughs in preventing cancer recurrences. Memorial Sloan Kettering is also working on an off-the-shelf vaccine that targets a gene mutation found in 95% of people with acute myeloid leukemia. The data from the KRAS-targeting vaccine trial published Monday showed it is likely possible to target these mutations with nonpersonalized vaccines, something researchers long thought was impossible. 'The fact that the long-term survival really correlated with T-cell response suggests that the vaccine caused this,' Dougan said, referring to the specific immune cells activated by the vaccine. 'The idea that you can target KRAS is really exciting.' This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
The Hill
2 days ago
- The Hill
Cloud-seeding is not a threat — it's a time-tested tool to deal with water scarcity
Farmers have an old saying: 'Pray for rain, but keep the plow in the ground.' For generations, the people who feed this country have kept their faith while adapting to challenges with ingenuity and the use of new tools. Today American farmers, and the American people, face a dire risk that calls for the same approach. Water scarcity now poses a permanent threat to our food supply, our economy and our families. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley estimate that nearly one million acres of farmland will be fallowed in California alone over the next 15 years due to lack of water. That means rising prices and fewer fruits and vegetables at the grocery store, but also fewer exports, fewer jobs, and more dependence on foreign supply chains in a time of global uncertainty. Soon it may also mean cities and towns running out of drinking water, the failure of critical infrastructure and ecosystems across the nation facing collapse. Farmers have always been the beating heart of our nation. In many ways they are also the canary in the coal mine, which is why we should pay close attention to the issues they face and the solutions they are exploring in times of need. One such tool is cloud-seeding: a safe, scalable method that encourages more rain or snow from weather systems that are already moving through the sky. Used responsibly, it can provide supplemental water for farms, reservoirs and ecosystems at a time when every drop counts. While relatively unknown to the general public, cloud seeding is nothing new. It was invented in the U.S. and has been used with little fanfare for over 80 years. Today, there are 10 states that actively invest in cloud seeding programs at either a local or state level across the American West: Utah, Idaho, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Texas, California, North Dakota, Nevada and soon Montana. In recent years, technological advances have made the process even faster, smarter and more reliable. How it works is quite simple: We encourage moisture to fall by introducing a small amount of material that fits certain properties into clouds — often silver iodide. The silver iodide gives water vapor something to cling to and freeze, and then it falls as rain, mimicking natural precipitation caused by dust or sea salt. When conditions are right, cloud seeding increases precipitation by as much as 10 to 15 percent — enough to recharge aquifers, extend growing seasons or shore up a reservoir over time. In Utah, a cloud seeding project has the potential to help refill the Great Salt Lake while adding over a year's worth of surplus drinking water over the course of a decade. And here is what cloud seeding cannot do: It cannot create new clouds. It cannot control large weather systems. And it cannot cause disasters. Meteorologists and dozens of state and local regulatory officials across the country agree on these points. Cloud seeding is a useful and scalable tool that can revitalize ecosystems, lower the incidence of wildfires, and promote hydropower stabilization. In times of drought and increasing water insecurity, to take such a solution off the table would be tremendously damaging to our national interest. Unfortunately, some are trying to do just that. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) recently introduced a bill that would criminalize precipitation enhancement nationwide. This proposal is built on conspiracy theories and ignores the overwhelming consensus of decades of science, threatening to cut off a lifeline to the farmers, communities and families who need access to a precious, life-giving resource. When disinformation reaches the halls of Congress, the damage can harm everyday people and set back our country at a time when adversaries like China are investing billions in weather and water technologies as part of broader strategies for energy independence, food productivity and global competition. That is a race in which we cannot afford to fall further behind. So here is the truth: Cloud seeding is neither a silver bullet nor a boogeyman. I come to this work as both a man of faith and a believer in science. I believe we are meant to care for the land and leave it better than we found it, using the tools we have built with our own God-given abilities. Today, realities on the ground call for a nuanced discussion about how novel technologies can make our planet more habitable. To me, stewardship of the earth starts with transparency, good science and humility about what technology can and cannot do. Augustus Doricko is the founder and chief executive officer of Rainmaker Technology Corporation.
