New Molecules for a Faster Internet

Roland Piquepaille writes "An international team of researchers has discovered a new generation of optical molecules which interact 50% more strongly with light than any molecules ever tested. These organic molecules, known as chromophores, have been theorized by physicists at Washington State University, synthesized by chemists in China and tested for their actual optical properties by chemists in Belgium. But if they're excellent candidates for being used in optical technologies such as optical switches and Internet connections, these new materials should not be used before several years — if ever. Read more for additional details and a picture of the physicist who broke a law he established in 1999."

Comments

I don't get it

[ArcherB]

But if they're excellent candidates for being used in optical technologies such as optical switches and Internet connections, these new materials should not be used before several years -- if ever.

OK, I RTFA'd, but I didn't find any reason as to why.
Did I miss something here?

Re:I don't get it

[calciphus]

I believe this comes from bad grammar, not a warning of apocalyptic molecular research.

Try "But if they're excellent candidates for being used in optical technologies such as optical switches and Internet connections, these new materials /will/ not be used before several years -- if ever."

Because the technology to produce them inexpensively and well does not yet exist.

Re:I don't get it

[stangbat]

It's simple: Chromophores is people!

Re:I don't get it

[bm_luethke]

It is because studies have shown the probability of a societies demise is related to their access to porn, the easier the more likely they are to die.

Currently western society is right near the limit where a society stays stable. An increase in 30% will definitely put us over the top, the sheer amount of porn downloaded would result in widespread danger. Birth rates are already abysmally low, add in that we can totally stay in house, be as fat/lazy/repulsive as we want and still see hot women nekkid will lead to not only a severe decrease in human interaction, but no one will ever want to leave their house to even work. In just a few short years - death of all of western civilization.

Hurry now, write your govt official in whatever country you are in. Lets make bandwidth restrictions so that this will never come about. Studies such as this should never reach the light of day.

We also know that speeding up light is bad - that causes the signal to go back in time. That would also allow MUCH more porn to be downloaded. You could get several hours worth instantly as long as you remembered to start it later on.

Other than that, I couldn't really figure out why either. Maybe the writer owns stock in copper wiring companies or something.

Barriers

[Haxx]

theorized by physicists at Washington State University, synthesized by chemists in China and tested for their actual optical properties by chemists in Belgium

  If only the rest of the world had the lack of national barriers like those in the scientific community.

Just what we need...

[Mikachu]

more tubes.

Re:Just what we need...

[d4nowar]

It's not the tubes, those are already in the ground. It's the molecules. These must obviously be smaller, meaning they can fit through the tubes much easier than the molecules we have now, and get past those pesky spam emails that are blocking up the rest of the internets for everyone else.

Similarly confused...

[Animaether]

the slashdot summary makes it sound like what they discovered is akin to an Omega Particle of the Star Trek kind. Like pursuing and making use of it would result in disaster.

Instead, at best: the article explains that the guy had a theory that particular matter could conly interact with light to a certain extent. Now some researchers have found possible evidence to the contrary. This means that either A. he and thus his theory (rule, law, theorem, whatever - not even the science community seems to use them consistently) was wrong or B. the researchers are wrong (meaning what they found does not violate the guy's theory - either because it's a whole different phenomenon, or because they made a mistake.. whatever).

I'm sure it's all highly interesting to those within those circles, and I even found the premise interesting enough - but to have a statement such as "should not be used for several years -- if ever".. hmm.

Re:Similarly confused...

[kebes]

The summary and Roland's article (not surprisingly?) get the details about these 'limits' somewhat wrong. If you read the intro to the arXiv article (warning: PDF), they say:

Quantum cal-culations using sum rules have been used to place an upper-bound on the molecular susceptibilities; [1, 2, 3, 4] but, the largest nonlinear susceptibilities of the best molecules fall short of the fundamental limit by a factor of 10^(3/2).[4, 5] A thorough analysis shows that there is no reason why the molecular hyperpolarizability can not exceed this apparent limit.[6] In this letter, we report on a novel set of molecules where the one with modulated conjugation[7] is found to have a hyperpolarizability that breaches the apparent limit.

If you look up reference [4], which you can find here, you see this is an "Erratum" (publication pointing out a mistake you made in a previous publication). In it, he shows (see graph), that what he previously plotted as the "limit" was a plotting mistake (not a theoretical mistake). So what he claims is that there is a fundamental (quantum) limit, but there is also an "apparent limit" based on the accumulated experimental data on chromophores so far.

Thus, this new paper is claiming to have broken through an "apparent limit" that existed before. Nothing fundamental about this limit, of course... it was merely that synthetic chemists had yet to be able to create molecules that good. This new report is a 'breakthrough' in the sense that they've made molecules with still higher nonlinear susceptibilities. (But still not violating the theories...)

Will this ever show up in real technology? Probably not. In 'real devices' of course having good optical response is only half the challenge. It must also be cheap enough, stable enough, easy to process, etc. So it's a step forward, but I would call it's more a 'pushing the edge of what can be synthesized' rather than a 'telecom breakthrough' as Roland tries to spin it.

tagged slashvertisment

[MustardMan]

Tagged slashvertisement for roland's constant whoring of his zdnet blog. I knew that zdnet had officially jumped the shark when they gave that hit-whore a place to regurgitate others' work and profit from it.

Physicist scandal

[dangitman]

Read more for additional details and a picture of the physicist who broke a law he established in 1999.

Should he arrest himself, or should the police do it?

Off Topic, No Guilt

[rohar]

I love love articles like this, submitted by the author as links to their own blog. I don't feel guilty about posting off-topic links to articles I wrote.

Some New Ideas in Indirect Solar Electrical Power Generation, Clean Water Capture and Seasonal Heat Storage

Re:RTF(Primary Source)A

[kebes]

Well I am a chemist... and in fact my Ph.D. thesis had alot to do with these kinds of chromophores!

Yes the molecules in question are "azobenzenes" (benzenes linked via N=N) and "stilbenes" (benzenes linked via C=C). These are well-established classes of molecules that have strong "nonlinear optical" properties.

The reason they are "nonlinear optical molecules" is because (in basic terms) the electron distribution is highly asymetric. You can see the chemical structures in the arXiv preprint (pdf). One end of the molecule has a group that 'attracts' electrons, and the other end has a group that 'donates' electrons, and the end result is that the electron distribution is strongly skewed. This means that when light hits the molecule, the electron cloud oscillates not like a normal sine wave (harmonic oscillator) but in a much more skewed way (think of a sawtooth wave). This means that when it re-emits light, that light can be very different from the incident light.

That's why these molecules can be used as amplifiers in lasers, and "frequency doublers" (where you input a certain frequency of laser light, and what comes out has double the frequency (i.e. half the wavelength)). They are remarkable molecules, really. This new paper is certainly noteworthy, but I'm not sure it's going to revolutionize the world of telecommunications anytime soon...

Telescopes?

[AtariDatacenter]

I wonder... could this make a higher transmissive reflective coating for telescopes?

Re:Telescopes?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are correct that a molecule could be designed to emit light at one energy at the expense of transmission of light at another energy. However, optical coatings used for telescopes tend to be designed with materials which adhere well to the lens and can produce nearly atomically flat layers by processes such as sputtering or molecular beam epitaxy etc. (google epitaxial growth to read up on this). However, the quantum yield (efficiency) of many chromophores is fairly low (quantum dots are the leaders here) and application to glass would be difficult. As an aside, quantum dots tend to absorb a wide range of energy and emit at one wavelength, thus integrating a wide field of spectral energy which is emitted at a single primary energy. Since quantum dot emission is highly tunable by physical dimension alone, they might be a better candidate for some sort of novel application along the lines which you are thinking. Sure you could experiment with the referenced chromophores, but I would expect the optical clarity to be more adversely affected than any improvement that might be realized from optical activity, that is, unless you have a chromophore that absorbs/emits just where is needed. In my case, by analyzing the emitted light I am able to identify nearby molecules due to the specific changes in particular resonance modes which are perturbed by multi-molecular interactions between the chromophore and nearby adsorbate. Thus chromophores are useful for all sorts of things, such as molecular recognition. But honestly, I'm not waiting for Roland to opine on the subject. Let's hope that greasemonkey script mentioned below gets adopted into the slash code ASAP.

Puhleease: Put Roland Piquepaille blog elsewhere

[viking80]

I would like to just suggest a link to Roland Piquepailles blog somewhere where those who are interested can click. And *no more articles please*

I read /. to get real news and facts, and see discussions from people with insight.
Roland Piquepailles submissions has not met this criterium. And again, chromophores has nothing to do with the speed of the internet.

You should mod this up if you agree or mod away as flamebait/offtopic/troll if you dont agree, but at least mod it.

Greasemonkey script to remove piquepaille stories

[viking80]

Here is one of many scripts:
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/5735/

Roland sucks - even your version is wrong

[arete]

Perhaps Roland has no grasp of science, English, or both. Or more likely, he's simply a whore who doesn't care about the truth. I wouldn't have read this if I'd noticed it was him.

He ALWAYS lies, horribly, in the summaries to make them sensational. These lies are inconsistent with the blog HE WROTE, so I have to go with the (ad-revenue?) whore theory.

Honestly, I think anyone who _repeatedly_ pimps their own links without pointing out that it's THEIR link should get a warning... and then be cut off from posting those links. (I'm not even saying "he can't post other stories" I'm saying "stories with that blog linked in them get at least SOME scrutiny)

Even your watered down version isn't right. Scientist predicted a theoretical limit "L". Scientist noticed all actual materials are at or below 0.3*L. Now we've found materials with... *drumroll* - 0.45*L. That does NOT break his law.

I hope Roland never "profiles" my research

[Goldsmith]

You cannot claim to break a law in a news release, while in the scientific paper (where it counts) they say:

"While our best measured values of the hyperpolarizability are still more than an order of magnitude from the fundamental limit, this design strategy appears to be a promising new paradigm for making better molecules."

I would actually like people like Roland writing about science if they did even just a tiny, tiny bit of work. It took me all of 15 minutes to read that paper and follow a few references.
This particular paper is talking about a scientific curiousity: a system with a single molecule interacting with the light without interactions with it's neighbors. Systems with multiple molecular interactions are much better (55% of the fundamental limit), but harder to match to theory. The broken "law" was more of a guess (which none of the people in any of these papers made or supported), and was found to be wrong years ago.

There's plenty of interesting stuff going on there, and Roland missed it all and chose to make up his own story. We'd all know more about science by avoiding this kind of stuff.

Phenazopyridine

[MillionthMonkey]

I used to work as an analytical chemist in a place that made phenazopyridine tablets, which are sold under the brand name Pyridium. This stuff is prescribed for women with urinary tract infections, and acts as a urinary analgesic.

Phenazopyridine has an aromatic azo -N=N- bond in it that exists in resonant conformation between a benzene ring and a pyridine ring. Azo bonds impart strong red-orange-yellow colors, and in pure form phenazopyridine is a dark red powder. It's only slightly soluble in water, but it really likes alcohols and the standard solvent in most lab procedures was methanol. And you have to use alcohol for everything with this stuff- you'll end up spraying alcohol everywhere and wiping stuff down with alcohol multiple times. Saturated alcoholic solutions are dark reddish-orange, but in lower concentrations the color fades to dark orange and then light orange before settling on a powerful yellow at extremely low concentrations that gives everything a just-pissed-on look. The tiniest speck could probably turn an Olympic swimming pool a noticeable yellow. In alcohol the yellow stain is really mobile, and a major way it gets around is when people try to clean it. The alcohol turns into yellow ink that gets everywhere. But you can't use water because that will set the stain.

All the hallways had fuzzy yellow lines running down their centers because people were tracking phenazopyridine around. The copy machine, the doorknobs, the tables, the balances, books, papers, sinks, everything- it all picked up a faint yellow sheen. You'd see a yellow tinge along the edges of things, and soon stuff at your house would pick up a yellow tinge. I haven't worked at that place for over a decade and I still have a few yellow-tinged items around.

The major side effect when taken for urinary tract infections is dark orange urine. Make sure to close the lid when you flush or your house might turn yellow. For that matter, your blood is now a powerful yellow dye so be careful if you bleed in the house. You can't wear contact lenses either because your corneas will stain them yellow. And avoid Olympic swimming pools I guess.

I heard an interesting phenazopyridine story recently, from someone who had a friend taking it for a UTI. She thought her urine was so pretty that she decided to stain her hair orange for Halloween with one of her tablets. Which worked, until she tried to wash it out. I can't imagine what that scene must have been like, but without an alcoholic shower it sounds pretty hopeless. She ended up shaving her head.