Scientists Discover A Way To Create Carbon Nanotubes With A Chemical From Household Cleaning Products - Canadanewsmedia
Connect with us


Scientists Discover A Way To Create Carbon Nanotubes With A Chemical From Household Cleaning Products



Researchers discovered that a chemical called cresol can be used to help produce carbon nanotubes. Previous attempts have resulted in the nanotubes twisting and clumping together.  ( Dean Simone | Pixabay )

Developing carbon nanotubes on a large scale is usually challenging, but new research suggests that it might actually be easier than what scientists first conceived.

Common Problems With Creating Carbon Nanotubes

Carbon nanotubes are only about as thin as an atom, but this material is tougher than Kevlar. The problem is that it is very difficult to mass-produce them. If a producer is not careful, the carbon nanotubes will twist and clump together, which prevents this material from working properly.

The individual nanotubes are typically shorter, which means there is very little room for error. Longer nanotubes would need to be created, but that could come with many obstacles.

The longer carbon nanotubes could easily get tangled and reduced into a think paste, which would weaken the material. In the past, researchers have tried to correct this malfunction by using chemicals to coat the nanotubes. Although the chemicals prevented the nanotubes from turning into a thick paste, this also sacrificed the material’s powerful potency.

The Chemical Breakthrough Behind Carbon Nanotubes

Reseachers at Northwestern University discovered an odd way to create carbon nanotubes without these problems. They applied a common chemical called cresol, which was once found in household cleaning products, to the carbon nanotubes.

Their findings were published on May 14 in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“Because of their exceptional mechanical, thermal and electrical properties, carbon nanotubes have attracted a lot of attention for a number of applications,” said professor Jiaxing Huang of Northwestern’s McCormick School of Engineering. “But after decades of research and development, some of the excitement has faded.”

The researchers discovered that the cresol preserves the carbon nanotube’s functionality while seperating the tubes. This makes the material behave like polymers. The chemical can also be removed by washing it off.

“It is really exciting to see cresol-based solvents make once hard-to-process carbon nanotubes as usable as common plastics,” said Jiaxing.

Another Team Introduces A Carbon Nanotube Solution

There is also a group of researchers from Beijing’s Tsinghua University that released a study that solves the same problem with nanotubes. They synthesized the tubes through chemical vapor deposition.

The findings were published on May 14 in the journal Nature Nanotechnology.

With the reactants behind the nanotube held within a reaction chamber, the researchers were able to grow the nanotubes within the same direction as they flowed. Although there were some obstacles to this, researchers found a solution by narrowing the chamber. The result was that the nanotubes bundled together and were still very strong.

See Now: Things You Should Never Search For On Google — You’ve Been Warned

© 2018 Tech Times, All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


Psychedelic drugs are making a medical comeback over 50 years after the heyday of research on them — here's what …




shrooms magic mushrooms psilocybinBy the end of the 1960s, most legitimate psychedelic research stopped because researchers and regulators struggled to balance the work with recreational use.Shutterstock

  • Scientific publications are making a case for researching psychedelic drugs such as LSD, peyote cactus, and mushrooms. 
  • Until recently, psychedelics’ potential medical benefits have been overshadowed by a reputation of danger or risk. 
  • Psychedelics could offer creative and potentially therapeutic benefits for mental health, including helping with depression and addiction.
  • There’s also evidence that mushrooms significantly reduces anxiety in patients with life-threatening illnesses like cancer and that ecstasy improves outcomes for people suffering from PTSD.

Psychedelic science is making a comeback.

Scientific publications, therapeutic breakthroughs and cultural endorsements suggest that the historical reputation of psychedelics — such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), mescaline (from the peyote cactus) and psilocybin (mushrooms) — as dangerous or inherently risky have unfairly overshadowed a more optimistic interpretation.

Recent publications, like Michael Pollan’s How to Change your Mind, showcase the creative and potentially therapeutic benefits that psychedelics have to offer — for mental health challenges like depression and addiction, in palliative care settings and for personal development.

Major scientific journals have published articles showing evidence-based reasons for supporting research in psychedelic studies. These include evidence that pscilocybin significantly reduces anxiety in patients with life-threatening illnesses like cancer, that MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetaminecan; also known as ecstasy) improves outcomes for people suffering from PTSD and that psychedelics can produce sustained feelings of openness that are both therapeutic and personally enriching.

Other researchers are investigating the traditional uses of plant medicines, such as ayahuasca, and exploring the neurological and psychotherapeutic benefits of combining Indigenous knowledge with modern medicine.

I am a medical historian, exploring why we now think that psychedelics may have a valuable role to play in human psychology, and why over 50 years ago, during the heyday of psychedelic research, we rejected that hypothesis. What has changed? What did we miss before? Is this merely a flashback?

Healing trauma, anxiety, depression

peyote cactusPeyote cactus is native to southern North America.LM Otero/AP

In 1957, the word psychedelic officially entered the English lexicon, introduced by British-trained and Canadian-based psychiatrist Humphry Osmond.

Osmond studied mescaline from the peyote cactus, synthesized by German scientists in the 1930s, and LSD, a laboratory-produced substance created by Albert Hofmann at Sandoz in Switzerland. During the 1950s and into the 1960s, more than 1,000 scientific articles appeared as researchers around the world interrogated the potential of these psychedelics for healing addictions and trauma.

But, by the end of the 1960s, most legitimate psychedelic research ground to a halt. Some of the research had been deemed unethical, namely mind-control experiments conducted under the auspices of the CIA. Other researchers had been discredited for either unethical or self-aggrandizing use of psychedelics, or both.

Timothy Leary was perhaps the most notorious character in that regard. Having been dismissed from Harvard University, he launched a recreational career as a self-appointed apostle of psychedelic living.

Drug regulators struggled to balance a desire for scientific research with a growing appetite for recreational use, and some argued abuse, of psychedelics.

In the popular media, these drugs came to symbolize hedonism and violence. In the United States, the government sponsored films aimed at scaring viewers about the long-term and even deadly consequences of taking LSD. Scientists were hard-pressed to maintain their credibility as popular attitudes began to shift.

Now that interpretation is beginning to change.

A psychedelics revival

LSD AcidLSD was first made in 1938 by Swiss scientist, Albert Hofmann.Psychonaught via Wikimedia Commons

In 2009, Britain’s chief drug adviser, David Nutt, reported that psychedelic drugs had been unfairly prohibited. He argued that substances such as alcohol and tobacco were in fact much more dangerous to consumers than drugs like LSD, ecstasy (MDMA) and mushrooms (psilocybin).

He was fired from his advisory position as a result, but his published claims helped to reopen debates on the use and abuse of psychedelics, both in scientific and policy circles.

And Nutt was not alone. Several well-established researchers began joining the chorus of support for new regulations allowing researchers to explore and reinterpret the neuroscience behind psychedelics. Studies ranged from those looking at the mechanisms of drug reactions to those revisiting the role of psychedelics in psychotherapy.

In 2017, Oakland, California, hosted the largest gathering to date of psychedelic scientists and researchers. Boasting attendance of more than 3,000 participants, Psychedelic Science 2017 brought together researchers and practitioners with a diverse set of interests in reviving psychedelics — from filmmakers to neuroscientists, journalists, psychiatrists, artists, policy advisers, comedians, historians, anthropologists, Indigenous healers and patients.

The conference was co-hosted by the leading organizations dedicated to psychedelics — including the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) and The Beckley Foundation — and participants were exposed to cutting-edge research.

Measuring reaction, not experience

As a historian, however, I am trained to be cynical about trends that claim to be new or innovative. We learn that often we culturally tend to forget the past, or ignore the parts of the past that seem beyond our borders.

For that reason, I am particularly interested in understanding the so-called psychedelic renaissance and what makes it different from the psychedelic heyday of the 1950s and 1960s.

The historic trials were conducted at the very early stages of the pharmacological revolution, which ushered in new methods for evaluating efficacy and safety, culminating in the randomized controlled trial (RCT). Prior to standardizing that approach, however, most pharmacological experiments relied on case reports and data accumulation that did not necessarily involve blinded or comparative techniques.

Historically, scientists were keen to separate pharmacological substances from their organic cultural, spiritual and healing contexts — the RCT is a classic representation of our attempts to measure reaction rather than to interpret experience. Isolating the drug from an associated ritual might have more readily conveyed an image of progress, or a more genuine scientific approach.

Today, however, psychedelic investigators are beginning to question the decision to excise the drug from its Indigenous or ritualized practices.

Over the past 60 years, we have invested more in psychopharmacological research than ever before. American economists estimate the amount of money spent on psychopharmacology research to be in the billions annually.

Rethinking the scientific method

Modern science has focused attention on data accrual — measuring reactions, identifying neural networks and discovering neuro-chemical pathways. It has moved decidedly away from larger philosophical questions of how we think, or what is human consciousness or how human thoughts are evolving.

Some of those questions inspired the earlier generation of researchers to embark on psychedelic studies in the first place.

We may now have more sophisticated tools for advancing the science of psychedelics. But psychedelics have always inspired harmony between brain and behaviour, individuals and their environments, and an appreciation for western and non-western traditions mutually informing the human experience.

In other words, scientific pursuits need to be coupled with a humanist tradition — to highlight not just how psychedelics work, but why that matters.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


Blazing Fireball 40 Times Brighter Than A Full Moon Streaks Across Alabama Sky [Video]




On Friday morning, a bright meteor came tumbling down from the heavens in Alabama and disintegrated right above the small town of Grove Oak, in DeKalb County, reports the Alabama Newscenter.

According to Bill Cooke of NASA’s Meteoroid Environment Office (MEO), the fireball was “at least 40 times as bright as the full moon” and caused quite the commotion, “triggering every camera and sensor” that MEO operates in the region.

The falling meteor lit up the Alabama sky and was bright enough to be spotted “through partly cloudy skies,” notes Cooke. Several witnesses reported the “extremely bright event,” which occurred right after midnight.

The fireball was also caught on camera both by the space agency, which has six meteor cameras installed in the area, and by private security cameras belonging to residents.

The video above shows the bright meteor streaking down the sky as captured by security and doorbell cameras in Alabama and Georgia, reports the local media outlet.

The first official sighting of the flaming meteor took place at 12:19 a.m. CT some 58 miles (93 kilometers) above Turkeytown, northeast of Gadsden. From there, the fireball zipped across the Alabama sky at dizzying speeds of 53,700 miles per hour (86.4 kilometers per hour), moving west of north, showed the MEO report.

Its journey ended in the sky over Grove Oak, where the meteor broke apart some 18 miles (29 kilometers) above the town.

For now, it remains unknown whether the Alabama meteor left behind meteorites scattered on the ground, Cooke mentioned in his report. What we do know is that the space rock is believed to have come from a small asteroid no more than 6 feet (2 meters) wide.

As reported by, NASA released a video of the Alabama meteor as well, uploaded on YouTube by the media outlet.

Footage of the fireball falling from the skies was posted on Facebook and Twitter by meteorologist James Spann, courtesy of four camera owners whose equipment recorded the Alabama meteor. One video, shared by Spann on Twitter several hours before the rest of the footage, was captured at 12:22 a.m. CT in Kennesaw, Georgia.

News of the Alabama meteor comes after another space rock penetrated Earth’s atmosphere on July 25, detonating over U.S.’s Thule Air Base in Greenland, per a previous Inquisitr report. That particular meteor almost sparked a war after exploding with 2.1 kilotons of force, since it could have been mistaken for an incoming missile, the media reported at the time.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


The space police there. And it protects not only the Earth




When you hear the phrase “space police”, imagine the Hollywood sci-Fi film. The reality is not so far from the movie.

The so-called space police is part of the international Committee on space research (COSPAR), established under the International Council for science. It was his submission in space research, the notion of planetary quarantine. For compliance just watching the police, reports rusjev.

In a recent interview with biologist Natalia Novikova told me that before sending into space the unit of the Russian-European mission “Eczemas-2020” must be checked for sterility. This happens with all instruments of the apparatus, to exclude man-made panspermia — that is entering the earth’s life forms to other planets. The sterilization process is very tedious, stringent requirements apply to all staff involved in the work.

According to Gerhard Kminek, who headed until recently the expert group on planetary protection COSPAR, if someone from staff working with the spacecraft, gets sick and becomes a source of infection, it is temporarily excluded from work. Plus the unit itself contain and tested in a special “clean” room.

Bi-bi-si has spoken to the successor of Cineca, Athena Coustenis, the current head of the Commission on planetary protection on the basis of COSPAR. Astrophysicist spoke about what planet we need to protect and from what, and why, you first need to send space mission robots and then humans.

Athena Coustenis: We ship the Rover, which will be in contact with the surface of Mars. The main goal is to find organic material preserved on this planet since ancient times. The Rover will be able to dig two meters deep into the surface in search of specimens of ancient Martian soil. It is in these deep samples are likely to detect the biomarkers, because thin atmosphere of Mars is poorly protects its surface from radiation.

In the case where the purpose of the mission is the search for alien life, we need to be very careful and carefully this planet to protect. Because otherwise you can detect it the life that we ourselves on this planet and brought.

Космическая полиция существует. И защищает она не только Землю

The holder иллюстрацииNASA/JPL-CALTECH/MSSS / HANDOUT
Image captionМиссии with landing on Mars receive the highest category of planetary protection

Bi-bi-si: Why do I need to disinfect vehicles traveling into space?

A. K.: You’d be surprised how long microorganisms can remain in extreme conditions! Over them carried out tests in the laboratories, contain them in a vacuum. Scientists can, for example, to simulate the condition of space travel to figure, they will survive it or not. And microbes do it!

You know the theory of panspermia? According to her, life on Earth has been brought through space with other objects. Am skeptical, but the conditions that you can experience a simple form of life, is impressive. It seems that we are the most vulnerable beings on the planet.

Special issue — what happens if we send people to Mars in order to settle there. About it really didn’t until Elon Musk promised to send a man to Mars. Of course, we do not fully sterilize the astronauts would be harmful to their health. But this is a new and important question that we still have no answer.

In this sense, it is helpful to first conduct robotic missions before sending people. Because a robot will tell you that, for example, on the studied object not found life, including the signs of any extinct forms of life. When we receive a response from the robotic mission, then we can say: “OK, we can go there, there’s nothing there”. If the robot will confirm that there are signs of life, then we will treat this mission quite differently, we will be different to train people who will be there to send.

Космическая полиция существует. И защищает она не только Землю

Image captionМарсоход mission “Eczemas-2020” will be able to dig 2 meters deep into the surface and will be able to detect biomarkers produced in the Martian soil

Bi-bi-si: do all missions the same level of security?

A. K.: Initially it is important to understand whether there would be planned for the spacecraft landing and likely an emergency. The spacecraft may bring on themselves with some organic matter. And even the orbital module can always fail and then have to make its emergency landing [though it was not planned].

The Mars mission are in the higher categories is as follows: third, fourth or fifth. Missions that do not represent a particular threat — for example, when you simply fly past an object, or launch a satellite, or when we think that the space object is anything not living (for example, if the asteroid) — it is the first category. If you fly to a planet, like Venus (but we do not think that I can face life on Venus), or, for example, if it is a mission to the giant planets, have no surface on which to detect life there is no chance, it is the second category of planetary protection.

Mission to the icy moons or to Mars without landing — this is the highest category a third. The fourth category — it is mission landing. And the fifth category is if the spacecraft returns to Earth.

When we don’t return to Earth samples of soil space, e.g. the moon or Mars (which we do not do, but I’m sure that will do in the future), we should concentrate on how not to accidentally bring together with the ground life on other planets. At this point there are very strict requirements that determine the duration of the mission, and the amount of biological load of the apparatus as it will be a debate and what they will be the lifetime.

Often the answers to these questions depend on where you sit. Mars we call a “special area”. Here is a great chance to find living organisms.

Each time we have made more discoveries that affect subsequent missions. For example, after the interplanetary probe Cassini found on Saturn’s moon Enceladus water source which can be an underground reservoir, we realized that the moon also will be subject to a high level of planetary protection.

Космическая полиция существует. И защищает она не только Землю

The holder иллюстрацииROBYN BECK/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
Image captionДо as the probe “Cassini” found on Enceladus water scientists and not thought to relate to the missions on the moon with greater caution

Bi-bi-si: What is wrong is to bring earth life to other terms,do you?

A. K.: It will hurt our ability to do science. But I can only speak on his own behalf, that is, from the face of the scientist. Suppose you want to know if there is somewhere else in the Solar system life. Everyone wants to know. If it exists somewhere, that means that it was a unique development, different from the earth. We also can accidentally kill extraterrestrial life — she may be unprepared to defend themselves.

If we don’t give her a chance to develop in a unique way if we will fly and infect it, the goal is to find alien life would be unattainable. We don’t know how life appeared on Earth, why we are different or Vice versa — similar to life anywhere else. We just get no chance to answer all these questions. We will lose an entire academic term.

Bi-bi-si: What would happen if we found alien life?

A. K.: If we find alien life, we will adhere to quarantine and will not immediately deliver it to Earth and study in laboratories. Why all these precautions? Because we don’t want to infect our planet, our own life. It works both ways.

If we find alien life… Actually I have no idea what it could be! Scientists agree that this would be primitive life form. I wouldn’t expect it to be something developed and possess intelligence.

Bi-bi-si: whether different countries have different policies of planetary protection?

AK: just the role of my expert group is to provide a dialogue between the space agencies of different countries. After all, if the Agency of one country will say that he wants one level of safety, and the Agency of the other country wants another, twice as large, it will be a mess. If we fail to coordinate our efforts, it may be that the norm for one is not normal for another. And it will affect security, and the ensuing research results.


Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2018 Canada News Media

%d bloggers like this: