11–20 of 63 posts
Where's the URL to the original IBM press release / article? I would rather read the news from the source, than from those gizmodo subhuman morons any day...
Cut them some slack. At least they're watching/trying. Their article is a news item here, after all.
That is fucking awesome. It's depressing to consider the fact that it would probably get downvoted on the science subreddit.
Second that. Picture of the year as far as I'm concerned. Simply unbelievable. What a time to be alive. So, now that we can 'see' the 3D arrangement in a manner of speaking is there any way we could feed known protein structure in to neural networks by imaging them in quantity and take some of the sting out of protein folding by identifying likely candidate ways to do the folding ? Or is that too big of a leap ?
What he said. This is amazing.
Where's the URL to the original IBM press release / article? I would rather read the news from the source, than from those gizmodo subhuman morons any day...
"I would rather read the news from the source, than from those gizmodo subhuman morons" Cut them some slack. At least they're watching/trying. Their article is a news item here, after all.
They're trying? Trying what? What they usually do is copy-paste from the source. That does not add much value. Hence, I ask again: where's the URL to the original press release? I don't want to read such great news from a website that allows comments from retards who know nothing about Physics...
That is fucking awesome. It's depressing to consider the fact that it would probably get downvoted on the science subreddit.
Second that. Picture of the year as far as I'm concerned. Simply unbelievable. What a time to be alive. So, now that we can 'see' the 3D arrangement in a manner of speaking is there any way we could feed known protein structure in to neural networks by imaging them in quantity and take some of the sting out of protein folding by identifying likely candidate ways to do the folding ? Or is that too big of a leap ?
It's a kind of the opposite approach: instead of slowly collecting information from extremely static scene they will blast the sample with very powerful X-ray laser, taking snapshot before shattering it to pieces.
http://www.xfel.eu/en/research-examples/structure-of-biomole...
How is the picture 3D? Also shouldn't we see electrons in pi clouds above the aromatic rings?
Also, consider that an electron is 1/1000 the size of a proton.
Where's the URL to the original IBM press release / article? I would rather read the news from the source, than from those gizmodo subhuman morons any day...
Pentacene on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/ibm_research_zurich/3839799374/
IBM Research Zurich (pix of lab) - http://www.flickr.com/photos/ibm_research_zurich/
Article in MIT Tech Review - http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/24040/
"The imaging work is described today in the journal Science."
Fun search result on www.sciencemag.org for ibm+zurich
Science 10 July 1987 - 'IBM's Zurich Lab Is "Flower" in Europe: Two major discoveries—the scanning tunneling microscope and superconducting ceramics—highlight IBM Zurich lab's success in tapping Europe's scientific talent'
How is the picture 3D? Also shouldn't we see electrons in pi clouds above the aromatic rings?
It should be noted that this sort of resolution has been attainable for some time using scanning tunneling microscopy, but I'm pretty sure this is a first for atomic force microscopy. STM doesn't give you a very good image of bonds -- in fact bonds are generally the thing you _don't_ see, since STM works by pulling electrons in/out and bonds are stable places where electrons really don't want to come out of or go into. AFM, on the other hand, shows bonds very nicely.
You can sorta make out where the aromatic rings are. I'm not sure why it's so bright at the ends -- any organic chemists out there who can explain that?
Where's the URL to the original IBM press release / article? I would rather read the news from the source, than from those gizmodo subhuman morons any day...
Some links closer to the point of origin: Pentacene on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/ibm_research_zurich/3839799374/ IBM Research Zurich (pix of lab) - http://www.flickr.com/photos/ibm_research_zurich/ Article in MIT Tech Review - http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/24040/ "The imaging work is described today in the journal Science." Fun search result on www.sciencemag.org for ibm+zurich Science 10 J…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I would rather read the news from the source, than from those gizmodo subhuman morons" Cut them some slack. At least they're watching/trying. Their article is a news item here, after all.
Have you read the comments on gizmodo? They're trying? Trying what? What they usually do is copy-paste from the source. That does not add much value. Hence, I ask again: where's the URL to the original press release? I don't want to read such great news from a website that allows comments from retards who know nothing about Physics...
That is fucking awesome. It's depressing to consider the fact that it would probably get downvoted on the science subreddit.
Second that. Picture of the year as far as I'm concerned. Simply unbelievable. What a time to be alive. So, now that we can 'see' the 3D arrangement in a manner of speaking is there any way we could feed known protein structure in to neural networks by imaging them in quantity and take some of the sting out of protein folding by identifying likely candidate ways to do the folding ? Or is that too big of a leap ?