Contributions include artificial radioactive atoms, atomic structure, ribosome research Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Female Nobel Prize Winners in Chemistry 04/04/26, 17:02 Last updated: Published: 03/06/23, 18:37 Contributions include artificial radioactive atoms, atomic structure, ribosome research Women contributing their innovative ideas has strengthened the knowledge held in the scientific world. It is important to realise that women in STEM need to be celebrated all year round – they need to be given the recognition they deserve. A total of 60 women have been awarded the Nobel Prize between 1901 and 2022. Specifically looking at the Female Nobel Prize winners in Chemistry – all of whom have changed the way society views women but also puts a spotlight on the progress that can still be made if we have more women in the field of STEM. There have been eight women to receive this prestigious award: Carolyn R. Bertozzi, Emmanuelle Charpentier, Jennifer A. Doudna, Frances H. Arnold, Ada E., Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin, Yonath, Irène Joliot-Curie and Marie Curie. This article celebrates their ground-breaking discoveries and contributions to the world of science and is a way to serve as an inspiration to young girls and women in the hope to raise a generation where more women are studying STEM subjects and acquiring high-ranked roles to reduce the gender gap. Nobel Prizes won in- 2022: Carolyn R. Bertozzi was awarded for her development of biorthogonal reactions which has allowed scientists to explore and track biological processes without disrupting the chemistry of the original cells (click chemistry and biorthogonal chemistry). 2020: Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna were awarded for their development of a method for high-precision genome editing: CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors. They used the immune system of a bacterium, which disables viruses by cutting their DNA up with a type of genetic scissors. The CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors has led to many exciting discoveries and new ways to fight against cancer and genetic diseases. 2018: Frances Arnold was awarded because of her work on directed evolution of enzymes. In 1993, Arnold conducted the first directed evolution of enzymes, which are proteins that catalyse chemical reactions. This has led to the manufacturing of environmentally friendly chemical substances such as pharmaceuticals, and the production of renewable fuels. 2009: Ada Yonath was awarded the Nobel Prize for her studies on the structure and functions of the ribosome. In the 1970s, Ada began a project that concluded in her successful mapping of the structure of ribosomes, which consisted of thousands of atoms, using x-ray crystallography. This has been important in the production of antibiotics. 1964: Dorothy Hodgkin was awarded the 1964 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for solving the atomic structure of molecules such as penicillin and insulin, using X-ray crystallography. 1935: Irène Joliot-Curie was awarded for her discovery that radioactive atoms could be created artificially. Written by Khushleen Kaur Related articles: Female Nobel prize winners in physics / African-American women in cancer research Project Gallery

The role of honesty Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Behavioural Economics I 31/10/25, 12:46 Last updated: Published: 24/01/24, 21:37 The role of honesty This is article no. 1 in a series on behavioural economics. Next article: The endowment effect . In the classical realm of economic theory, consumers are said to be utility maximisers. These economic agents will always prefer a situation where they can increase their utility (a measure of well-being or happiness) and will achieve this by any means necessary. Given the opportunity, economic agents will take advantage of others and abuse their power, and although this can be true in many aspects of life, in this article we will explore why people are intrinsically honest, defying classical economic theory, giving a brief insight into how we can explain economic behaviour through the power of behavioural economics. ‘Lost Wallets’ In an effort to measure civic honesty around the globe, Cohn et al. devised a comprehensive study to measure whether people's own material incentives were able to overpower their innate sense of honesty and altruism all together. By distributing over 17,000 ‘lost wallets’ in over 40 countries, Cohn et al. were able to surprisingly prove that people are more honest than we take each other to be. The experiment was simple but comprehensive. A group of people in many different countries would hand in a ‘lost’ wallet to a desk in public areas, for example at a hotel desk or at a library. The wallet contained three business cards - a way to contact the owner, a grocery list, and a key to make it seem more legitimate. Another important detail was that the wallets were transparent, so the receiver did not have to open the wallet to see its contents. The reason why this is important is because some wallets contained money in them, and we wanted to see if this impacted the decision to hand the wallets in or not. In classic economic theory, we would expect that wallets with money in them would not be returned, but instead the receiver would take the money freely. They may be more inclined to return the wallet without money as there would be little benefit in keeping them. However, in real life, this could not be any further from the truth. In 38/40 of the countries, lost wallets were handed back more often when they contained money. Civic honesty was found to be statistically higher when the wallets were not empty. So why are people more likely to hand back their wallets when they contain money? Surely that’s counterintuitive? Well, in fact, one strong explanation is that people value honesty due to their own self-image. If we take the money, our own view of our perfect self becomes threatened, so that the psychological effect of taking the money is greater than the money’s value itself. Similarly, when the wallet contains only business cards, the receiver cannot see any intrinsic value in the wallet. The psychological value of handing the wallet back is now far less worth the effort of making contact with the owner. We disregard the wallet before we even know its contents. Another interesting fact is that when there is a big money condition (7x what was used initially), we find that people are even more likely to report the missing wallet. One explanation may be that with a greater stake, there is also a greater psychological reward for handing the wallet back. When doing an act of kindness as simple as this, people often feel good about themselves, boosting their own ego, and this could be perceived to be greater than the value of their wallet. If the combination of threatened self-image with the positive psychological value of returning the item is much greater than the monetary value of the ‘lost wallet’, then people are likely to return the wallet. In fact, the study showed that over 70% of the wallets were returned when it contained a substantial sum of money. ‘Dice in a Cup’ The second study that I wish to use to describe the effect honesty has on society, is one that involves an extremely simple setup. There is a benefit to having simple experiments in a lab setting. When people volunteer to participate in a lab-controlled experiment, they realise they are being watched (unlike with the previous experiment, which was performed on unsuspecting subjects). This often means that people put in fake answers—the answers they think we wish to hear—which aren’t useful to us. The way we get around this is by putting incentives in place and encouraging people to act the way they would in real life and by ensuring that the experiment is simple, there is no chance that a subject could misinterpret the rules of the experiment. The die-in-the cup experiment run by Gachter and Schulz did just that. Subjects were told to enter a room, and in the middle of the room sat a table with a die placed on top. The subjects were instructed before they entered the room to roll the die twice and then report the first roll of the die only. The number they reported then corresponded to a payout of the following: 1 = £1, 2 = £2... 5 = £5, and 6 = £0. (The pay-out for different countries were in their corresponding currency of equivalent value.) The aim of this experiment is to examine the amount of honesty in a society, and in this paper, they compared this with the presence of rule violations across different societies and looked for a relationship. They discovered that the inhabitants of wealthier countries are more honest on average. In classical economics, if everyone was ‘rational’, they would lie to get the maximum payout every time. This would give an average payout of £5. On the other hand, if everyone was completely honest, the average payout would be £2.50. In the experiment, the mean payout across all countries was around £3 (around £2.90 for the richer nations and up to as high as £4 for the poorer nations). What this tells us is that people are dishonest, but not fully dishonest. One possible explanation is that people would ‘justify dishonesty’. By choosing the higher of the two rolls, people feel less bad about lying completely and bend the rules in their favour. Another explanation is that people take the second-best outcome. In the fear of people being suspicious of them, subjects may decide to say 3 or 4 instead of 5 if, for example, they rolled a 1. But why don’t people lie and say they get a 5 every time? One theory is that people’s desires conflict with their perception of an honest self-image. Like with the lost wallets experiment, people feel guilty by lying completely, but by changing the rules slightly or not taking the highest payout, the benefit of lying is greater than any negative self-perception as in their eyes, they are not lying completely. People are only as dishonest as they can be whilst maintaining a ‘honest’ self-image. So, as we have shown, the foundation of economics can indeed fall short. The basis that people are utility maximisers is not necessarily true in all circumstances, such as when maximising utility violates self-perception. However, this is not to say that we have disproved all of economics. Economics provides an insight into how people and systems in society interact in an ideal setting, which is still beneficial for understanding what a policy is needed to achieve, but behavioural economics can be used to develop the policy further so that its implementation is more seamless. To learn even more about the developments in this ongoing discipline, be sure to follow Scientia News on social media and don’t forget to look out for Part 2 in this new 4-part series discussing the realm of behavioural economics! Written by George Chant Related article: Mathematical models in cognitive decision-making REFERENCES Alain Cohn et al., Civic honesty around the globe. Science 365,70-73(2019) Gächter , S., Schulz, J. Intrinsic honesty and the prevalence of rule violations across societies. Nature 531 , 496–499 (2016) Project Gallery

Applications of ancient DNA analysis Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Are aliens on Earth? 09/04/26, 18:08 Last updated: Published: 04/10/23, 18:13 Applications of ancient DNA analysis During the congressional hearing regarding UFOs held by Mexico on the 13th of September 2023, two alleged alien corpses were presented by UFO enthusiast Jaime Maussan. These artefacts were met with scepticism due to Maussan’s previous five claims to have found aliens, all debunked as mummified human remains. To verify the newly found remains as alien, various lab tests have been performed, one being a carbon-14 analysis by researchers at the Autonomous National University of Mexico. This analysis estimated the corpses to be approximately 1000 years old. Determination of the corpses’ genetic make-up is another essential technique for the verification of the supposed alien remains, but is it possible for these ancient remains to undergo DNA analysis? Yes; in fact, there are methods specialised for cases such as these that enable ancient DNA (aDNA) analysis. The relatively recent advent of high throughput sequencing technology has streamlined DNA sequencing into becoming a more rapid and inexpensive process. However, aDNA has fundamental qualities that complicate its analysis such as postmortem damage, extraneous co-extracted DNA and the presence of other contaminants. Therefore, extra steps are essential in the bioinformatics workflow to make sure that the aDNA is sequenced and analysed as accurately as possible. So, let’s talk about the importance of aDNA analysis in various areas and how looking at the genetics of the past, and potentially space, can unearth information for modern research. Applications of aDNA sequencing and analysis Analysis of ancient DNA is a useful technique for the discovery of human migration events from hundreds of centuries ago. For example, analyses of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) have repeatedly substantiated the “Recent African Origin” theory of modern human origins; the most common ancestor of human mtDNA was found to exist in Africa about 100,000-200,000 years ago. There have also been other recent studies within phylogeography; an aDNA study on skeletal remains of ancient northwestern Europeans carried out in 2022 showed that mediaeval society in England was likely the result of mass migration across the North Sea from the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. Thus, these phylogeographic discoveries improve our knowledge of the historic evolution and migration of human populations. Paleopathology, the study of disease in antiquity, is another area for which ancient DNA analysis is important. Analysis of DNA from the victims of the Plague of Justinian and the Black Death facilitated the identification of Yersinia Pestis and determined it as the causal agent in these pandemics. The contribution of aDNA analysis is consequently important to reveal how diseases have affected past populations and this derived genetic information can be used to identify their prevalence in modern society. Exciting yet debatably ethical plans for the de-extinction of species have also been announced. The biotech company Colossal announced plans in 2021 to resurrect the woolly mammoth among other species such as the Tasmanian tiger and the dodo bird. Other groups plan to resurrect the Christmas Island rat and Steller’s sea cow. In theory, this is exciting, or scary from certain ecological perspectives, but is complicated in practice. Even though the number of nuclear genomes sequenced from extinct species exceeds 20, there has been no restoration of species to date. Are aliens on Earth? Thus, ancient DNA analysis can be applied to a multitude of areas to give historical information that we are able to carry into the modern world. But, finally, are these ‘alien’ corpses legitimately from outer space? José Zalce Benitez is the director of the Health Sciences Research Institute in the secretary of the Mexican Navy’s office and he reports on the scientists’ findings. The DNA tests were allegedly compared with over one million species and found not to be genetically related to “what is known or described up to this moment by science.” In essence, genetic testing has not conflicted with Maussan’s claim that these remains are alien so the possibility of their alien identity cannot yet be dismissed. However, this genetic testing does not appear to be peer-reviewed; NASA is reportedly interested in the DNA analysis of these corpses, so we await further findings. Ancient DNA analysis will undoubtedly provide intriguing information about life from outer space or, alternatively, how this DNA code was faked. Whatever the outcome, ancient DNA analysis remains an exciting area of research about life preceding us. Written by Isobel Cunningham Related article: Astro-geology of Lonar Lake Project Gallery

Page Not Found You can return to the homepage and try again. Go to Homepage

There’s Nothing Here... We can’t find the page you’re looking for. Check the URL, or head back home. Go Home

All Posts Check back soon Once posts are published, you’ll see them here.

Groups Sort by: Recent Activity All (1) My Groups Suggested Groups My Site 1 Group Public · 33 members Join

Search Index All (250) Other Pages (231) Forum Posts (19) 250 items found Other Pages (231) The dopamine connection | Scientia News Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link The dopamine connection How your gut influences your mood and behaviour Introduction to dopamine Dopamine is a neurotransmitter derived from an amino acid called phenylalanine, which must be obtained through the diet, through foods such as fish, meat, dairy and more. Dopamine is produced and released by dopaminergic neurons in the central nervous system and can be found in different brain regions. The neurotransmitter acts via two mechanisms: wiring transmission and volume transmission. In wiring transmission, dopamine is released to the synaptic cleft and acts on postsynaptic dopamine receptors. In volume transmission, extracellular dopamine arrives at neurons other than postsynaptic ones. Through methods such as diffusion, dopamine then reaches receptors in other neurons that are not in direct contact with the cell that has released the neurotransmitter. In both mechanisms, dopamine binds to the receptors, transmitting signals between neurons and affecting mood and behaviour. The link between dopamine and gut health Dopamine has been known to result in positive emotions, including pleasure, satisfaction and motivation, which can be influenced by gut health. Therefore, what you eat and other factors, including motivation, could impact your mood and behaviour. This was proven by a study (Hamamah et al., 2022), which looked at the bidirectional gut-brain connection. The study found that gut microbiota was important in maintaining the concentrations of dopamine via the gut-brain connection, also known as the gut microbiota-brain axis or vagal gut-to-brain axis. This is the communication pathway between the gut microbiota and the brain facilitated by the vagus nerve, and it is important in the neuronal reward pathway, which regulates motivational and emotional states. Activating the vagal gut-to-brain axis, which leads to dopamine release, suggests that modulating dopamine levels could be a potential treatment approach for dopamine-related disorders. Some examples of gut microbiota include Prevotella, Bacteroides, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Clostridium, Enterococcus, and Ruminococcus , and they can affect dopamine by modulating dopaminergic activity. These gut microbiota are able to produce neurotransmitters, including dopamine, and their functions and bioavailability in the central nervous system and periphery are influenced by the gut-brain axis. Gut dysbiosis is the disturbance of the healthy intestinal flora, and it can lead to dopamine-related disorders, including Parkinson's disease, ADHD, depression, anxiety, and autism. Gut microbes that produce butyrate, a short-chain fatty acid, positively impact dopamine and contribute to reducing symptoms and effects seen in neurodegenerative disorders. Dopamine as a treatment It is important to understand the link between dopamine and gut health, as this could provide information about new therapeutic targets and improve current methods that have been used to prevent and restore deficiencies in dopamine function in different disorders. Most cells in the immune system contain dopamine receptors, allowing processes such as antigen presentation, T-cell activation, and inflammation to be regulated. Further research into this could open up a new possibility for dopamine to be used as a medication to treat diseases by changing the activity of dopamine receptors. Therefore, dopamine is important in various physiological processes, both in the central nervous and immune systems. For example, studies have shown that schizophrenia can be treated with antipsychotic medications which target dopamine neurotransmission. In addition, schizophrenia has also been treated by targeting the dysregulation (decreasing the amount) of dopamine transmission. Studies have shown promising results regarding dopamine being used as a form of treatment. Nevertheless, further research is needed to understand the interactions between dopamine, motivation and gut health and explore how this knowledge can be used to create medications to treat conditions. Conclusion The bidirectional gut-brain connection shows the importance of gut microbiota in controlling dopamine levels. This connection influences mood and behaviour but also has the potential to lead to new and innovative dopamine-targeted treatments being developed (for conditions including dopamine-related disorders). For example, scientists could target and manipulate dopamine receptors in the immune system to regulate the above mentioned processes: antigen presentation, T-cell activation, and inflammation. While current research has shown some promising results, further investigations are needed to better comprehend the connection between gut health and dopamine levels. Nevertheless, through consistent studies, scientists can gain a deeper understanding of this mechanism to see how changes in gut microbiota could affect dopamine regulation and influence mood and behaviour. Written by Naoshin Haque Related articles: the gut microbiome / Crohn's disease Project Gallery How does moving houses impact your health and well-being? | Scientia News Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link How does moving houses impact your health and well-being? Evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of gentrification in the context of health Introduction According to the World Health Organization (WHO), health is “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity". Another way to define health is an individual being in a condition of equilibrium within themselves and the surrounding environment, which includes their social interactions and other factors. Reflecting on historical views of health, ancient Indian and Chinese medicine and society in Ancient Greece thought of health as harmony between a person and their environment, which underlines the cohesion between the soul and body; this is similar to the WHO’s definition of health. Considering these ideas, one key determinant of health is gentrification (see Figure 1 ). It was first defined in 1964 by British sociologist Ruth Glass, who witnessed the dilapidated houses in the London Borough of Islington being taken over and renovated by middle-class proprietors. The broader consequences of gentrification include enhanced living conditions for the residents, differences in ownership prerequisites, increased prices of land and houses, and transformations in the social class structure. Also, these changes cause lower-income inhabitants to be pushed out or go to poorer neighbourhoods, and the conditions in these neighbourhoods, which can include racial separation, lead to inequities and discrepancies in health. For example, a systematic review discovered that elderly and Black residents were affected more by gentrification compared to younger and White citizens; this highlights the importance of support and interventions for specific populations during urban renewal. Given the knowledge provided above, this article will delve further into the advantages and disadvantages of gentrification in the context of health outcomes. Advantages of gentrification Gentrification does have its benefits. Firstly, it is positively linked with collective efficacy, which is about enhancing social cohesion within neighbourhoods and maintaining etiquette; this has health benefits for residents, like decreased rates of obesity, sexually transmitted diseases, and all-cause mortality. Another advantage of gentrification is the possibility of economic growth because as more affluent tenants move into specific neighbourhoods, they can bring companies, assets, and an increased demand for local goods and services, creating more jobs in the area for residents. Additionally, gentrification can be attributed to decreased crime rates in newly developed areas because the inflow of wealthier citizens often conveys a more substantial sense of community and investment in regional security standards. Therefore, this revitalised feeling of safety can make these neighbourhoods more appealing to existing and new inhabitants, which leads to further economic development. Moreover, reducing crime can improve health outcomes by reducing stress and anxiety levels among residents, for example. As a result, the community's general well-being can develop, leading to healthier lifestyle choices and more lively neighbourhoods. Furthermore, the longer a person lives in a gentrifying neighbourhood, the better their self-reported health, which does not differ by race or ethnicity, as observed in Los Angeles. Disadvantages of gentrification However, it is also essential to mention the drawbacks of gentrification, which are more numerous. In a qualitative study involving elderly participants, for example, one of them stated that, “The cost of living increases, but the money that people get by the end of the month is the same, this concerning those … even retired people, and people receiving the minimum wage, the minimum wage increases x every year, isn’t it? But it is not enough”. Elderly residents in Barcelona faced comparable challenges of residential displacement between 2011 and 2017 due to younger adults with higher incomes and those pursuing university education moving into the city. These cases spotlight how gentrification can raise the cost of living without an associated boost in earnings, making it problematic for people with lower incomes or vulnerable individuals to live in these areas. Likewise, a census from gentrified neighbourhoods in Pittsburgh showed that participants more typically conveyed negative health changes and reduced resources. Additionally, one study examined qualitative data from 14 cities in Europe and North America and commonly noticed that gentrification negatively affects the health of historically marginalised communities. These include threats to housing and monetary protection, socio-cultural expulsion, loss of services and conveniences, and raised chances of criminal behaviour and compromised public security. This can be equally observed during green gentrification, where longtime historically marginalised inhabitants feel excluded from green or natural spaces, and are less likely to use them compared to newer residents. To mitigate these negative impacts of gentrification, inclusive urban renewal guidelines should be drafted that consider vulnerable populations to boost health benefits through physical and social improvements. The first step would be to provide residents with enough information and establish trust between them and the local authorities because any inequality in providing social options dramatically affects people’s health-related behaviours. Intriguingly, gentrification has been shown to increase the opportunity for exposure to tick-borne pathogens by populations staying in place, displacement within urban areas, and suburban removal. This increases tick-borne disease risk, which poses a health hazard to impacted residents ( Figure 2 ). As for mental health, research has indicated that residing in gentrified areas is linked to greater levels of anxiety and depression in older adults and children. Additionally, one study found young people encountered spatial disconnection and affective exclusion due to gentrification and felt disoriented by the quickness of transition. Therefore, all of these problems associated with gentrification reveal that it can harm public health and well-being, aggravating disparities and creating feelings of isolation and aloneness in impacted communities. Conclusion Gentrification is a complicated and controversial approach that has noteworthy consequences for the health of neighbourhoods. Its advantages include enhanced infrastructure and boosted economic prospects, potentially leading to fairer access to healthcare services and improved health outcomes for residents. However, gentrification often leads to removal and the loss of affordable housing, which can harm the health of vulnerable populations. Therefore, it is vital for policymakers and stakeholders to carefully evaluate the likely health effects of gentrification and enforce alleviation strategies to safeguard the well-being of all citizens (see Table 1 ). Written by Sam Jarada Related article: A perspective on well-being REFERENCES WHO. Health and Well-Being. Who.int . 2015. Available from: https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/major-themes/health-and-well-being Sartorius N. The meanings of health and its promotion. Croatian Medical Journal. 2006;47(4):662–4. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2080455/ Krahn GL, Robinson A, Murray AJ, Havercamp SM, Havercamp S, Andridge R, et al. It’s time to Reconsider How We Define Health: Perspective from disability and chronic condition. Disability and Health Journal. 2021 Jun;14(4):101129. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936657421000753 Svalastog AL, Donev D, Jahren Kristoffersen N, Gajović S. Concepts and Definitions of Health and health-related Values in the Knowledge Landscapes of the Digital Society. Croatian Medical Journal. 2017 Dec;58(6):431–5. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5778676/ Foryś I. Gentrification on the Example of Suburban Parts of the Szczecin Urban Agglomeration. remav. 2013 Sep 1;21(3):5–14. Uribe-Toril J, Ruiz-Real J, de Pablo Valenciano J. Gentrification as an Emerging Source of Environmental Research. Sustainability. 2018 Dec 19;10(12):4847. Schnake-Mahl AS, Jahn JL, Subramanian SV, Waters MC, Arcaya M. Gentrification, Neighborhood Change, and Population Health: a Systematic Review. Journal of Urban Health. 2020 Jan 14;97(1):1–25. Project Gallery The chemistry of an atomic bomb | Scientia News Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link The chemistry of an atomic bomb Julius Oppenheimer Julius Robert Oppenheimer, often credited with leading the development of the atomic bomb, played a significant role in its creation in the early 1940s. However, it is essential to recognize the collaborative effort of many scientists, engineers, and researchers who contributed to the project. The history and chemistry of the atomic bomb are indeed fascinating, shedding light on the scientific advancements that made it possible. The destructive power of an atomic bomb stems from the rapid release of energy resulting from the splitting, or fission, of fissile atomic nuclei in its core. Isotopes such as uranium-235 and plutonium-239 are selected for their ability to undergo fission readily and sustain a self-sustaining chain reaction, leading to the release of an immense amount of energy. The critical mass of fissionable material required for detonation ensures that the neutrons produced during fission have a high probability of impacting other nuclei and initiating a chain reaction. To facilitate a controlled release of energy, neutron moderation plays a crucial role in the functioning of an atomic bomb. Neutrons emitted during fission have high velocities, making them less likely to be absorbed by other fissile material. However, by employing a moderator material such as heavy water (deuterium oxide) or graphite, these high-speed neutrons can be slowed down. Slowing down the neutrons increases the likelihood of their absorption by fissile material, enhancing the efficiency of the chain reaction and the release of energy. The sheer magnitude of the energy released by atomic bombs is staggering. For example, one kilogram (2.2 pounds) of uranium-235 can undergo complete fission, producing an amount of energy equivalent to that released by 17,000 tons (17 kilotons) of TNT. This tremendous release of energy underscores the immense destructive potential of atomic weapons. It is essential to note that the development of the atomic bomb represents a confluence of scientific knowledge and technological advancements, with nuclear chemistry serving as a foundational principle. The understanding of nuclear fission, the critical mass requirement, and the implosion design were key factors in the creation of the atomic bomb. Exploring the chemistry behind this devastating weapon not only provides insights into the destructive capabilities of atomic energy but also emphasises the responsibility that accompanies its use. In conclusion, while Oppenheimer's contributions to the development of the atomic bomb are significant, it is crucial to acknowledge the collective effort that led to its creation. The chemistry behind atomic bombs, from the selection of fissile isotopes to neutron moderation, plays a pivotal role in harnessing the destructive power of nuclear fission. Understanding the chemistry of atomic weapons highlights the remarkable scientific achievements and reinforces the need for responsible use of atomic energy. By Navnidhi Sharma Project Gallery View All Forum Posts (19) Quizzes #3 In Questions & Answers · 15 February 2023 Form of energy which is due to an object/ particle's motion? A. Kinetic energy B. Gravitational potential energy C. Potential energy D. Thermal energy 0 1 16 Quizzes #5 In Questions & Answers · 4 March 2023 0 1 22 Forum rules In General Discussion · 13 December 2022 We want everyone to get the most out of this community, so we ask that you please read and follow these guidelines: Respect each other Keep posts relevant to the forum topic No spamming 1 0 6 View All

There’s Nothing Here... We can’t find the page you’re looking for. Check the URL, or head back home. Go Home

There’s Nothing Here... We can’t find the page you’re looking for. Check the URL, or head back home. Go Home