Triangulene. No matter how hard you try, you can’t put double bonds on the middle rings without having a carbon atom form five bonds, which it refuses to do. So you end up with unpaired electrons instead. A lot of organic chemistry feels like an episode of Mythbusters , if a bit of an undramatic one. Imagine a couple of chemists sitting at a white board, asking each other, “Is it actually possible to build this thing?” Getting a PhD can often depend on figuring out how to overcome the challenges of constructing a molecule. Sometimes, the challenges come because the starting materials won’t react with anything. Sometimes, the challenge is that the products will react with everything , often with explosive consequences. But clearing these hurdles is usually more than an intellectual curiosity; in many cases these odd molecules can tell us about basic principles of chemistry. The molecules may also have useful properties that we’d like to study in the hope that we can figure out how to make a stable molecule that behaves the same way. In the latest triumph, a Swiss-UK team has managed to make a molecule called triangulene. It’s a strange beast: a flat triangle of carbon that has an odd combination of bonds that leave a couple of electrons free. These electrons are expected to give it magnetic properties, but we haven’t been able to confirm this because the molecule also reacts with everything it comes in contact with. The trick to making it was crafting individual molecules by hand—a hand that operated a scanning-tunneling microscope. Read 8 remaining paragraphs | Comments
See the article here:
Triangulene, reactive, magnetic relative of graphene finally produced
According to a ruling by judges at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the disputed patents on the gene-editing tool CRISPR belong to the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. “The ruling comes a little over two months after a high-profile court hearing, during which MIT and University of California, Berkeley heatedly argued about who should own CRISPR, ” The Verge reports. From their report: STAT News reported that the decision was one sentence long. The three judges decided that the Broad patents are different enough from the ones the University of California applied for that the Broad patents stand. The patent ruling suggests that the work done by Jennifer Doudna of the University of California and her colleagues on CRISPR wasn’t so groundbreaking as to make any other advance obvious. But that legal opinion isn’t how the science world views her work, STAT points out: “Doudna and her chief collaborator, Emmanuelle Charpentier, won the $3 million Breakthrough Prize in the life sciences in 2015, the $500, 000 Gruber Genetics Prize in 2015, and the $450, 000 Japan Prize in 2017, ” the outlet notes. Read more of this story at Slashdot.