Life minus Nine

We define life in many ways. All the research in the world is aimed primarily at only one target - improving human lives. The past steps lead us to a new gate called ‘nanotechnology'. Although research in this field has been going on for decades, it is only now that the focus light is turned on. It will be worthwhile to spend some time on it.

Nanotechnology, like life, can be defined in many ways, its areas extending far beyond just physics, chemistry, or biology. Here, I try to relate these hard-to-define terms, "life" and "nano". What would life be 'minus nine'? I would rather prefer to talk about life 'plus' nine.

It is customary to define nanoparticles or nanostructures as entities in the range of sizes from 1 - 100 nm, thus many biological materials can be classified as nanoparticles. Considering a gradation in this range, we can include, viruses, which range in size between 10 to 200 nm, in the upper part of the nanoparticle range. Proteins, ranging between 4 and 50 nm, are in the low nanometer range, while the building blocks of proteins, the amino acids - each about 0.6 nm in size - are below the lower limit of a nanoparticle. These are a few of the examples that could be considered in the nanoscale. The structures made up by these particles sometimes end up in the same range too.

A protein is a combination of any of the 20 amino acids, bound together one after the other by strong peptide chemical bonds. These chains called polypeptides contain hundreds, and in some cases thousands of amino acids; hence they correspond to "nanowires". The polypeptide nanowires further undergo twistings and turnings to compact themselves into a relatively small volume forming a polypeptide nanoparticle, with a diameter that is typically in the range of 4 - 50 nm. Thus a protein is a nanoparticle consisting of a compacted polypeptide nanowire.

The genetic material deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) has the structure of a compacted nanowire. It is made up of 4 nucleotide molecules that bind together in a long double helix to form chromosomes. Thus the DNA molecule is a double-nanowire, with the strands twisted around each other with a repeat unit every 3.4 nm, and a diameter of 2 nm.

Another biological structure made up of subunits in the nanometer range size is the human tendon. The function of a tendon is to attach a muscle to a bone. The fundamental building block of a tendon is the assemblage of amino acids that form a gelatin- like protein called 'collagen' (1 nm), which coils into a triple helix (2 nm). Further arrangement then follows a three-fold sequence of fibrillar nanostructures: a microfibril (3 - 5 nm), a subfibril (10 - 20 nm), and a fibril itself (50 - 500 nm). These nanostructures then make up the macroscopic tendon.

A view of these biological nanostructures would give us an idea what role the study of nanoparticles plays in biology. Taken to the scrap, many important biomolecules may end up in nanoparticles. Since the smallest amino acid, glycine is 0.42 nm in size, and some viruses reach 200 nm, it will be appropriate to define a biological nanostructure as being in the nominal range from 0.5 to 200 nm. It is our discretion to study them as a separate class, to place them in a separate group, or to create a new field called 'nanobiotechnology'.

Remember, best things come in small packages!
 

பழைய படம்

"இந்த  வாழ்க்கைப்  பயணம் போற போக்குல உணர்வுகளையும், உறவுகளையும் குழி தோண்டி பொதச்சுட்டு அப்டி எத தேடிகிட்டு போறோம்?"

"Leaving behind our feelings and our relatives/friends, where are we proceeding in this journey of life?"

Pazhaya Padam (non-native speakers of Tamil, read as ‘Palaya Padam’) is a short film made by the MGR Film Institute, Chennai, India. By short, I mean it’s really short – just about fifteen minutes. There are two reasons why I write about this film. One, the story they try telling us is so close to my heart; I have had the same feelings as shown in the movie, which is because I’m sentimental. Second, the music was scored by my very good friend Justin Prabhakaran, my undergrad classmate.

We live in an era, where sentiments have taken a backseat. In our race to succeed, and survive, we take every stride possible, not knowing what we lose behind. The film portrays an old man, living alone in a village, waiting for his grandson to come and see him. And when it happens, the loving grandson could not keep his grandfather with him for long, given his economical situation, and his parents wish to stay away. The film makes its point clear: What is it that makes a person happy, especially if you are old, weak, and lonely? It is the love of your children. Making up for lost time will never happen.

The film’s music, as for any short film, is a 'method' score, with some tear-jerking violin pieces and pleasant humming.  But for a first-timer (and when it is just his project), this is a very good attempt. I’m tempted to add a personal comment here: This guy won the best singer award in the whole of Madurai district in a competition ‘College Kondattam’ conducted by Jaya TV. We also won the prize for best group performance for a song composed and written by him. To me, he just seems to improve with every song he composes (sorry that I talk about something you have not heard)…

Coming back to the film’s music, we cannot expect any variety in a short film, that too one with such an emotional script. But with the limited scope, the music composer has done a great job, mixing a more subtle Indian tone throughout. Of course, there are clichéd music pieces like the sunrise scene which has “Kowsalya supraja ramapoorva” keerthanai in its background. I cannot count how many movies I have seen with such a scene, and with the same background music. But it is apt for such a film, as it takes the message across quickly. Now that he is with Harris Jeyaraj, we’ll hope he learns a few more tricks in the trade and comes back to the focus light, probably as a music director for a feature film.

The film’s title, literally meaning ‘An Old Portrait’ brings out the theme beautifully. We always think we can get back to our old times, our native town, and our childhood play grounds after finishing our job, and get to enjoy them the same way we did years ago. The same applies to spending time with your family. But we do not realize that time goes on, and doesn’t bother to wait for our return. So when we do return, all we see is just an old portrait of the times we missed. 

"எப்பவாவது இந்த உறவுகல பத்தி நினைவுகள் வரும்போது எல்லாமே பழைய படமா மாறிப் போயிருக்கும்..."

For the short movie:   Pazhaya Padam - Part I

                                       Pazhaya Padam - Part II

Elements of Fire: Air, Fuel, and Heat

It was the first lab for the summer and the students were so engrossed in finishing the experiment as early as possible. Well, they were just half an hour into the experiment! And I, as usual, was enjoying teaching a lab course (more than the stressful recitation). It was a course I had taught before, and I had an air of confidence around me.

The experiment that day involved the analysis of effect of temperature on acid-base reaction. The Teaching Assistants (TAs) including me had in their hands what we called a ‘striker’ used to light a burner. It was my favorite asset in the lab, and I went around revolving it in my hand. Through the experiment, I lighted a few of the students’ burners and suddenly we heard an alarm in the lab. Within seconds, the building’s fire alarm went off. Great! That was a good start to a course! I checked through the lab to make sure we did not start a fire. We did not. As everyone, we had to go out. We sent out the students and cleared the building. It was always a wonderful sight seeing so many people standing across the road all worried about the experiments they left, the laptops which were open, and of course, unfinished coffee!

Siren. The fire engines were here. The fire personnel shuffled in and out, and about forty five minutes later, we were let in. Obviously, there was no great fire in the building. There were four other TAs with me and we were thinking about coffee as Starbucks was close. I had Caramel Macchiato in mind, but we thought so long that it was now time for us to resume our duties. We were back in, and the experiment which should have ended in one and a half hours was now into its second hour, and finally got over after three and a half hours. Hmmm, I wouldn’t mind a fire alarm once in a while, but it was not destined to be so…

The very next week, there was another alarm, again during my lab! But this time, I did not have a striker in my hand, and we were using just ice! We evacuated the building, and this time, we didn’t think much about coffee; we went straight to the coffee shop exiting the building! But instead of the caramel macchiato I bought an iced Venti, the day’s special. As we returned, we had guesses on how many fire alarms we will have in the forthcoming labs we were teaching. The call back in was quicker this time, and I just had the time to finish my coffee. This experiment was longer. One team was held up in a step: “God is not looking at me today” she said. “I’m sure he’ll turn around soon” was my reply. They finished it fifteen minutes late.

Both these incidents were not drills, as the fire engines would not be there just to make the drills realistic! Fire alarms are good, but it is how sensitive they are that matters. Even then, I would not blame my school’s fire alarm, because the one in my apartment is worse: it shrieked for my cooking!

When we guessed numbers the previous week, we had no idea it would actually occur. How often will one expect a course to be disturbed by a fire alarm in the first two weeks? It was just the fifth experiment in the course, and already the third time we had to evacuate the building because of a fire alarm!! “I enjoyed the break” said a student after returning in. This was today.

We experienced the Elements of Fire: fresh ‘air’ outside the building, re’fuel’ed ourselves with a coffee and ‘heat’: we burnt a few calories teaching in the lab!

Law abiding citizen

Washington Square Park, East Village, New York City

Cleaning the room at the bottom

One of my relatives once asked me: “I saw a guy talk about nanotechnology in the TV and I was reminded of you. Is that what you do?” How could I explain that making metal oxide nanoparticles for solar cells was different from designing DNA motifs. I reluctantly said “Yes, but mine is slightly different”.

When we hear the word Nanotechnology, we get the feel that it is something new, something different. It is neither. Metal nanoparticles have been in the making for two decades and the vision of DNA nanostructures through self-assembly was seen as early as the early eighties. It is not new. There are very few separate ‘centers’ or departments for nanotechnology in universities and research institutes, but the number is rising. But it does not reflect that actual nanotechnology research is just budding at these places. There are a lot more people working on it in the departments of physics, chemistry, biology, you name it! It is not different. So when people ask me about nanotechnology, I tell them it is the study of any material in the nanoscale. As of now, the relevance is mainly toward physical sciences as there are more applications we see and hear in the market. But in reality, it extends to a far wider spectrum.

It is only the buzz about Nanotechnology that has made this commotion. People should understand that it is the nature of every material to be in any form or any scale, and when we make or work on materials in the range of one billionth of a meter, that is where Nanotechnology steps in. You cannot study the properties of a ceramic material without knowing the physics behind its mechanical strength. You cannot design a drug-delivery nanoshell without understanding the physiological path it has to take to reach the particular cell in the body. How could a DNA nanostructure be designed without knowing the chemical stability of its twists and flips? It is Physics. It is Chemistry. It is Biology. From what I understand, it always gives us a sense of elation when we tell people we do something different. Instead of ‘research in physics’, ‘I work in nanotechnology’ seems hi-fi. I agree it does. But you are ‘scientifically’ still in physics. Science has no boundaries. You cannot separate each field and remain in just one for too long. It is to our convenience that we name each area so that colleagues in that field would be benefited in discussions, and references toward a particular research would be simpler.

I talked to my friend in Germany who works in NMR study of nanomaterials, and I could not comprehend the complete subject of his research. The same with his understanding of DNA. And we both can call ourselves researchers in nanotechnology. It is a wide field, and you could be anywhere, doing anything. Everyone who works in nanotechnology may/will/need not know what each other does, except his area of research of course. Understanding nanotechnology is not distinct from physics, biology or chemistry; it is time to understand that NT itself is not a book, but just a page in the book called Science.

A friend of mine once asked me about a master’s program in nanotechnology. I asked him why he wanted to do it since he already had a master’s degree. His reply was that he wanted to do his PhD in Nanoscience. The area you choose for your research is your discretion, until the point it has some relevance with what you studied. You do not have to have a degree in nanoscience or nanotechnology to do your research in the field! If that were the case, how do we have so many institutes in nano when we did not have (or did not even hear) degree programs on nanotechnology and what did our professors specialize in?? A microbiologist could do a research in nanotechnology, so could a chemist. There are no restrictions or requirements. 

It has become a trend to include the word (prefix, suffix) ‘nano’ in a research paper and a paper published with ‘nano’ in the title need not involve an actual work in Nanotechnology. On the contrary, any research in Nanotechnology does not have to have the prefix in its title. It will take some time for this craze to end, or submerge. For now, I would rather say I work in the department of Chemistry, specializing is DNA crystallography!

All said, when someone asks me if I’m doing my research in nanotechnology, I would simply say “Yes” and if they tell me they know someone who works in nanotechnology, I’d say “Oh, nice”. And there ends the story.

Nanotechnology, all in one, and one in all.

On-screen Partnerships – Hollywood – I

I have always liked a movie with more than one lead character. Even if there is a lead, and the focus is shared by another one, things get spicier. My favorite combination of actors on-screen may/will not be what the majority likes. But here I go ga ga about what I like, and why.

Will Smith / Jaden Smith - The Pursuit of Happyness:

Chris Gardner: Probably means there's a good chance. Possibly means we might or we might not.

Christopher: Okay.

Chris Gardner: So, what does probably mean?

Christopher: It means we have a good chance.

Chris Gardner: And what does possibly mean?

Christopher: I know what it means! It means we're not going to the game.

It was not until a few months after I saw the movie that I came to know Jaden was Will Smith’s own son. Well, I didn’t even try to see the kid's name in the credits when I saw the film. This was one of the most effective on-screen pairs I have seen. The single dad’s care for his son was portrayed impeccably by Will smith (he was nominated for an Oscar for best actor in a lead role). Jaden’s shaky voice throughout the film walking with his dad gave me a quirky smile. I doubt if any other pair could have moved me to the extent these two did. Let’s see if the time machine has an answer!

Arnold Schwarzenegger / Edward Furlong - Terminator 2: The Judgment Day:

John Connor: No, no, no, no. You gotta listen to the way people talk. You don't say "affirmative," or some shit like that. You say "no problemo". And if someone comes on to you with an attitude you say "eat me". And if you want to shine them on it's "hasta la vista, baby".

The Terminator: Hasta la vista, baby.

John Connor: Yeah but later, dickwad. And if someone gets upset you say, "chill out"! Or you can do combinations.

The Terminator: Chill out, dickwad.

John Connor: Great! See, you're getting it!

The Terminator: No problemo.

Arnold’s most famous character to date is that of The Terminator, his only sequel appearance. Role of the T-800 protecting John Connor, a go-frenzy kid is the best pairing we could have. The dialogues between the two take us through the first part of the movie in a lighter sense. The cautious terminator and the freelance future hero was a nice pairing in action. It was not the acting that made me like it, but the feel of togetherness between the characters. Of course, Arnold is my favorite actor and I would like whatever he does! John Connor: Life endangered, mother in peril, end of the world; and the Terminator: only mission to protect John. What else could be more complementary… Hope he’ll be back!

Christian Bale / Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight:

The Joker: Oh, you. You just couldn't let me go, could you? This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. You are truly incorruptible, aren't you? Huh? You won't kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won't kill you because you're just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever.

Batman: You'll be in a padded cell forever.

The Joker: Maybe we can share one. You know, they'll be doubling up, the rate this city's inhabitants are losing their minds.

Christian Bale reprised his role as Batman in The Dark Knight with Heath Ledger as his arch-rival The Joker. With half the screen time with him, Heath Ledger really did take off his share of fame as the Joker. The two characters get together on the screen only halfway through the film, but when they did, their clashes were sparkling throughout, both in words and actions. This was one movie with more verbal exchanges between the protagonist and the antagonist. Crisp sequences and taut setting had these two characters etched out in a single timeline. The only botheration was that both their faces were masked, for the most part. Well, we know the Joker took it all, though a little late.

Will Smith / Alan Tudyk (Voice) - I, Robot:

  

Detective Del Spooner: I thought you were dead.

Sonny: Technically I was never alive, but I appreciate your concern.

This perhaps was one of the very few real vs. animated pairing on screen. Will smith’s portrayal of a robot-hating detective and Alan Tudyk’s voice for Sonny, the ‘unique’ NS5 robot make this movie a great sci-fi thriller. For someone who hates the illogical scientific advancement (like me), it is always difficult to comprehend even the good features of it. At the opposite end is Sonny, who is clear in his standpoint, and thinks he has a purpose. It is an engaging sequence in the latter half of the movie with both the characters playing the same side. Made me think who the lead role is!

  

Marlon Brando / Al Pacino - The Godfather:

Don Corleone: I knew Santino was going to have to go through all this... But I, I never wanted this for you… I refused to be a fool dancing on the strings held by all of those big shots. But I always thought that when it was your time, that you would be the one to hold the strings - Senator Corleone, Governor Corleone, something.

Michael: Another pezzonovante.

Don Corleone: Well, there wasn't enough time, Michael. There just wasn't enough time.

Michael: We'll get there, Pop. We'll get there. 

One of Hollywood history’s greatest movies of all time, with then superstar Marlon Brando and the fresh Al Pacino. The acting of the two took the film through like a novel, engrossing me in the happenings. Though it was Brando throughout the first half, the second half beautifully shows the father’s love for the reluctant younger son who has to take over his crime regime. The aging dad’s concern for his son and his family was one of the best performances by Marlon Brando (won Oscar for best actor in a lead role), and Pacino underplayed  so well as the son learning his father’s trade (nominated for Oscar – best actor in a supporting role). Best choices for the roles, and the rest was history.

These may not be the best on-screen duo ever, but just my favorites. There would be many more great on-screen partnerships I can write of. Let me think about more combos!!