%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |
Items to fit into your overhead compartment |
| I wanted to share this article because a) it's interesting and I have stuff to say about it and b) I wanted to show that even the most serious science communicators, like Quanta, sometimes can't help using a pun in the headline. The Physics of Glass Opens a Window Into Biology  The physicist Lisa Manning studies the dynamics of glassy materials to understand embryonic development and disease. If you're anything like me, you're wondering what the hell glass and biology could possibly have in common. Well, that's what the article's for. The ebb and flow of vehicles along congested highways was what first drew Lisa Manning to her preferred corner of physics... I can relate. I still remember the epiphany I got back in engineering school when I realized that the equations of traffic flow are the discrete-math versions of the equations of fluid flow. But it wasn’t until after she had earned her doctorate in physics in 2008 that Manning started applying that enthusiasm to problems in biology. I've noted before that, sometimes, an interdisciplinary approach can solve problems that a focus on one field cannot. Perhaps I'm biased because I prefer to know a little bit about a lot of things than to know a whole lot about one thing and nothing about anything else. ...she learned about what’s known as the differential adhesion hypothesis, an idea developed in the 1960s to explain how groups of cells in embryos move and sort themselves out from one another in response to considerations like surface tension. “It was amazing that such a simple physical idea could explain so much biological data, given how complicated biology is,” said Manning, who is now an associate professor of physics at Syracuse University. “That work really convinced me that there could be a place for this kind of [physics-based] thinking in biology.” "Amazing," sure, but to me, it's not surprising. Complexity emerges from simplicity, not the other way around. And biology is basically chemistry which is basically physics, so even there, it should be no surprise that one field can inform the other. She took inspiration from the dynamics of glasses, those disordered solid materials that resemble fluids in their behavior. I'm going to digress for a moment, here. Glass has been described as a "solid liquid." When touring some historical site lo these many years ago—hell, it might have been Monticello—I heard a tour guide assert that being a solid liquid, glass flows very, very slowly under the influence of gravity, and that's why all these old windows are wavy and thicker at the bottom. This didn't sit right with me then, so I looked into it (this was pre-internet, so it involved an actual trip to an actual library). Turns out that no, glass is solid, period. It doesn't flow any more than rocks do, assuming ordinary temperatures (of course it flows when heated enough to change phase). The waviness of pre-industrial glass is a result of its manufacturing process, and apparently, they'd often install the panes with the thicker bits at the bottom, for whatever reason. Point is, people confuse "glass resembles a fluid" with "glass flows, albeit very slowly." Which is understandable, though really, tour guides should know better. The reason we say glass is fluid-like is that most solids have a crystalline structure of some sort, at the atomic level. But glass does not; its atomic structure is disordered. I mention all this in case someone's still got that idea in their head that glass is a slow-moving liquid; the article doesn't make it clear (see, I can pun, too) until it gets into the interview portion. Manning found that the tissues in our bodies behave in many of the same ways. As a result, with insights gleaned from the physics of glasses, she has been able to model the mechanics of cellular interactions in tissues, and uncover their relevance to development and disease. Unlike the relatively simple ideas about the atomic structure, or lack thereof, of various solids, the connection to biology is beyond me. The rest of the article is, as I said, an interview, which I'm not quoting here. While I can't pretend to understand a lot of it, I can appreciate her multidisciplinary approach and how insights from one branch of science can illuminate problems from another branch. Incidentally, I find it helps to use a similar approach to writing. Because as much as we like to categorize things, the boundaries tend to blur and become fluid. Like the view through an 18th century window pane. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
