miércoles, 18 de febrero de 2015

FÍSICA - Nuevas Particulas

New Particles Found at Large Hadron Collider

Two new “baryons” made of three quarks each are an exotic twist on normal protons and neutrons
 
LHCb experiment


The LHCb experiment at CERN's Large Hadron Collider.
CERN
Two new particles made of exotic types of quarks have appeared inside the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) near Geneva, Switzerland. The particles are never-before-seen species of baryons—a category of particles that also includes the familiar protons and neutrons inside atoms. The new baryons had been long predicted to exist, but their specific characteristics, such as their mass, were unknown until they were discovered in the flesh. The new measurements serve to confirm and refine the existing theory of subatomic particles and help pave the way for a deeper theory that could include even more exotic particles.

Scientists at the collider’s Large Hadron Collider beauty (LHCb) experiment reported the discovery of the baryons, called Xib'- and Xib*- (pronounced “zi-b-prime” and “zi-b-star”), February 10 in Physical Review Letters. (They posted a preprint of their paper in November on the arXiv server.) “These were two things that very much should have existed,” says Matthew Charles of Paris 6 University Pierre and Marie Curie, a co-author of the study. “Of course, you still have to check because every now and then you get a surprise.” Both particles contain one beauty, or b, quark, one strange quark and one down quark. What differentiates these particles from one another, and from one other conglomeration of the same three types of quarks that was previously found at the LHC, is the arrangement of the quarks' spins.

Quantum spin
Spin is one of the basic quantum characteristics intrinsic to any particle, and comes in unitless, discrete amounts. All quarks have a spin of one half. When two quarks inside the same particle are spinning in the same direction, their spins add together; when they rotate in opposite directions their spins cancel out. Spins are like magnets in that like repels like, so quarks prefer to spin in opposite directions. Extra energy is needed to align two quarks to spin in the same direction. The lowest-energy configuration of a Xib particle is for the two lightest quarks (the down and strange) to be antialigned, with their spins canceling out to zero, and the heavy b quark spinning in either direction, adding another one-half spin for a total spin of one half. That ground state, called Xib*0, was found at the LHC in 2012.

The two newfound baryons are higher-energy configurations. Both have the lightest two quarks spinning in parallel, adding to a combined spin of 1. Xib'- has its b quark spinning opposite those two, giving the particle a total spin of one half (from 1 minus one-half). In Xib* the spin of all three quarks is aligned, giving it a total spin of 1 and a half. This triple alignment requires the most energy of any configuration, causing Xib* to be the heaviest of the three states.

Before the particles were discovered, physicists had estimated their masses based on a theory called quantum chromodynamics (QCD), which describes the strong force—one of the four fundamental forces of nature—that is responsible for binding quarks together. The strong force is carried by particles called gluons, so inside any particle held together by the strong force there will also be gluons. And in addition to the main quarks and gluons “virtual” pairs of quarks and antiquarks (the antimatter counterpart of quarks) continuously pop into and out of existence. This particle zoo makes calculations based on QCD incredibly difficult, to the point that mass estimates can only be accomplished using powerful supercomputers running complex simulations that aim to take all of the constituents of the particle into account. “We supposedly have a theory that tells us how these particles are supposed to behave and in principle it should open new doors. But in practice, our ability to calculate is quite limited,” says Frank Wilczek, a theoretical physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who won the Nobel Prize for helping to formulate QCD.

The new LHCb measurements agree with the best QCD predictions of the Xib masses. “This is a validation that the theoretical approach is the correct one and that we have the calculation under control,” says theorist Richard Woloshyn of the Canadian particle physics laboratory TRIUMF, who published a prediction of the Xib masses in 2009. The measurements will serve as new data points to anchor down the theory. “We need more examples to test out computational methods and explore what the different methods can teach us,” Wilczek says. “This system will help us to refine those techniques.”

Testing the standard model
So far, the newfound baryons behave according to QCD and to the larger “standard model” of physics, which describes all the known particles in the universe. Yet scientists know that the standard model cannot be the final word, because it does not account for dark matter—the invisible material that seems to dwarf normal matter in the cosmos. By making increasingly precise measurements of all the predictions of the standard model, researchers hope eventually to find cracks that lead the way to a larger theory to supersede it. “These two particles themselves are perfectly standard-model and expected,” Charles says, “but we’re hoping that we will be able to build on these in the long run to move beyond the standard model.”

The Xib particles, like all new species discovered at the LHC (including the famed Higgs boson), arose in the aftermath of collisions between speeding protons inside the accelerator’s 27-kilometer underground ring. When the protons disintegrate, their mass and energy is converted into new particles. The higher a collision's energy, the more massive newly appearing particles can be. This spring the LHC will rev up again at higher energies than ever before, following a two-year hiatus for upgrades. Those higher energies should allow more and heavier particles to arise than earlier runs saw, potentially revealing exotic particles that finally push the bounds of the standard model.

Tomado de  http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-particles-found-at-large-hadron-collider/?WT.mc_id=SA_Facebook

miércoles, 11 de febrero de 2015

BIOLOGÍA - SISTEMA INMUNE



A Pill That Mimics the Immune System

Synthetic antibodies with the potential to be orally ingested to fight cancer and autoimmune diseases may replace cumbersome intravenous therapeutics
antibodies


The therapeutic potential of synthetic antibodylike compounds is vast.
Credit: NIAID via Flickr
The human body doesn’t like outsiders. When a foreign pathogen or substance, say an unwanted virus, finds its way into our blood streams we produce antibodies that the neutralize the threat. These “Y”-shaped proteins are made by a class of white blood cells called plasma cells and bind to molecules on the invaders called antigens, triggering another set of white blood cells to literally ingest the interloper. For years now doctors have used antibodies and other protein-based therapies (aka biologics) to treat a range of illnesses, cancers, infections and autoimmune diseases among them.

But antibodies have their drawbacks: for one they're bulky and hence usually have to be administered intravenously as they’re often too big to be absorbed in the gastrointestinal tract. With this in mind, chemist David Spiegel and his colleagues at Yale University are out to develop compounds with the benefits of antibodies—hopefully minus the needle.*
In work recently published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society Spiegel and his team have successfully developed the first synthetic molecules that behave like antibodies. Like the real thing, these so-called "synthetic antibody mimics"—or "SyAMs"—bind to both diseased cells and disease-fighting immune cells. Specifically the compounds were found to zero in on and bind to a specific antigen on prostate cancer cells. The SyAMs also bind to and activate certain immune cells that then devour the malignancy.
Spiegel’s SyAMs are produced in a way that is similar to conventional drugs, by using chemical reactions to piece together various structural features often not found in nature. As he explains, the therapeutic potential of synthetic antibodylike compounds is vast: “Because antibodies are proteins they’re difficult and expensive to produce on a large scale, can cause unwanted immune reactions and tend to aggregate and denature with long-term storage.” Spiegel speculates that SyAMs will be easier and cheaper to produce and less likely to incite aberrant immune activity. SyAMs are also one twentieth the size of antibodies—more akin to the size of most medications—and can therefore perhaps be administered orally. This could be a major boon to patients with cancers and autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis who have to regularly get themselves to infusion centers for monoclonal antibody therapy.
The idea of producing “artificial antibodies” traces back to the work of late 19th-century German physician Paul Ehrlich who first proposed that the immune system can neutralize toxins or pathogens by forming "antitoxins." Based on the idea he and his colleagues began developing drugs meant to function like these antitoxins, including one to treat Trypanosoma parasite infections. During the 1930s and 1940s—as understanding of antibody–antigen interactions grew—famed chemist, activist and vitamin C evangelist Linus Pauling started tinkering with the idea that proteins could be transformed into antibodies by exposing them to certain antigens.
Artificial antibody research split subsequently in two directions: one camp pursued creating protein antibodies resulting in what are called monoclonal antibodies. Monoclonals are produced by natural means in a lab and are now commonly used therapeutically. The other camp, in which Spiegel falls, set out to produce smaller, nonprotein compounds with antibodylike properties.
Beyond attacking prostate cancer, Spiegel’s group has also developed SyAM-based approaches targeting HIV, various other cancers and bacterial triggers of autoimmune disease. And although SyAM research remains in the petri dish, a mouse model is in the works and human studies are not far off. A number of other labs are also researching ways to fight disease by manipulating antibodies and synthesizing molecules that act on the immune system, including Peter Schultz at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif. “He's probably our biggest competitor and I'm his biggest fan,” Spiegel says.
Laura Kiessling at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, who studies ways to draw natural antibodies to tumor cells, comments on the benefits of Spiegel’s approach: “It can be tailored to selectively recruit specific types of immune cells to kill tumor cells. The smaller size of the compounds could also be an asset in eliminating tumors, but the benefits would need to be looked at in vivo,” Kiessling says.
As Spiegel confesses, his route to the chemistry lab was an unusual one. He went to medical school to become a psychiatrist but along the way also picked up an interest in chemistry and—in decidedly un-psychiatristlike fashion—tacked on a PhD in organic synthesis (the development of new organic compounds and reactions in the lab). “The relevance of this research to clinical medicine was not always clear to my classmates and colleagues—or sometimes to myself,” he recalls, “but I realized that organic chemistry has been critically associated with drug development from the beginning.”
Spiegel points out that most U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved drugs are in fact small organic molecules. “My thought was that by working to understand diseases at the cellular and molecular level, I could not only learn how to make new drugs,” he notes, “but also perhaps develop new paradigms for how drugs could function.” Spiegel’s decision to join his chemical and clinical interests, it seems, was a wise one.

*Clarification (2/10/15): This paragraph was edited after posting to explain more accurately the drawbacks of administering antibodies to patients and the way researchers hope to surmount the problem.

TOMADO DE http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-pill-that-mimics-the-immune-system/?WT.mc_id=SA_Facebook

Taller Grado 10





REALIZAR LAS SIGUIENTES CONVERSIONES:


 4.500 nm a Km

 

200X105 fm a Dm

 

204X106 minutos a años

 

1,5 siglos a segundos

 

 0,0008 Gm a mm

 

100 Km/h  a m/s

 

 25m/s a Km/h

 

 0,014X108 metros a nm

Tabla de Unidades


Exa
E
1018
Peta
P
1015
Tera
T
1012
Giga
G
109
Mega
M
106
Kilo
K
103
Hecto
H
102
Deca
D
101
Unidad

100
deci
d
10-1
centi
c
10-2
mili
m
10-3
micro
µ
10-6
nano
n
10-9
pico
p
10-12
femto
f
10-15
atto
a
10-18