The Nobel Prize in Science 1999.


105 views
Uploaded on:
Category: News / Events
Description
The Nobel Prize in Science 1999. " for his investigations of the move conditions of compound responses utilizing femtosecond spectroscopy". Ahmed H. Zewail. Egypt and USA . California Foundation of Innovation Pasadena, CA, USA . b. 1946.
Transcripts
Slide 1

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1999 " for his investigations of the move conditions of concoction responses utilizing femtosecond spectroscopy" Ahmed H. Zewail Egypt and USA California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA, USA b. 1946

Slide 2

The "shutter speed" of such a camera must be to a great degree high since particles are little (around 10 - 9 m) and move amazingly quickly (1 000 m/s).

Slide 4

A compound response - up slope and down dale Like everything in nature, atoms endeavor to achieve the least conceivable vitality state. This makes it handy to depict responses utilizing vitality surfaces. An atom on a vitality surface tries, similar to a kid in a water-slide, to achieve the most minimal point. You require enough speed (high vitality) to get up over the peak. The photo beneath demonstrates the ring opening of a cyclo-butane particle to frame two ethylene atoms. Zewail concentrated on this response by energizing cyclopentanone atoms with a femtosecond heartbeat. He could demonstrate that this response happens through a move state living a couple of hundred femtoseconds. This analysis settled an old contention about whether the response happens in one stage with concurrent softening of both bonds or up two stages, one bond breaking before the other.

Slide 7

Further perusing Information of the 1999 Nobel Prize in Chemistry (press discharge): The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences The Femtoland website page: www.its.caltech.edu/~femto The Birth of Molecules, A.H. Zewail, Scientific American, Vol. 262, Dec. 1990, pp.40-46 Laser Femtochemistry, A.H. Zewail, Science, Vol. 242 (1988), pp. 1645-1653 Femtochemistry: Recent advancement in investigations of Dynamics and Control of Reactions and their Transition States, A.H. Zewail, J. Phys. Chem. (Centennial Issue), Vol. 100 (1996) 12701-12 Femtochemistry: Ultrafast Dynamics of the Chemical Bond, Vol 1-2, A.H. Zewail. World Scientific 1994 pp.915, ISBN 9810219407 Femtosecond Chemistry, Vol 1-2, Eds. J. Manz, L. W ö ste. VCH 1995 pp. 916, ISBN 3-527-29062-1 Femtochemistry and Femtobiology: Ultrafast Reaction Dynamics at Atomic-Scale Resolution, Nobel Symposium 101.Ed.V. Sundstr ö m.World Scientific, Singapore 1997. ISBN 1-86094-039-0 The World\'s Fastest Camera, V.K. Jain. The World and I, October 1995, pp. 156-163 Freezing Time - in a Femtosecond, J.S. Baskin and A.H. Zewail, Science Spectra, Issue 14 (1998) pp. 62-71 Ten years of Femtochemistry: Time Resolution of Physical, Chemical and Biological Dynamics, A.W. Castleman and V. Sundstr ö m (eds.), J. Phys. Chem. - Special Issue (1998), pp. 4021.

Slide 9

The Marcus model During the 1950\'s scientific experts had the capacity set up that responses comprising of a solitary electron exchange, have a welldefined rate. Starting with one response then onto the next the distinction may be as extraordinary as that between a snail and an express prepare. Why? Rudolph Marcus fathomed this conundrum by considering every one of the points of interest of the response. Albeit no bonds are broken amid the response, there are still little changes in structure when electrons are included or evacuated. The substance\'s lengths bonds are changed and the dissolvable\'s particles are tossed about. Such auxiliary changes require the redesign vitality λ. In fig 1, λ is the vitality distinction between the left\'s base parabola (speaking to the balance positions before the response) and a point vertically above on the upper piece of the other bend (speaking to the response items An/A-preceding any nuclear positions have been changed). Marcus was the first to ascertain λ. He likewise understood that the electron\'s jump just requires the vitality λ/4 by means of the intersection purpose of the parabolas. The enactment vitality is in this manner Ea = λ/4. One may then, as indicated by surely understood standards, infer that: Reaction rate = ν exp(- Ea/kT) where k is the Boltzmann steady and T the supreme temperature. The preexponential component (ν) is the vibration recurrence of the iotas around their balance positions. The redesign vitality λ, and henceforth Ea, differs extraordinarily starting with one response then onto the next. Thusly one may clarify the considerable varieties in response rate.

Slide 10

A response where the vitality E is freed relates in the Marcus model to moving the vitality bend of the items (stamped D+/A-) around the sum E. As is clear from fig 2 the enactment vitality (Ea) is diminished and is rather Ea = (E-λ)2/4î». The response\'s reliance rate on E is then allegorical, and this hypothetical forecast concurs extremely well with exploratory results. In the event that the freed vitality E is equivalent to λ, then Ea will be equivalent to zero and the response is quick. For E>î» an alleged reversed area is come to (see fig 3), where the actuation vitality Ea increments with E. The response is slower the more prominent the vitality freed. This somewhat amazing result has been tentatively affirmed. An essential piece of the revamping vitality, λ, is reliant on the dissolvable. The higher the dielectric steady of the last the bigger the quality acquired for λ. Water with a high dielectric consistent is accordingly a poor dissolvable if quick electron exchange responses are sought.

Slide 11

Safety light When the bar is twisted a glass ampoule is broken, the fluids from the ampoule and the bar are blended and \'chilly light\' is delivered. The marvel is an illustration of chemiluminescence, a convoluted procedure including electron exchange steps. Because of the modified area the aggregate response results in an energized state from which light is discharged. Wellbeing lights of this kind, which are non-combustible and weatherproof are utilized via sailors and jumpers as a part of crisis.

Slide 15

between two imidazole gathers (the five-membered rings) and two yellow sulfur iotas.

Slide 16

Gemstones

Slide 17

Further perusing J. Physical Chemistry, Vol 90, No 16, July 31, 1986. Rudolph A. Marcus Commemorative Issue Chemical Reviews, 92:3, 1992 R.D. Gun: Electron exchange responses . Butterworths, 1980 Lennart Eberson: Electron Transfer Reactions in Organic Chemistry . Springer, 1987 Information on the 1992 Nobel Prize in Chemistry (press discharge), The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Slide 18

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1967 "for their investigations of greatly quick compound responses, effected by exasperating the equlibrium by method for short beats of energy" Manfred Eigen 1/2 of the prize Federal Republic of GermanyU Max-Planck-Institut fã¼r Physikalische Chemie Goettingen, Federal Republic of Germany 1927b. 1897d. Ronald George Wreyford Norrish 1/4 of the prize Institute of Physical Chemistry Cambridge, United Kingdom b. 1897 d. 1978 George Porter 1/4 of the prize United Kingdom Royal Institution of Great Britain London b. 1920 d. 2002

Slide 19

Presentation Speech Your Majesty, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen. The scientific experts of more seasoned times were essentially keen on the most proficient method to deliver substances from normal items which may demonstrate valuable; for instance, metals from minerals and so forth. As is normally done, they were certain to notice that some synthetic responses occurred quickly, while others continued substantially more gradually. In any case, deliberate investigations of response speeds were scarcely attempted before the mid-nineteenth century. To some degree later, in 1884, the Dutch scientist, Van \'t Hoff , abridged the mathematic laws which concoction responses regularly take after. This work, together with different accomplishments, earned for Van \'t Hoff the first Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1901. All synthetic responses will continue all the more quickly if the blend is warmed. Both Van \'t Hoff and Svante Arrhenius , who for different revelations was granted the third Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1903, set up a numerical equation which depicts how the speed of a response increments with temperature. This equation could be translated by the suspicion that when two particles impact, they more often than not part again and nothing happens; yet in the event that the crash is adequately rough, the particles break down and their iotas recombine into new atoms. One could likewise visualize the likelihood that the particles moved towards one another at moderate speed, yet that the iotas in one atom swayed roughly so that no extreme effect would be needed for that atom to break down. It was at that point then understood that higher temperature inferred two things: the particles moved quicker, and the iotas wavered all the more roughly. It was likewise understood that when a response speed could be measured, just the merest division of the impacts included truly brought about a response.

Slide 20

How quick were the responses that could be measured in the days of yore? Considering that the substances first must be blended, after which tests must be evacuated at indicated times and afterward dissected, the technique\'s velocity was essentially constrained. The best case was if one could watch the adjustment in some physical property, for example, shading; then it was not important to uproot tests. The physicists needed to peruse off his clock and measuring instrument, and after that to make passages in his research facility diary. On the off chance that he was speedy, he could stay aware of a response which had run a large portion of its course in almost no time. How moderate were the responses one could gauge? Eigen has said that this is dictated by to what extent a period a young fellow needs to commit to his doctoral paper. On the off chance that as a functional greatest we say that a large portion of the response is finished following three years, that comes to around 100 million seconds. Actually, there are significantly slower responses. Numerous responses were obviously known not at speeds so extraordinary as to challenge estimations. For instance, nobody had succeeded in measuring the response\'s speed between a corrosive and a soluble base. In such cases it was comprehended that the atoms responded w

Recommended
View more...