Thursday, December 14, 2017

Transition-metal Alchemist

The workings of the Morphogenic Field have long been the target of Riddled posting; they may even be lurking somewhere in the small print of the Mission Statement. But we are no longer alone in this particular obsession, with Lyle Zapato at ZPi discovering the phenomenon as well. It thereby becomes exponentially more likely that other blogs will independently take up the topic in turn, and then more, until the entire bloggosphere is singlemindedly devoted to reporting manifestations of the Field.

So it is with a certain sense of inevitability that we encounter an Indian nanotechnology team of fullmetal alchemists who have fallen under the thrall of the Field and are doomed to repeat the same experimental results, again and again, whichever materials they investigate. This is what happens when you rip open the same seam in the Fabric of Reality, too many times.

"Figure 2. Fluorescence spectra of (A) EA-CNDs, (B) APr-CNDs, (C) AB-CNDs, and (D) AP-CNDs at different excitation wavelengths (1, 300; 2, 313; 3, 325; 4, 338; 5, 350; 6, 363; 7, 375; 8, 388; 9, 400; 10, 413; 11, 425; 12, 438; and 13, 450 nm). (inset) Camera pictures of CNDs in the absence and presence of UV light."

My theory (and it is mine) is that they began by presenting copies of a single depiction (with only subtle variations among them) to create an artistic statement that a single copy could not convey... with the editors and peer-reviewers of ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering fortunately recognising the hommage to Andy Warhol's screenprints.

In the art world, Warhol's legacy propagated backwards through the centuries to create an entire aesthetic tradition of painting multiple panels of the same scene, to see if viewers will spot the differences among them, or perhaps the lack thereof.

So when Sharma and his students presented fluorescence spectra from sea-urchin nanoparticles for a range of excitation wavelengths, repeating the diagram six-fold for particles of different vegetable origins, varying only in the colour of the lines, they could not have foreseen the outcome...

"Fig. 1. (A) UV–vis spectra of CNPs (0.05 mg mL−1) derived from all the green precursors. Fluorescence spectra of CNPs (0.05 mg mL−1) derived from: (B) red capsicum (RCP-CNPs), (C) yellow capsicum (YCP-CNPs), (D) green capsicum (GCP-CNPs), (E) red chili (RCh-CNPs), (F) black chili (BCh-CNPs), and (G) green chili (GCh-CNPs) at different excitation wavelengths. Inset showing the camera pictures of the respective CNPs under UV-light. "

Namely: that the same results would continue to appear, in a different experimental results with Carbon Nano Dots sourced from brassica vegetables, without even the chromatic ringing of changes. All due to Synchronicity and the non-causal workings of the Morphogenic Field.

"Figure 1: (A) UV-Vis spectra for the CNDs derived from radish, cabbage, broccoli and cauliflower. Excitation wavelength dependent PL spectra of the CNDs derived from (B) radish, (C) cabbage, (D) broccoli and (E) cauliflower."

Here are four electrochemistry plots, spread across as many papers, for 28 different nanopreparations. I am especially besotted with the ones sourced by baking 'idli' bread until it transforms into heteroatom-doped graphene foam, for use as a bifunctional rechargeable-battery catalyst.

"Fig. 1 ... (C) Cyclic voltammetric run for ferrocyanide at various modified PGEs."
"Fig. 5 ... (D) Cyclic voltammetric runs in ferrocyanide solution for bare PGE and nanomaterial-modified PGEs"

"Fig. 3. (A) Cyclic voltammetric run of ferrocynide using bare and nanohybrid-modified PGEs."
"Figure 1... (F) Electrocatalytic activity of doped and undoped graphene foam using potassium ferrocyanide as the electro-active probe molecule (Inset: camera picture of graphene foam obtained after calcination of graphene-Idli)."

When all four diagrams are superimposed, the horizontal axes are the same but the vertical axes are all over the place. It is a technicolour vision from a tequila hangover but at least there are far fewer than 28 different lines, for many of them were computed with the same values of the single parameter, and therefore overlie each other exactly.

Just look at these 27 hysteresis loops reported across 11 papers, purporting to measure the ferromagnetic properties of 27 different carbon nanospheres, quantum dots, mesoporous carbon, SPIONs and hybrid silane nanoparticles (or perhaps they are amphisbaenic sea-horses). Yet they are identical apart from the vertical scale. It is a mysteresis.

"Fig. 4 ... (C) Magnetic hysteresis loops of Fe3O4, C@Fe3O4 and MIP@Cube/Hexa/Sph-Ag/C@Fe3O4
"(B) magnetic hysteresis loops of OMMC and imprinted-OMMC [Inset: camera picture of imprinted-OMMC in the absence (a) and presence (b) of magnet]"

Figure 3(C), "Magnetic hysteresis loop of Gd-SPIONs and AuNFs@MPS"
Figure 1, "(I) Magnetic hysteresis loops of SPIONs and T-MIP."

"Fig. 2. … (C) Magnetic hysteresis loops of MGO, Eu-MGO and nanohybrid"
"Fig. 1. ... (C) magnetic hysteresis loops of agar@Fe/Pd and agar@Fe/Cu bimetallic nanoparticle." 

"Figure 4: (A) Magnetic hysteresis loop of MNPs (a), Gd-MNPs (b) and poly@Gd-MNPs (c). (B) An aqueous solution of poly@Gd-MNPs in the absence (a) and the presence of an external magnet."

"Fig. 1. ...(D) Room temperature magnetization curves of BMNPs and MIP@BMNP" 
"Figure 3: ... (C) Magnetic hysteresis loops of (1) r-GO, (2) silane@Fe3O4, (3) r-GO/silane@Fe3O4, (4) r-GO dendrite." 

"Figure 1. Characterization of dendritic monomer by ... (C) VSM techniques"
"Figure 1: ... (B) Magnetic hysteresis loop of SPIONs and poly-SPIONs."

We know that the authors didn't simply make up a set of numbers and plot it repeatedly, for those 11 papers have been cited a total of 297 times in the nanobullshit literature, and presumably they have been read as well. And rival researchers in the field of Novel Imperial Tailoring would certainly have called shenanigans if they had seen anything that was problematic. Just as Sharma et al. would have called shenanigans if they had seen those rivals resorting to photoshopped figures, rather than approvingly reprinting one, whoops.

More on the Sharma team here!

No comments: