So... these are very fun materials, a kind of real-life menger sponges with huge internal surface area.
Some fifteen years ago, as an intern working for a company making desulfurization catalysts (stuff that removes nasty sulfur compounds from crude oil so they don't stink up the gas you put in your car), I prepared a few of the easy-to-handle air stable ones.
Reactions between fluids and a solid catalyst take place on the catalyst surface, so higher surface area = higher reaction rates = better.
I remember everyone's minds at the company being completely blown by the ridiculous surface areas of my attempts at recreating some random MOFs from literature. Got awarded the highest possible grade for no reason other than (badly) following a few procedures and measuring that indeed, their internal surface area was insanely big.
Thanks Yaghi and co. I'll always fondly remember your MOFs.
shevy-java•1h ago
Hmmm. This years' nobel prizes are a bit more boring compared to prior ones. I understand that not all ideas or inventions are created equal, but I prefer more raw epicness.
gerikson•1h ago
When you have a yearly prize, you're bound to get off-years. Maybe the Nobels should be structured to only be given out every 4 years, like the Olympics. But that would be a huge blow to the Stockholm hospitality business.
JKCalhoun•17m ago
You hit it on the head: comparing the Nobel prizes to the Olympics. Perhaps to some they look too much like the Olympics: periodic, awarded in various categories. I suggest the similarities end there though.
nylonstrung•1h ago
This seems pretty epic to me- an entirely new material primitive with novel real world properties
StopDisinfo910•1h ago
The Nobel prizes are not there to produce good sounding opeds and "epic" news to entertain the general public.
It’s a prize given to scientists to highlight and encourage valuable research according to a jury of pairs.
speed_spread•50m ago
You can't discover cold fusion every year.
JKCalhoun•18m ago
Aaaay! (Ouch)
PlasmonOwl•39m ago
What do you mean boring? MOFs are a fascinating area of chemistry. Outside of nature, they are most likely our best example of rationally designed nanoscale systems. In chemistry, rational design - that based on rules - is a rare thing. Molecules bump around and stick together in unpredictable ways, but MOFs allow us to create very well defined nanoscale frameworks. They’re famously tricky, though!
Metacelsus•1h ago
MOFs have been the "hot thing" in chemistry for about the past decade so this certainly isn't a surprise. Congrats to the laureates!
pama•20m ago
This is as cool as it gets for using organic chemistry to design materials: design your own little lego blocks and let them self assemble into a humongous structure.
isoprophlex•2h ago
Some fifteen years ago, as an intern working for a company making desulfurization catalysts (stuff that removes nasty sulfur compounds from crude oil so they don't stink up the gas you put in your car), I prepared a few of the easy-to-handle air stable ones.
Reactions between fluids and a solid catalyst take place on the catalyst surface, so higher surface area = higher reaction rates = better.
I remember everyone's minds at the company being completely blown by the ridiculous surface areas of my attempts at recreating some random MOFs from literature. Got awarded the highest possible grade for no reason other than (badly) following a few procedures and measuring that indeed, their internal surface area was insanely big.
Thanks Yaghi and co. I'll always fondly remember your MOFs.