Tiny flying robots could perform such useful tasks as pollinating crops inside multilevel warehouses, boosting yields while mitigating some of agriculture’s harmful impacts on the environment. The latest robo-bug from an MIT lab, inspired by the anatomy of the bee, comes closer to matching nature’s performance than ever before.  Led by Kevin Chen, an associate professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and the senior author of a paper on the work, the team adapted an earlier flying robot composed of four identical two-winged units, combined into a rectangular device about the size of a microcassette. The wings managed to flap like an insect’s, but the bot couldn’t fly for long. One problem is that the wings would blow air into each other when flapping, reducing the lift forces they could generate. In the new design, each of the four units has a single flapping wing pointing away from the robot’s center, stabilizing the wings and boosting their lift forces. The researchers also improved the way the wings are connected to the actuators, or artificial muscles, that flap them. In previous designs, when the actuators’ movements reached the extremely high frequencies needed for flight, the devices often started buckling. That reduced the power and efficiency of the robot. Thanks in part to a new, longer wing hinge, the actuators now experience less mechanical strain and can apply more force, so the bots can fly faster, longer, and in more precise paths. The robots can precisely track a trajectory enough to spell M-I-T.COURTESY OF THE RESEARCHERS Weighing less than a paper clip, the new robotic insect can hover for more than 1,000 seconds—almost 17 minutes—without any degradation of flight precision. “When my student Yi-Hsuan Hsiao was performing that flight, he said it was the slowest 1,000 seconds he had spent in his entire life. The experiment was extremely nerve-racking,” Chen says. The new robot also reached an average speed of 35 centimeters per second, the fastest flight researchers have reported, and was able to perform body rolls and double flips. It can even precisely track a trajectory that spells M-I-T. “At the end of the day, we’ve shown flight that is 100 times longer than anyone else in the field has been able to do, so this is an extremely exciting result,” Chen says. COURTESY OF THE RESEARCHERS From here, he and his students want to see how far they can push this new design, with the goal of achieving flight for longer than 10,000 seconds. They also want to improve the precision of the robots so they could land in and take off from the center of a flower. In the long run, the researchers hope to install tiny batteries and sensors so the robots could fly and navigate outside the lab. The design has more room for those electronics now that they’ve halved the number of wings. The bots still can’t achieve the fine-tuned behavior of a real bee, Chen acknowledges. Still, he says, “with the improved lifespan and precision of this robot, we are getting closer to some very exciting applications, like assisted pollination.” 

After decades of working as a biologist at a Southern school with a Division 1 football team, coming to MIT was a bit of a culture shock—in the best possible way. I’ve heard from MIT alumni all about late-night psetting, when to catch MITHenge, and the best way to celebrate Pi Day (with pie, of course). And I’ve also learned that for many of you, the Institute is more than simply your alma mater. As the MIT Alumni Association celebrates its 150th anniversary, I’m reflecting on the extraordinary talent and drive of the people here, and what it is that makes MIT alumni—like MIT itself—just a little bit different. As students, you learned to investigate, question, argue, critique, and refine your ideas with faculty and with each other, managing to be both collaborative and competitive. You hacked the toughest and most interesting problems and came up with the most unconventional solutions. And you developed and nurtured a uniquely entrepreneurial, hands-on MIT spirit that only those who have earned a degree here can fully understand, but that the rest of us can easily identify and admire. An article in this magazine about the history of the MIT Alumni Association notes that when the association was formed, there were 84 alumni in total. By 1888, the number had increased to an impressive 579. And it grew by orders of magnitude; today nearly 149,000 alumni are members. But even as the alumni community has grown and evolved, its culture and character have remained remarkably consistent, represented by men and women known for their rigorous thinking, incisive analysis, mens et manus ethos, and drive to make a real and transformative impact on people and communities everywhere. As MIT alumni, you recognize each other by your Brass Rats. These sturdy, cleverly designed rings not only signify your completion (some might say survival) of an immensely difficult course of study. They also signal to the world that you stand ready to share your expertise, knowledge, and experience in the service of humanity.  Alumni have always been the Institute’s greatest ambassadors, and today that role has taken on even greater meaning and importance. We are working intensely, every day, to make the case for the vital importance of MIT to ensuring the nation’s security, prosperity, health, and quality of life. And I’m deeply grateful that we can rely on MIT’s extraordinary family of alumni to help share that message far and wide.

Elon Musk has announced he will step back from the White House DOGE office after spending three months trying to radically reshape the federal government and its workforce."Starting next month, I will be allocating far more of my time to Tesla," he said, "now that the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency" is done, Musk said in Tuesday's Tesla earnings call.He said he'll continue to spend a day or two a week on government matters, "as long as it is useful," and the president wants him to do so.Musk's announcement comes on the heels of Tesla's disappointing quarterly earnings report Tuesday.Under Musk's unofficial leadership, DOGE has targeted a wide swath of federal agencies, including dismantling the US Agency for International Development, attempting to gain access to sensitive data and payment systems at the Internal Revenue Service and Treasury Department, and trying to shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Musk has also helped Trump gut the federal workforce through buyout offers to government employees, mass firings of probationary workers, and downsizing of agencies like the National Institutes of Health.Despite its large-scale targeting of federal agencies and workers, DOGE has not come close to its savings goals. Musk first promised that his sweeping DOGE cuts would save taxpayers $2 trillion, but later downgraded that to $1 trillion, and further again to $150 billion,DOGE's claimed savings have been riddled with mistakes and corrections, including removing $4 billion from its "Wall of Receipts" in March, dropping its real estate savings by $150 million later that month, and lowering its savings claims by over $9 billion over two days in February.Musk's involvement with DOGE was never meant to be permanent — as a "special government employee," he is not allowed to serve more than 130 days in a 365-day period.Under Trump's original executive order, the DOGE office can run through July 4, 2026, the 250th anniversary of the nation's independence. It's unclear what will happen with the initiative now given that many of DOGE's top leaders are long-time Musk allies.Correction: April 22, 2025 — A previous version of this story misstated Musk's announcement regarding his DOGE role. He will be stepping back from DOGE, not leaving entirely.

OLIVER CONTRERAS/AFP via Getty Images 2025-04-22T22:06:51Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? The US is calling on food companies to remove all synthetic food dyes by 2027. Announcing the move, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said food companies are open to the change. Here's the evidence on synthetic dyes and health issues like cancer and ADHD. US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Tuesday that he has ordered food companies to remove eight petroleum-based dyes from their products.Speaking alongside the FDA and food activists, Kennedy said brands will have until 2027 to voluntarily reformulate their food and drinks using natural dyes like carmine, turmeric, and beets — or add warning labels to their products.The move comes three months after the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned Red 3, shortly before the Trump administration took office.The eight dyes under scrutiny today include Citrus Red No 2 and Orange B, which are not widely produced. Those two should be dropped with immediate effect, FDA Commissioner Dr. Martin Makary said.Others are more commonly used. Red 40 is used in Gatorade, Doritos, and Skittles. Yellow 5 is used in Vigo's saffron rice, Fruit Loops, and some mustards. Blue 1 is used in Mountain Dew Baja Blast. Green 3 is used in Nyquil.The benefit of using these petroleum-based dyes is economic — they're cheaper, stable year-round, and less prone to fading than fruits, vegetables, and spices. Hydrocarbons, extracted during petroleum refinement, are fused with salts to create a vibrant color.However, consumer advocates and researchers have raised concerns about health risks.Kennedy, who made synthetic food dyes a central concern in his presidential campaign of 2024, thanked "warrior moms who power the MAHA movement" for galvanizing political appetite for this change.During the press conference, Makary said "kids have been living in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals." He cited studies that found links between synthetic food dyes and health issues like ADHD and cancer.Here's what we know about the link between synthetic food dyes and health problems:The science of food dyes and ADHDKennedy has repeatedly said that he believes artificial food dyes cause ADHD in children.Over a decade ago, US and European regulators reviewed the same evidence linking synthetic food dyes to ADHD in kids — but they drew different conclusions.The EU concluded that the evidence was persuasive. Since then, many European brands have started using natural dyes instead. Products that contain synthetic dyes must display an ADHD warning for consumers.The FDA, however, said more research was needed to warrant a change. (To date, no federal studies have been conducted.)A decade later, in 2021, researchers in the California EPA reviewed the available evidence on seven artificial food dyes. They concluded that synthetic dyes can affect behavior in some kids. California Gov. Gavin Newsom responded, ordering food companies to remove dyes from snacks in public schools by 2027.The big question is: why would dyes impact kids' behavior?Scientists don't know for sure, since there are no large-scale, randomized control trials. One study found it might have something to do with how food dyes interact with histamine. Another study found that red dye probably doesn't have a huge influence on kids' brains, but it seems to fuel hyperactivity in the short term.There may be a genetic factor at play. UK researchers found evidence that some children appear to be more susceptible to the effects of food dye than others, based on their genes.Some dyes in the food system have been linked to cancerIn the late 1980s, scientists found male lab rats exposed to high levels of Red 3 developed thyroid tumors. Based on that study, the FDA declared Red 3 a carcinogen in 1990, and announced a ban on the dye in cosmetics.However, it took 30 years to see a ban on Red 3 in food. The dye remained in food and drink, in part due to lobbying from the maraschino cherry industry, which holds sway in many cherry-producing states.Earlier this year, driven by public demand, the Biden administration's FDA delivered a ban on Red 3 in food and drinks, giving food companies until 2027 to phase out the dye."The FDA cannot authorize a food additive or color additive if it has been found to cause cancer in humans or animals," Jim Jones, then the FDA's deputy director for human foods, said in a statement when he announced the ban in January.Consumer advocates have pushed for bans on other dyes, voicing concerns about cancer risk.A review published in 2012 linked red 40 to multiple cancers. FDA tests conducted in the early 1990s concluded that some batches of Yellow 5 and Yellow 6 have been contaminated with carcinogens such as benzidine. The agency said the risk is too low to warrant concern.Less evidence for other health issuesBeyond ADHD and cancer, Makary said petroleum-based food dyes are linked to allergic reactions in kids. That's based on a few studies that found dyes like Red 40 and Yellow 5 can cause hives in some people.Makary also said synthetic dyes may be linked to insulin, genomic disruption, and GI issues. Evidence is limited to tests in petri dishes and animals, and more research is needed in humans. Here's what we know so far:A 2013 study found Red 40 disrupted glucose metabolism in rats.A 2012 study found Yellow 5 caused DNA disruptions in human blood cells.A 2022 study found Red 40 caused colitis in mice."To the companies currently using these dyes, try watermelon juice," Makary said at the press conference, holding up a bottle of juice. Recommended video

This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here.Welcome to The Logoff: Today I’m focusing on the controversy surrounding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, as reports of mismanagement and dysfunction in his office suggest he’s unfit for one of the administration’s most important jobs.What’s going on with Hegseth? He has been under scrutiny since before his confirmation, when Senators and others raised concerns about his treatment of women and issues with alcohol. Last month, Hegseth shared sensitive information about an upcoming military strike on a non-secure group chat. (The world found out about it because a staffer accidentally included the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic in the chat.)Things haven’t gotten any better over the past week, in which:Multiple outlets reported that Hegseth had shared sensitive information about the strike in a second chat, one that included his brother and lawyer (who both have Pentagon jobs) and his wife (who does not).Three top officials Hegseth brought to the Defense Department have been suspended in connection with a Pentagon investigation into leaks.A fourth member of his team quit and wrote an op-ed for Politico accusing Hegseth of presiding over dysfunction, calling on Donald Trump to fire him.The New York Times this morning reported that Hegseth “had been unable to establish a process to ensure that basic, but essential, matters move swiftly” through his office.Is Hegseth going to get fired? NPR reported yesterday that the White House had begun the process of looking for Hegseth’s replacement, but White House officials, including Trump, have repeatedly denied any plans to oust him.Why does this matter outside the Pentagon? The defense secretary is the civilian official tasked with overseeing the world’s most powerful military and with reacting quickly to major geopolitical crises. If Hegseth isn’t up to the task of managing his own office — and if he’s continually sloppy with sensitive information — his presence in the role poses a risk to national security.And with that, it’s time to log off…It’s Earth Day, and I have more good news today from Vox’s Escape Velocity project, a package of stories demonstrating how progress on climate change can and will continue under the current administration. One of today’s pieces is about developments in home battery technology, and how it can help avoid blackouts and diminish demand for dirty energy. Thanks for reading, and I’ll see you back here tomorrow.You’ve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you — threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you — join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

Three years ago, Montgomery County, Maryland, approved several books with LGBTQ characters for use in public school classrooms. Not much else is known about these books, how they have been used, when they were used in lessons, or how teachers plan to use them in the future.These questions have come before lower courts, but the Supreme Court decided to hear a case — Mahmoud v. Taylor, brought by conservative Muslim and Christian parents who find these books objectionable — before these lower courts had a chance to sort out whether anyone’s constitutional rights have actually been violated.Despite all this uncertainty, all six of the Supreme Court’s Republicans appeared absolutely convinced, during an oral argument on Tuesday, that the Montgomery County school district violated the Constitution, and that it must do more to protect parents who object to these books on religious grounds. Based on Tuesday’s argument in Mahmoud, it seems all but certain the Court will rule that parents who object to these books must be allowed to remove their children from any classes where the books are featured. What is less clear is whether the Court will do so in a way that could endanger every public school in the country’s ability to function.Eric Baxter, the lawyer representing the parents who oppose these books, seemed quite emboldened during Tuesday’s argument, and advocated for a result that would be extraordinarily disruptive. In his brief, Baxter suggested that parents who object to any form of classroom instruction on religious grounds must be notified in advance about that instruction and be permitted to opt their child out of the class. The implications of this argument are breathtaking. As Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out, past cases involve parents who object to lessons touching on topics like divorce, interfaith couples, and “immodest dress.” Parents have brought federal lawsuits objecting, on religious grounds, to the government using unique numbers to identify people in its own internal records. They’ve objected to lessons exposing children to ideas about evolution, pacifism, magic, women achieving things outside of the home, and “false views of death” — among other things. Under Baxter’s proposed rule, to avoid these lawsuits, school districts would have an obligation to notify parents in advance if they will teach any book where magic exists, any book where divorce exists, any book where women have accomplishments, or any book about famous pacifists such as Martin Luther King, Jr. — among many other things. It is hard to imagine how any public school could comply with such an obligation.That said, while all six of the Republican justices appeared highly likely to rule against the school district in Mahmoud, some of them did appear to be looking for a way to decide this case more narrowly than Baxter suggested. Justice Samuel Alito, for example, suggested at one point that Baxter’s rule might only apply to very young students, or to lessons that touch upon sexuality. Justice Neil Gorsuch pointed to an alleged statement by a school board member, which Gorsuch claims showed animus against certain religious beliefs. Following Gorsuch’s line of thinking to its conclusion would allow the Court to rule that Montgomery County’s policies must be changed because they are rooted in animus, but that another school district might be allowed to enact similar policies so long as they did not display similar hostility toward religion.So, while there seems to be little doubt that the school district will lose the Mahmoud case, it is possible that it will lose in a way that doesn’t endanger public school instruction throughout the United States.The Court appeared to divide into four campsBroadly speaking, the justices floated four different approaches to this case.All three of the Court’s Democrats — Sotomayor, and Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — focused on the “line-drawing” problems presented by this case. Kagan said she understood how even non-religious parents might object to “young kids” being taught “on matters concerning sexuality,” but she added that there wasn’t anything in Baxter’s argument that would allow the Court to limit claims by parents who want to micromanage a school’s lessons.Similarly, Jackson was troubled that Baxter’s arguments seemed so broad that they could prevent a gay teacher from displaying a picture of their own wedding, or even prevent a teacher from referring to a transgender child by that child’s preferred pronouns in the presence of another student whose parents object to trans people on religious grounds.But these concerns were largely limited to the Court’s Democratic minority. The other six justices appeared to be hunting for a way to rule against the school district.The most extreme of these six Republicans was Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who at one point said that he is “mystified, as a longtime resident” of Montgomery County, that this case exists. As the Supreme Court said in Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery (1988), the First Amendment only prohibits government action that tends “to coerce individuals into acting contrary to their religious beliefs.” But Kavanaugh at one point seemed to propose overruling Lyng and holding that a parent with religious objections to a lesson must only show a “burden” on their faith — however Kavanaugh would define that term.Both Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts, meanwhile, appeared to think that there is something particularly noxious about exposing young people to books with gay characters. Alito, for example, argued that older students will understand that their teacher isn’t always correct — so it’s okay if those students are exposed to lessons that are in tension with their parents’ religious beliefs. But a different rule should apply to younger students.Similarly, Roberts argued that it would be “dangerous” to expose kindergarten-age children to lessons their parents might object to, because that might cause those children to question whether they should obey their teacher.Gorsuch, meanwhile, latched onto several lines in Baxter’s brief, which claim that a school board member compared parents who object to LGBTQ-inclusive literature to “white supremacists” and “xenophobes.” This matters because, in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018), the Court ruled in favor of a baker who refused to bake wedding cakes for same-sex couples because a state civil rights commissioner made similarly disparaging comments about the baker.Under Gorsuch’s approach, in other words, the Court could decide the Mahmoud case very narrowly, ruling in favor of the parents because of this school board member’s alleged comments, without handing down a broader rule that would impose unworkable disclosure rules on every public school in the country.So it is possible that the Court will hand down a good-for-this-ride-only decision that gives these specific Montgomery County parents the result they want, without harming public education elsewhere. It is also possible that the Court will impose a kind of “Don’t Say Gay” rule on elementary school teachers, while allowing high school teachers to reveal that some people form romantic attachments to people of the same sex.One surprising omission in Tuesday’s argument is that no one mentioned the Court’s decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), a free speech case brought by students who wore black armbands to class in order to protest the Vietnam War.In Tinker, the Court held that these students had a right to wear the black armbands, but it did so because the students merely engaged in a “silent, passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on the part of petitioners.” Tinker held that public school students retain free speech rights, but not when their speech “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.”The Court, in other words, recognized that public schools could not function if students could engage in speech that disrupts lessons, and it crafted a careful rule which respects those students’ First Amendment rights without undercutting the school’s ability to educate them and their classmates.The Court could take a similar approach in Mahmoud. Because the full facts of this case are not yet known, it may, in fact, turn out that a teacher tried to coerce a student into rejecting their religious beliefs, or otherwise behaved in a manner that violates the Constitution’s protections for religious people. If that turns out to be true, then the courts absolutely should provide appropriate relief to that student and their parents.But, instead of waiting until they know all the facts of the Mahmoud case and crafting an appropriately tailored rule like the one announced in Tinker, many of the justices seemed inclined to a more ham-handed approach. Based on Tuesday’s argument, it is difficult to guess whether Kavanaugh’s, Alito’s, Gorsuch’s, or some other approach will prevail. But, if the justices choose to accept Baxter’s arguments in full, they could easily impose unworkable obligations on public schools that will prevent them from functioning.See More:

Warner Bros. and Ryan Coogler have much to celebrate with the success of the filmmaker’s hit vampire movie. After Sinners‘ opening weekend, the Hollywood Reporter shared that it raked in $48 million domestically, which bodes well for original filmmaking and the studios still game to support it. Sinners was a gamble that Warner Bros. movie heads Pam Abdy and Michael De Luca are seeing pay off. Speaking to THR, De Luca said, “We kind of knew we had the goods just in terms of having watched the director’s cut. But to have the audience validate that— that’s really what’s giving us the most joy today. We’re also happy that as an original swing, it’s worked out and we hope it inspires the other studios to take more original swings because that’s how you get new franchises and keep the industry refreshed.” Warner Bros. boss David Zaslav called the producing team to congratulate the duo—”He was very proud of the group and very happy with the result,” De Luca said—putting to bed recent rumors that Abdy and De Luca were on their way out at the studio. Also not going anywhere, at least once he’s finished Black Panther 3 for Marvel, is Coogler. “That’s the long-term play … and I just spoke to him this morning,” De Luca said. “He will absolutely be back [to make more movies at Warner Bros.].” As for Coogler, he penned a heartfelt thank-you to everyone who took the time out to see the film. The letter was shared by Proximity Media on X and it thanks fans for buying tickets, carving the time out to see it in any of the formats available, and taking part in the discourse the film inspires. “I had the gift of the opportunity of making a film inspired by my family and my ancestry but it was always a film that we wanted to make for audiences, in theaters,” Coogler wrote. “We always had our minds on you, the audience, and felt a deep responsibility to entertain you, and move you in the way only cinema can.” “I believe in cinema. I believe in the theatrical experience. I believe it is a necessary pillar of society. It’s why me and so many of my colleagues have dedicated our lives to the craft. We don’t get to do what we do if you don’t show up. The global theatrical audience has allowed me to dream, find a career, and build a more sustainable life for me and my family. And the only way that I know how to thank you for that, is by continuing to mine my personal human experience and my relationships for more stories to bring to you in cinematic language. To see your response to the film has re-invigorated me and many others who believe in this art form.” Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

Grant yourself peace of mind in your own home. The Ring Doorbell is comprehensive home security solution. With its enhanced video quality, precise motion detection, and seamless integration with Alexa, the Ring Doorbell offers unmatched convenience and security. Upgrade your home security today and allow yourself top-tier home monitoring with the Ring Doorbell, which happens to be part of a limited time deal at Amazon. That’s right, for a the time being, you can save 45% on the battery-powered Ring Doorbell. It’s normally priced at $100, but after the discount, you can nab it for just $55. That’s a savings of $45. See at Amazon Unmatched Security Ring’s premier battery-powered doorbell camera is equipped with an HD camera, offering an expansive field of view that ensures you see more of what’s happening at your front door. The 2024 model of the Ring Doorbell utilizes 66% more vertical coverage than the previous model. A larger field of view means you’ll you’ll have coverage head to toe of anyone stepping onto your property, and then you can zoom in anytime for closer look. This high-definition video quality delivers exceptional clarity, allowing you to identify visitors and packages with ease. Security doesn’t stop when the sun goes down. Thanks to its enhanced imaging sensors, the Ring Doorbell  delivers clear color and clarity even in low-light conditions. This means you’ll have peace of mind knowing that your home is protected day and night. Never miss a delivery again with the Ring Doorbell’s Person + Package Alerts. This exclusive feature, available with a Ring Protect subscription, notifies you when your package is detected within a specified zone. Say goodbye to stolen packages and hello to that new expensive Breville espresso maker you finally ordered. The Ring Doorbell is designed for convenience, powered by a Quick Release Battery Pack that allows for quick and easy recharging. No more dealing with hardwiring or complicated installations. Simply recharge the battery pack and keep your doorbell running smoothly. See at Amazon Seamless Integration with Alexa Enhance your home automation setup by connecting the Ring Doorbell with Alexa on compatible Echo devices. This integration enables announcements and Two-Way Talk, allowing you to communicate with visitors directly from the comfort of your home. Whether you’re in the kitchen or upstairs, you’ll always be connected to your front door. For a limited time, you can get the newest-model of the Ring Battery Doorbell for just $55 (down from $100). You’ll be saving a nice $45 on your purchase. See at Amazon

One of the world’s greatest mysteries is how life on Earth began. Scientists have long sought to decipher where and how prebiotic molecules — those that preceded life — emerged. A new study suggests that the answers lie somewhere out in space, based on a recreation of the conditions in interstellar clouds that likely gave our planet a biological jumpstart.The study, recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, indicates that asteroid and comet impacts possibly supplied Earth with molecules essential for life-sustaining chemical reactions. It also signals that a better understanding of outer space chemistry could even hold implications for life elsewhere in the universe. How Did Life Start on Earth?Life arose on Earth somewhere between 3.5 billion years and 3.8 billion years ago, yet the circumstances that allowed this to happen have been subject to constant speculation. Scientists are concerned with how abiogenesis — the inception of life from non-living matter — could have occurred in the first place; some theories state that certain environments on Earth, like hydrothermal vents deep in the ocean or terrestrial hot springs, drove prebiotic processes. The true catalyst for life, however, may have arrived from space. Despite the cold, icy conditions of interstellar clouds scattered between star systems, these regions contain a variety of prebiotic molecules. Simulating Interstellar SpaceResearchers involved with the new study were able to form complex carboxylic acids by simulating the conditions of interstellar space — these organic compounds are important components of metabolism, the process in living organisms that converts food into energy. They focused on molecules involved in the Krebs cycle, a series of reactions that cause cells to produce energy in nearly all living organisms. To produce the prebiotic molecules, the researchers first froze simple gases to near absolute zero. The frozen gases were then exposed to "ubiquitous galactic cosmic ray proxies” and then slowly warmed to imitate the heating that happens as new stars form, according to a statement.This method yielded organic acids associated with the Krebs cycle (including mono-, di-, and tricarboxylic acids), which have also been previously found on asteroids and meteorites. Samples from the asteroids Ryugu and Bennu, which were brought back to Earth, contained prebiotic molecules, for example. “This work shows that the basic ingredients for life’s chemistry could have been made in space, long before Earth even formed,” said Ralf I. Kaiser, a chemist at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa, in a statement. The Search for Prebiotic MoleculesThe researchers say that prebiotic molecules from space dust and gas may have been carried to Earth by comets and asteroids. Around 4 billion years ago, Earth went through a tumultuous period known as the “late heavy bombardment,” when severe comet and asteroid impacts made the planet too hot to support the existence of water and carbon-based life. However, near the very end of this period, 3.8 billion years ago, life was able to form relatively quickly. This may have stemmed from less intense collisions that delivered prebiotic molecules to Earth after the late heavy bombardment subsided. The search for evidence of extraterrestrial life has accelerated in recent years, and carbon-rich asteroids, known as C-type asteroids, are high on the list of sources to explore. NASA's Lucy spacecraft has already embarked on a journey to meet multiple asteroids in space, set to fly by eight different ones over a 12-year period. The spacecraft will scan the surfaces of Trojan asteroids (which follow Jupiter's orbit around the Sun) for organic compounds, which may provide further insight into prebiotic chemistry in space. Article SourcesOur writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Abiotic origin of the citric acid cycle intermediates Communications Earth and Environment. Prebiotic membrane structures mimic the morphology of alleged early traces of life on EarthNASA. The Lucy SpacecraftJack Knudson is an assistant editor at Discover with a strong interest in environmental science and history. Before joining Discover in 2023, he studied journalism at the Scripps College of Communication at Ohio University and previously interned at Recycling Today magazine.

Researchers from the University of California, Berkeley have announced the discovery of a color never before seen by the human eye. Through a new study, published in Science Advances, researchers used a pulsing laser on study participants to stimulate a part of the eye. Study participants reported that after their eyes were stimulated, they saw a new shade of blue-green. Outside researchers dispute the claim, saying that more study is needed to prove that this is indeed a new color. However, researchers associated with the study say that this new information could contribute to research on color blindness. Simulating Novel Colors Our eyes process colors and images through photoreceptors — rods and cones. These photoreceptors are located in the back of the eye on the retina. From the retina, images are sent via neurological and chemical signals to the brain, where those signals are perceived as an image. The cone cells in the retina are responsible for seeing color, and they include “short (S), medium (M), and long (L) wavelength cones.” Each one is more sensitive to blue, red, or green wavelengths. According to the study authors, to see a novel color, the S and L cones need to be bypassed, and the M cone needs to be isolated. “Theoretically, novel colors are possible through bypassing the constraints set by the cone spectral sensitivities and activating M cone cells exclusively,” the authors wrote in their study. Finding the New Color: OloTo achieve the results of this study, the research team used a device called “Oz,” which is composed of mirrors, lasers, and other optical components. The research team then used Oz to shine a pulsing laser beam into one of the study participants’ eyes. There were five participants in all, four male and one female. Three of the participants were also co-authors of the study. The Oz machine works by only stimulating the M cells in the eye, allowing the study participant to see the novel color “olo” a “blue-green of unprecedented saturation,” according to the study. However, without Oz, it wouldn’t be possible to see olo with the naked eye alone. The participants could “color match” olo to the best of their ability using a set of dials to adjust the hue and saturation of the color until it was closest to olo. The Future of Oz TechnologyWhile it could be a magnificent feat to have discovered a new color, olo is still up for debate. However, Oz’s technology is still relatively new, and more research and fine-tuning will be needed before this technology can be used on a more accessible scale. “Oz represents a new class of experimental platform for vision science and neuroscience, which strives for complete control of the first neural layer to the brain, programmability of every photoreceptor’s activation at every point in time,” the authors wrote in the study. However, as this technology advances, it may help further our understanding of color blindness and give people the ability to perceive the world like those with tetrachromacy (extra-sensitive color vision) can. Read More: Our Eyes May Hold Evolutionary SecretsArticle SourcesOur writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:A graduate of UW-Whitewater, Monica Cull wrote for several organizations, including one that focused on bees and the natural world, before coming to Discover Magazine. Her current work also appears on her travel blog and Common State Magazine. Her love of science came from watching PBS shows as a kid with her mom and spending too much time binging Doctor Who.