Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, images of the coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, have been seared in our minds. But the way we picture the virus, typically as a sphere with spikes, is not strictly accurate. Microscope images of infected tissues have revealed that coronavirus particles are actually ellipsoidal, displaying a wide variety of squashed and elongated shapes. 

Now, a global research team, including scientists from Queen’s University, Canada, and the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology (OIST), Japan, have modeled how the different elliptical shapes affect the way these viral particles rotate within fluids, impacting how easily the virus can be transmitted. The study was published recently in Physics of Fluids.

“When coronavirus particles are inhaled, these particles move around within the passageways in the nose and lungs,” said Professor Eliot Fried, who leads the Mechanics and Materials Unit at OIST. “We are interested in studying to what extent they are mobile in these environments.”

The specific type of movement that the scientists modeled is known as rotational diffusivity, which determines the rate at which the particles rotate as they move through a fluid (in the coronavirus case, droplets of saliva). Particles that are smoother and more hydrodynamic encounter less drag resistance from the fluid and rotate faster. For coronavirus particles, this rotational speed affects how well the virus can attach to and infect cells.

“If the particles rotate too much, they might not spend enough time interacting with the cell to infect it, and if they rotate too little, they might not be able to interact in a necessary way,” explained Prof. Fried.

In the study, the scientists modeled both prolate and oblate ellipsoids of revolution. These shapes differ from spheres (which have three axes of identical length) in just one of their axes, with prolate shapes having one longer axis, whilst oblate shapes have one shorter axis. Taken to the extreme, prolate shapes elongate into rod-like shapes, whilst oblate shapes squash into coin-like shapes. But for coronavirus particles, the differences are more subtle.

The scientists also made the model the most realistic yet, by adding the spike proteins onto the surface of the ellipsoids. Previous research from Queen’s University and OIST showed that the presence of triangular-shaped spike proteins lowers the speed at which the coronavirus particles rotate, potentially increasing their ability to infect cells.

Here, the scientists modeled the spike proteins in a simpler way – with each spike protein represented by a single sphere on the surface of the ellipsoids. 

“We then figured out the arrangement of the spikes on the surface of each ellipsoidal shape by assuming that they all contain the same charge,” explained Dr. Vikash Chaurasia, a postdoctoral researcher in the OIST Mechanics and Materials Unit. “Spikes with identical charges repel each other and prefer to be as far from each other as possible. They, therefore, end up evenly distributed across the particle in a way that minimizes this repulsion.”

In their model, the researchers found that the more a particle differs from a spherical shape, the slower it rotates. This could mean that the particles are better able to align and attach to cells.

The model is still simplistic, the researchers acknowledge, but it brings us one step closer to understanding the transport properties of the coronavirus and could help pin down one of the factors key to its infective success.

Associate professor Mazhar Ali and his research group at TU Delft, the oldest and largest Dutch public technical university, located in Delft, Netherlands, have discovered one-way superconductivity without magnetic fields, something that was thought to be impossible ever since its discovery in 1911 – up till now. The discovery makes use of 2D quantum materials and paves the way towards superconducting computing. Superconductors can make electronics hundreds of times faster, all with zero energy loss. Ali: “If the 20^th century was the century of semi-conductors, the 21^st can become the century of the superconductor.” During the 20^th century many scientists, including Nobel Prize winners, have puzzled over the nature of superconductivity, which was discovered by Dutch physicist Kamerlingh Onnes in 1911 (read more about this in the frame below). In superconductors, a current goes through a wire without any resistance, which means inhibiting this current or even blocking it is hardly possible – let alone getting the current to flow only one way and not the other. That Ali’s group managed to make superconducting one-directional – necessary for computing – is remarkable: one can compare it to inventing a special type of ice that gives you zero friction when skating one way, but insurmountable friction the other way.

Superconductor: super-fast, super-green
The advantages of applying superconductors to electronics are twofold. Superconductors can make electronics hundreds of times faster, and implementing superconductors into our daily lives would make IT much greener: if you were to spin a superconducting wire from here to the moon, it would transport the energy without any loss. For instance, the use of superconductors instead of regular semi-conductors might save up to 10% of all western energy reserves according to NWO.

The (Im)possibility of applying superconducting
In the 20^th century and beyond, no one could tackle the barrier of making superconducting electrons go in just one direction, which is a fundamental property needed for computing and other modern electronics (consider for example diodes that go one way as well). In normal conduction the electrons fly around as separate particles; in superconductors, they move in pairs of twos, without any loss of electrical energy. In the 70s, scientists at IBM tried out the idea of superconducting computing but had to stop their efforts: in their papers on the subject, IBM mentions that without non-reciprocal superconductivity, a computer running on superconductors is impossible.

Interview with Mazhar Ali

Q: Why, when one-way direction works with normal semi-conduction, has one-way superconductivity never worked before?

Mazhar Ali: “Electrical conduction in semiconductors, like Si, can be one-way because of a fixed internal electric dipole, so a net built-in potential they can have.  The textbook example is the famous "pn junction"; where we slap together two semiconductors: one has extra electrons (-) and the other has extra holes (+). The separation of charge makes a net built-in potential that an electron flying through the system will feel. This breaks the symmetry and can result in "one-way" properties because forward vs backward, for example, are no longer the same. There is a difference in going in the same direction as the dipole vs going against it; similar to if you were swimming with the river or swimming up the river.”

“Superconductors never had an analog of this one-directional idea without magnetic field; since they are more related to metals (i.e. conductors, as the name says) than semiconductors, which always conduct in both directions and don't have any built-in potential. Similarly, Josephson Junctions (JJs), which are sandwiches of two superconductors with non-superconducting, classical barrier materials in-between the superconductors, also haven't had any particular symmetry-breaking mechanism that resulted in a difference between "forward" and "backward".

Q: How did you manage to do what first seemed impossible?

Ali: “It was really the result of one of my group's fundamental research directions. In what we call "Quantum Material Josephson Junctions" (QMJJs), we replace the classical barrier material in JJs with a quantum material barrier, where the quantum material's intrinsic properties can modulate the coupling between the two superconductors in novel ways. The Josephson Diode was an example of this: we used the quantum material Nb₃Br₈, which is a 2D material like graphene that has been theorized to host a net electric dipole, as our quantum material barrier of choice and placed it between two superconductors.”

“We were able to peel off just a couple atomic layers of this Nb₃Br₈ and make a very, very thin sandwich  - just a few atomic layers thick - which was needed for making the Josephson diode, and was not possible with normal 3D materials. Nb₃Br₈ is part of a group of new quantum materials being developed by our collaborators, Professor Tyrel McQueen and his group at Johns Hopkins University in the USA, and was a key piece in us realizing the Josephson diode for the first time.”   

Q: What does this discovery mean in terms of impact and applications?

Ali: “Many technologies are based on old versions of JJ superconductors, for example, MRI technology. Also, quantum computing today is based on Josephson Junctions. Technology that was previously only possible using semi-conductors can now potentially be made with superconductors using this building block. This includes faster computers, as in computers with up to terahertz speed, which is 300 to 400 times faster than the computers we are now using. This will influence all sorts of societal and technological applications. If the 20th century was the century of semi-conductors, the 21st can become the century of the superconductor.”

“The first research direction we have to tackle for commercial application is raising the operating temperature. Here we used a very simple superconductor that limited the operating temperature. Now we want to work with the known so-called "High Tc Superconductors", and see whether we can operate Josephson diodes at temperatures above 77 K since this will allow for liquid nitrogen cooling. The second thing to tackle is the scaling of production. While it’s great that we proved this works in nanodevices, we only made a handful. The next step will be to investigate how to scale production to millions of Josephson diodes on a chip.”

Q: How sure are you of your case?

Ali:  “There are several steps which all scientists need to take to maintain scientific rigor. The first is to make sure their results are repeatable. In this case, we made many devices, from scratch, with different batches of materials, and found the same properties every time, even when measured on different machines in different countries by different people. This told us that the Josephson diode result was coming from our combination of materials and not some spurious result of dirt, geometry, machine or user error or interpretation.”

“We also carried out "smoking gun" experiments that dramatically narrow the possibility for interpretation. In this case, to be sure that we had a superconducting diode effect we actually tried "switching" the diode; as in we applied the same magnitude of current in both forward and reverse directions and showed that we actually measured no resistance (superconductivity) in one direction and real resistance (normal conductivity) in the other direction.”

“We also measured this effect while applying magnetic fields of different magnitudes and showed that the effect was clearly present at 0 applied field and gets killed by an applied field. This is also a smoking gun for our claim of having a superconducting diode effect at a zero-applied field, a very important point for technological applications. This is because magnetic fields at the nanometer scale are very difficult to control and limit, so for practical applications, it is generally desired to operate without requiring local magnetic fields.”

Q: Is it realistic for ordinary computers (or even the supercomputers of KNMI and IBM) to make use of superconducting?

Ali: “Yes it is! Not for people at home, but for server farms or supercomputers, it would be smart to implement this. Centralized computation is really how the world works nowadays. Any and all intensive computation is done at centralized facilities where localization adds huge benefits in terms of power management, heat management, etc. The existing infrastructure could be adapted without too much cost to work with Josephson diode-based electronics. There is a very real chance, if the challenges discussed in the other question are overcome, that this will revolutionize centralized and supercomputing!”