Filamentous phages as building blocks for reconfigurable and hierarchical self-assembly

Filamentous bacteriophages such as fd-like viruses are monodisperse rod-like colloids that have well defined properties: diameter, length, rigidity, charge and chirality. Engineering those viruses leads to a library of colloidal rods which can be used as building blocks for reconfigurable and hierarchical self-assembly. Their condensation in aqueous solution \th{with additive polymers which act as depletants to induce} attraction between the rods leads to a myriad of fluid-like micronic structures ranging from isotropic/nematic droplets, colloid membranes, achiral membrane seeds, twisted ribbons, $\pi$-wall, pores, colloidal skyrmions, M\"obius anchors, scallop membranes to membrane rafts. Those structures and the way they shape shift not only shed light on the role of entropy, chiral frustration and topology in soft matter but it also mimics many structures encountered in different fields of science. On one hand, filamentous phages being an experimental realization of colloidal hard rods, their condensation mediated by depletion interactions constitutes a blueprint for self-assembly of rod-like particles and provides fundamental foundation for bio- or material oriented applications. On the other hand, the chiral properties of the viruses restrict the generalities of some results but vastly broaden the self-assembly possibilities

What is Probable Cause, and Why Should We Care?: The Costs, Benefits, and Meaning of Individualized Suspicion

Taslitz defines probable cause as having four components: one quantitative, one qualitative, one temporal, and one moral. He focuses on the last of these components. Individualized suspicion, the US Supreme Court has suggested, is perhaps the most important of the four components of probable cause. That is a position with which he heartily agree. The other three components each play only a supporting role. But individualized suspicion is the beating heart that gives probable cause its vitality

Rawls’s Justification Model for Ethics: What Exactly Justifies the Model?

This is a defense of Rawls against recent criticism, ironically my own, though it is also a critique insofar as it addresses a problem that Rawls never does. As a defense, it is not a retraction of the original charges. As a critique, it is not more of the same op-position. In either capacity, it is not an afterthought. The charges were conceived from the outset with a specific solution in mind, which would have been too distracting to pursue in the same article. This is that solution. It also highlights the problem. The original charges were that Rawls’s decision procedure for ethics does not justify his own moral principles, namely his principles of justice, and that the underlying problem may well keep the decision procedure from justifying any moral principles whatsoever, or at least any normatively useful ones. The underlying problem was, and still is, the model’s inherent universalism, which is built into the decision procedure through design specifications precluding relativism, yet only at the cost of limiting the relevant moral principles to generalities that are already widely accepted, thereby render-ing the procedure at best redundant and very likely vacuous as an ethical justification model. These difficulties are manifested in the work of Rawls as the dogmatism of champi-oning a distinctive conception of justice, a liberal one as he himself calls it, through a justification model that is too universalistic to permit such a bias and possibly also too universalistic to permit any substantive conclusions at all. The solution contemplated here is to position the decision procedure as a dynamic justification model responsive to moral progress, as opposed to a static one indifferent to such progress and equally open to all moral input, thus removing the inconsistency between the universalistic design and any distinctive or controversial principles, including the ones Rawls himself recommends, so long as they are consistent with moral progress

Quantum technology: single-photon source

This report is a synthesis of my master thesis internship at the National Institute of Informatics (NII) in Tokyo, Japan, that lasted during the summer of year 2012. I worked in the Quantum Information Science Theory (QIST) group under supervision of Prof. Kae Nemoto and Dr. Simon Devitt. This group works on theoretical and experimental implementations of quantum information science. The aim of my project was to study and improve quantum optical systems. I first studied different fields and systems of quantum information science. Then I focused my research on single-photon sources, entangled photon sources and interferometric photonic switches. Finally, I found some strategies to design an efficient and optimized single-photon source that could be built with today's technologies. This report describes in details the created and optimized design of a single-photon source based on time and space multiplexing of Spontaneous Parametric Downconversion (SPDC) sources.Comment: Research extract of Master thesis report. Defended in September 2012. Declassified by the NII in February 201