I warmly endorse this book because I have lived through several of the stages described in the book. WHY WEREN’T QUASI-PERIODIC MATERIALS DISCOVERED EARLIER? Why were quasi-periodic materials not discovered before 1982? For 70 years, hundreds of thousands of crystals were discovered and analyzed by X-ray crystallographers, and not one saw quasi-periodic materials. Quasi-periodic materials are not rare. There Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical are hundreds upon hundreds of them. A partial list of some of the quasi-periodical crystals based on aluminum can be seen in VRT752271 clinical trial Figure 9.

Other quasi-periodical crystals are based on copper, iron, nickel, and more. Clearly, these materials are abundant and not esoteric. It is true that many quasi-periodic materials transform to a periodic structure only at high temperatures, but many are thermodynamically stable at lower temperatures as well. These metallic alloys are also easy to produce by Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical all the common methods used in industry such as casting, rapid solidification, single growth crystal, electrode position, chemical vapor deposition (CVD), and physical vapor deposition (PVD). Figure 9 Quasi-periodic materials with aluminum in them. I would like to present Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical my own subjective answer to this question. As previously mentioned, quasi-periodic crystals are small. Therefore, the only tool that could have discovered them is a transmission electron microscope (TEM). The vast majority of crystallographers

work with X-ray diffractions; hence, the number of scientists who could have made this discovery is automatically limited. Like any other sophisticated tool, it is not enough to know how to use the TEM. To get these Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical results, you must be an expert at using the TEM, and that narrows the number of potential Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical discoverers even more. In addition, three important qualities are required of scientists who come across something unexpected: tenacity, courage, and belief. Professionals in any field, and so much more in science,

should be their own worst critic. Once a discovery is made, one should go over the results, repeat the experiments, and make sure that the results are real and not artifacts. Once the results have been validated, the researcher should stand during tall and defend them. This takes courage and tenacity, and often large quantities of both. However, the rewards for whoever walks this path are great. I would like to share an anecdote about missed opportunities. During one of the conventions that I attended, I was approached by a European professor who told me that while he was going through the data of his students, he saw a slide with the diffraction pattern I had seen. To his amazement, the date on the slide predated my discovery. The professor contacted his former student who now holds a leading management position in the industry and asked him if he realized that he had seen the same diffraction pattern that I saw. The student answered in the affirmative.