As an undergraduate working in a mass spectrometry lab, my
ears always perk up when I hear the term “computational chemistry” mentioned.
Without getting into too much detail, computational chemistry allows for the
simulation of chemical phenomena “in
silicio”. Some of the uses of this technique include the validation of
proposed chemical structures and modification of proposed reaction mechanisms
(A mechanism is a step by step illustration of believed electron movement during
a particular chemical reaction). One of the most popular pieces of software
that chemists use for this is called Gaussian09. To give an idea of how much
value chemists place on the results generated by this software—a site license
for the most up to date version costs approximately seven thousand dollars.
Despite the existence (and experimentally verified accuracy)
of the mathematical equations at work in computational chemistry—the software cannot actually “come up” with any
chemistry at all. The art of creating reasonable inputs that ultimately generate
meaningful outputs remains the job of the chemist. In other words, its possible
to ask the computer to perform a simulation on a chemical compound that doesn’t
exist. It is for this reason that computational chemistry will never replace
the need for comprehensive chemistry education. However, the results that are
generated when reasonable inputs are provided can provide data which support or
help reject a particular hypothesis like any other experimental technique.
Computational chemistry plays a tremendous role in the multi
hundred billion global business that is the pharmaceutical industry. The desire
for growth coupled with the desire to cut research and development costs means
that big pharma will rely more and more on these in silicio technques in the
future. This likely increase in demand means that more computer science
professionals will be employed to create and update future versions of these
applications.
No comments:
Post a Comment