Substantia. An International Journal of the History of Chemistry 1(1): 43-48, 2017

Firenze University Press 
www.fupress.com/substantia

DOI: 10.13128/Substantia-10

Citation: D. Xie, D.E. Dunstan (2017) 
Modelling polymers as compressible 
elastic spheres in Couette flow. Sub-
stantia 1(1): 43-48. doi: 10.13128/Sub-
stantia-10

Copyright: © 2017 D. Xie, D.E. Dun-
stan.This is an open access, peer-
reviewed article published by Firenze 
University Press (http://www.fupress.
com/substantia) and distribuited under 
distributed under the terms of the 
Creative Commons Attribution License, 
which permits unrestricted use, distri-
bution, and reproduction in any medi-
um, provided the original author and 
source are credited.

Data Availability Statement: All rel-
evant data are within the paper and its 
Supporting Information files.

Competing Interests: The authors 
declare no competing interests.

Research Article

Modelling Polymers as Compressible Elastic 
Spheres in Couette Flow

Donglin Xie and Dave E. Dunstan*

Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Melbourne, VIC 
3010, Australia.
E-mail: davided@unimelb.edu.au

Abstract. A model of polymer chains as compressible elastic spheres in flow is pre-
sented. The spherical polymer blobs are assumed to compress in simple Couette flow 
in accord with recent rheo-optic measurements on semi-dilute solutions. The experi-
mentally determined decrease in radius with increasing shear rate is predicted by the 
model. Furthermore, the model predicts power law exponents for the viscosity-shear 
rate within the range of measured values for polymer chains.

Keywords. Semi-dilute Polymer solutions, Couette Flow, compression, modelling, 
power law.

INTRODUCTION

The rheology of polymers is of both fundamental interest and consider-
able practical importance.1-4 Predicting the flow behaviour of polymeric solu-
tions from the fundamental physics of the individual chains has long been 
the quest of soft condensed matter.5,6 The combination of statistical mechan-
ics and fluid mechanics has been used to predict polymer rheology.7,8 Kuhn 
was the first to develop a model of chains in flow.9 He modelled the chains 
as beads on a spring in which the beads account for the hydrodynamic forces 
and the spring embodies the elastic nature of the chain. He also developed the 
first statistical mechanical model that enabled the calculation of the effective 
spring constant from the chain properties.9 Kuhn’s 1933 Kolloid Z. paper also 
showed that the chains experience both extensional and compressive hydrody-
namic forces as they tumble in flow in so called Jeffery Orbits.10  Interesting-
ly, since Kuhn’s original paper, the compressive forces have been ignored and 
only extension is assumed to occur. The dumbbell model presented by Kuhn 
enables the hydrodynamic forces to be evaluated and the steady state condi-
tion of the forces to be equated as a function of the angle around the vorti-
city axis. Since Kuhn’s pioneering work, an essential assumption of polymer 
dynamics is that the single molecule response to applied stress may be used to 
interpret the observed macroscopic material behaviour.2,4,6 The elegant mod-
els of single polymer chains which assume that the chain can be described as 



44 Donglin Xie and Dave E. Dunstan

a random walk on a periodic lattice have been success-
ful in predicting a number of the key properties of poly-
mers.5,6 Furthermore, the inclusion of excluded volume 
to the ideal chain has enabled prediction of the solution 
size of polymers.3,11,12 The entropy of the chain is derived 
in terms of the end-to-end vector of the random chains.2 
This model forms the basis of rubber elasticity and is 
used to incorporate elasticity in models of flow where 
chain deformation results in entropy reduction and elas-
ticity.13 The theory of rubber elasticity (based on the same 
physical assumptions) predicts the elastic behaviour of 
rubbers over a wide strain range.13 Importantly, the “Rub-
ber Theory” predicts both the compressive and extension-
al behaviour of rubbers. This agreement between the the-
ory and experiment, albeit at effectively “infinite” molecu-
lar weight and high polymer concentration with excluded 
volume interactions neglected, gives confidence that the 
fundamental tenets of the theory are correct. However, 
due to their complexity there exist very few simulations 
of polymer solutions and melts in the semi-dilute and 
concentrated regimes.8,14-16

A general assumption used in models of polymers in 
flow is that the chains extend in response to the hydro-
dynamic forces.14-16 Recent experimental evidence shows 
that synthetic polymer chains compress in Couette flow 
at semi-dilute concentrations.17-19 Recent studies on semi-
dilute DNA solutions shows that extension and tumbling 
occurs.20,21 It appears that the general assumption of 
chain extension in flow may not be valid for concentra-
tions above critical overlap in Couette flow.18,19,22,23 Fur-
thermore, recent Brownian dynamics simulations for 
dilute solutions predict chain compression by neglecting 
excluded volume effects and including hydrodynamic 
interactions.24,25  While these simulations have been done 
for dilute chains, the neglect of excluded volume effects 
is consistent with concentrated solution behaviour. The 
inclusion of hydrodynamic interactions in concentrated 
solution where they are screened is not however consist-
ent with the physics of concentrated solutions. Many of 
the models and experiments presented in the literature 
are for purely extensional flows.2,26 Recent simulations on 
the blood borne protein von Willebrand Factor (vWF) 
show that in Couette flow the vWF chain tumbles when 
exposed to high shear rates to extend and then refold. 
When exposed to relatively low extensional shear rates, 
the vWF unfolds and extends.27-29

In light of recent experimental evidence showing 
chain compression in Couette flow, a new model is pre-
sented where the chains compress in response to the 
hydrodynamic forces. We also note that coil compression 
is an elastic event which leads to reduced friction in the 
system and is therefore consistent with the shear thinning 

and visco-elasticity observed for polymer solutions in 
simple flow. Purely extensional flow results in an increas-
ing extensional viscosity with shear rate.30 

RESULTS

The shear rate dependence of the end-to-end dis-
tance, r, has been measured for polymethyl methacrylate 
(PMMA) using fluorescence resonance energy trans-
fer (FRET) tagged chains in laminar Couette flow.22 The 
conformation of poly-4-butoxy-carbonyl-methylurethane 
(4-BCMU) in flow has been measured using absorption 
spectroscopy where the change in segment length with 
shear is used to determine the change in polymer size.18 
The results of the previous studies are re-plotted on a 
log-log scale in Figure 1 below. Both polymers show a 
decrease in the end-to-end distance with increasing shear 
rate. Reversibility was observed upon cessation of shear 
for all shear rates measured.18,22

The results presented in Figure 1 are from two differ-
ent rheo-optical experiments for two different polymeric 
systems. The data for PMMA was collected using time 
resolved FRET measurements on end tagged PMMA 
as a molecular tracer in a matrix of untagged PMMA 

Figure 1. Measured end-to-end distance plotted as log r versus log 
shear rate. ata for 800kD 4-BCMU.18  has the fitted equation: log(r) 
= – 0.0046log(γ

∙
) + 1.7 with the coefficient of determination: R2 = 

0.23. Data for 49kD FRET tagged PMMA in Couette flow22 shows 
the fitted equation: log(r) = – 0.0072log(γ

∙
) + 0.69 with R2 = 0.88. 

The lines of best fit yield an inverse 0.07±0.02 power of the radius 
with shear rate for the PMMA and 0.0042±0.002 for the 4-BCMU. 
The error bars are approximately the size of the symbols. The error 
associated with each point is: ~5% in the shear rate due to the radi-
us/gap ratio of the Couette cell. For the 4-BCMU the un-sheared 
size of the chain is 49±1nm and for PMMA the size is 4±0.1nm.  



45Modelling Polymers as Compressible Elastic Spheres in Couette Flow

at ~2C*. The data for 4-BCMU is taken from reference 
1 where the segment lengths of the 4-BCMU are meas-
ured to decrease with increasing shear rate at a polymer 
concentration of ~1.6C*.18 Calculation of the average seg-
ment length and conversion to an end-to end distance 
using the equation r = aN1/2 yields the results presented 
in Figure 1 for 4-BCMU. Here N is the number of seg-
ments and a the segment length as taken from literature 
values.18 Both data sets show a decreasing radius with 
shear rate with a power law behaviour. 

THEORY

The polymers are modelled as space filling, spherical 
elastic objects at semi-dilute concentration. The spheres 
are compressible and may change their volume through 
deformation. The flow is defined as simple Couette flow 
where the spherical blobs are exposed to a uniform 
velocity gradient at low Reynolds number, Re = vr/η for 
neutral buoyancy spheres. In view of recent experimental 
evidence showing that polymer chains compress in Cou-
ette flow (see Figure 1), we assume that the translational 
hydrodynamic forces on the sphere act to compress the 
chain in accord with the experimental evidence.17,22,31 
The semi-dilute concentration is such that the spheri-
cal blobs are in contact with each other and compress 
in flow. We postulate that the reason compression rath-
er than extension dominates the flow response of these 
polymers is due to the crowding of the single chain by 
the neighbouring chains in semi-dilute solution. The 
tumbling motion of the chains results in a time average 
compressive hydrodynamic force on the sphere in semi-
dilute solutions.

For the semi-dilute solutions, the blobs experi-
ence both rotational and compressive forces in flow. The 
rotational force (torque) acts to make the compressive 
hydrodynamic forces on the sphere uniform. As such 
the hydrodynamic translational force acts isotropically 
inward on the blob and is opposed by the elastic force. 
The force acting on each half space in the Couette flow 
acts in the opposite direction and is simply one half of 
the Stokes’ drag on the sphere. Goldman, Cox and Bren-
ner32,33 determined the hydrodynamic force on a sphere 
in Couette flow at low Reynolds number as:

Fy
s* = Fy

s /6πηrU  (1)

Here F is the force with the subscript y defining the 
direction of the translational motion in the unperturbed 
shear rate s, r is the sphere radius, U the fluid velocity 
and h the solvent viscosity. 

Equation 1 defines the force on the sphere at distanc-
es from the walls greater than the radius as:

fhyd =6πηrU  (2)

The torque on the sphere, Faxen’s Law, was also 
determined as:33

 Tx
s* =Tx

s / 8πηr3Ω  (3)

where T is the torque on the sphere, with the superscript 
s defining the undisturbed shear rate, the subscript x is 
the vorticity axis and Ω is the rotational velocity. 

The local forces may then be equated under steady 
state flow. The elastic and hydrodynamic forces on sphere 
then act to change the radius in flow. The forces are used 
in the following treatment as at each point in the sys-
tem the hydrodynamic and elastic forces oppose each 
other. In order for the system to reach steady state, the 

Figure 2. Schematic showing the polymer represented as a sphere 
in Couette flow. At semi-dilute concentrations each sphere is in 
“contact with the surrounding spheres. The shaded area shows the 
region which experiences a compressive force from the flow. The 
upper half experiences a compressive force from left to right while 
the bottom right hand part of the image experiences a similar com-
pressive force from the flow from right to left.  Each surface experi-
ences a compressive force equal to one half the Stokes’ drag on a 
sphere. The total compressive force is then equal to fcompressive = fhyd 
= 6πηrU where η is the solution viscosity, r the sphere radius and 
U the velocity difference across the sphere in the direction shown. 
The sphere also experiences a torque around the vorticity axis. This 
rotational motion causes a tumbling which yields an averaged sym-
metric compression on the blobs in flow. At each point across the 
surface the hydrodynamic force is equal to the elastic force under 
steady shear. Local fluctuations will occur with the system reaching 
an average reduced size of the coil with increasing shear rate and 
commensurate hydrodynamic force. The arrows pointing inward on 
the blob represent the local hydrodynamic compressive force.



46 Donglin Xie and Dave E. Dunstan

completely isotropic forces throughout the solution are 
equivalent. Obviously, the forces will fluctuate around the 
steady state average as the blobs rotate around the vorti-
city axis in the shear field. In steady state flow the hydro-
dynamic and elastic forces are then equated: 

fel = fhyd  (4)

Where the magnitude of the elastic force for the blob 
is taken from the theory of rubber elasticity and has a 
similar form as that reported previously:13,34 

fel = E× Area=
3nkBT
r

 (5)

Where E is the Young’s modulus of the blob, kB is 
Boltzmann’s constant, T the absolute temperature and r 
the sphere radius. The elastic force so described embod-
ies the entropic nature of the chain. Here we define n as 
the number of chain interactions (usually assumed to be 
entanglements) where n may be assumed to be constant 
for finite deformation. The theory of rubber elasticity 
defines n as the number of cross links in the gel.13 Note 
that the theory of rubber elasticity introduces an r0 term 
into equation 5 to allow for compression and the finite 
size of the chain in the quiescent state.13 Neumann has 
previously suggested that the inability to account for r0 
in the Hookean force law used in models of polymers in 
flow arbitrarily restricts the chain to extension.35,36  Indeed 
the neglect of the r0 term results in a Hookean response 
of the chains that is not physically correct in that the 
radius is zero at zero force and infinite at infinite exten-
sion. The formalism introduced by Neumann has the cor-
rect limiting behaviour for the force law in both extension 
and compression. Compression of the chains to point size 
would require an infinite force as would large stretching.

At each localised point, we assume that the elastic 
force acting normal to the surface of the blob as shown in 
Figure 2 opposes the hydrodynamic force.

The hydrodynamic force on the spherical blob is 
developed from equation 2 above using the assumption 
that the velocity in Couette flow U defines the shear rate 
as:
!γ =U / 2r  (6)

Then

fhyd =6πη!γr
2  (7)

Here the viscosity of the polymer solution is η, !γ  
the shear rate experienced by the chain and r the aver-
age end-to-end vector of the chain as defined above. It is 
assumed that the end-to-end distance is equivalent to the 

radius of the sphere that experiences the hydrodynamic 
force. The hydrodynamic force varies as r2 in accord with 
the original derivation of the hydrodynamic drag on a 
dumbbell derived by Kuhn.9

To first order the viscosity of the solution, is approxi-
mated by a modified version of Einstein’s equation:

η ~η0φ  (8)

Where the η0 is the effective solvent viscosity and ϕ 
the volume fraction of the chains. We assume that the 
effective solvent viscosity composed of solvent and the 
surrounding polymers. The polymer chains in flow act as 
compressible objects where the (incompressible solvent) 
may exchange freely throughout the system. The solution 
viscosity will depend on the polymer volume fraction and 
the shear rate. We assume that η0 is also proportional to 
the volume fraction ϕ so that: 

η ~φm  (9)

De Gennes and later Rubinstein and Colby have 
derived the volume fraction dependence for the viscos-
ity of semi-dilute solutions using scaling arguments and 
determined that m = 2. Furthermore, experimental data 
confirms the scaling arguments for polyethylene oxide 
in the semi-dilute concentration range.2,37 By assuming 
φ ~ r3  by substitution into equation 5 we obtain the fol-
lowing:

η ~ r3m  (10)

Equating the hydrodynamic and elastic forces on the 
spherical object in flow;

3nkBT
r

=6πr3m!γr2  (11)

Yields:

nkBT ~ !γr
3 m+1( )  (12)

so that 

r ~ nkBT !γ
−1/3 m+1( )  (13)

The generally accepted power law model is of the 
form:

η ~ !γ n  (14)

Values of n reported for polymeric systems range 
between p ~ -0.2 to -1.0.38-40 Interpretation of the data 



47Modelling Polymers as Compressible Elastic Spheres in Couette Flow

presented by Stratton indicates that for monodisperse 
polystyrene, p = -0.82.40 The value of p = -2/3 predicted 
by the model is well within the range of accepted values 
for shear thinning polymers.38

The viscosity-shear rate in model developed has the 
power law form:

η ~ !γ−m/ m+1( )  (15)

The dependence of the radius with shear rate for m = 
2 is then:

r ~ kBT !γ
−1/9  (16)

and

η ~ !γ−2/3  (17)

Thus the model predicts values for the power law 
model in accord with those determined experimentally 
for polymer solutions and hard sphere suspensions.39,40

DISCUSSION

The measured dependence of the decrease in 
the radius with increasing shear rate (power law of 
-0.09±0.02) is in close agreement with the model predic-
tion of -1/9 (-0.11) (Equation 16) when m = 2 is used for 
the volume fraction power law of the viscosity for the 
PMMA data. 

Furthermore, the model predicts a power law for the 
shear thinning viscosity of -2/3 (-0.67) that is within the 
range observed for polymer solutions which have been 
found to lie within the range of -1.0 to -0.2.38-40 Using the 
approximation that the viscosity follows a volume frac-
tion squared behavior allows the model to fit both the 
power law behavior of the radius and viscosity with shear 
rate for PMMA. Expansion of the Einstein Equation 
involves the addition of higher order terms in the volume 
fraction as attributed to Batchelor.33 Any correction to 
the viscosity-volume fraction dependence would presum-
ably require higher order terms (m > 2) that would yield 
lower values of the predicted power law at higher con-
centrations. Indeed, scaling arguments predict that the 
viscosity follows a 14/3 power of the volume fraction at 
concentrations above the entanglement concentration.37 
The measured viscosity-molecular weight behavior for 
a range of polymers is consistent with the volume frac-
tion dependence used in Equation 7.41 Furthermore, de 
Gennes and later Rubinstein and Colby have modeled the 
viscosity-polymer volume fraction dependence described 

in Equation 9 using scaling arguments to show that m 
= 2 in the semi-dilute concentration range.2,37 This rela-
tionship between the volume fraction of the polymer and 
the effective solvent viscosity enables the macroscopic 
viscosity-shear rate power law to be predicted (Equa-
tion 15). The predicted and measured decrease in radius 
with shear rate for the PMMA are in excellent agreement 
when the second order dependence of the viscosity on 
volume fraction (m = 2) is used. Fitting the BCMU data 
requires that m is approximately 1 (m = 1.0015). This 
suggests a power law for the viscosity of ~-1/2.   Equation 
7 yields an unbounded radius (and viscosity) as the shear 
rate tends to zero so that a modified form of the above 
equations must be used at low shear rates. The form of 
the equations at low shear rates will be similar to the 
Cross equation for shear thinning.39 The recently meas-
ured shear induced phase separation observed in semi-
dilute polymer solutions may be explained by chain com-
pression in flow where the solutions appear to be more 
heterogeneous as reflected in the scattering measure-
ments. The observed compression in flow lays the foun-
dation for an explanation of the observed shear induced 
phase changes observed for polymer solutions.42,43

Furthermore, it is noted that the model predicts a value 
of p = -1/2 and a radius dependence of the shear rate with 
a power of -1/6 for dilute solutions where it is assumed 
that the viscosity is proportional to the volume fraction. A 
review of the literature on the power law behavior observed 
for polymer solutions of differing volume fraction would be 
appropriate in validating the current model. The power law 
of the viscosity with volume fraction is used as an adjust-
able parameter in the model and suggests possible reasons 
for the different power law behavior reported in the litera-
ture for the same polymer systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The model for polymers in flow is presented where the 
chains behave as elastically deformable spheres that com-
press in simple shear flow at semi-dilute concentrations. 
Equating the elastic and hydrodynamic forces on the blob 
enables the power law observed for shear thinning and 
the reduction in end-to-end distance with shear rate to be 
predicted over the range of shear thinning. Physically the 
model is consistent with the observed rheology of polymer 
solutions in Couette flow which is attributed here to com-
pression of the chains in flow rather than the previously 
assumed extension. Development of the model using the 
assumption that the chains compress enables a simple ana-
lytical prediction of polymer visco-elastic behavior includ-
ing the power law for shear thinning. 



48 Donglin Xie and Dave E. Dunstan

AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS

DX undertook data analysis and contributed to writ-
ing the paper. DD contributed to writing the paper and 
developed the model. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank Elisabeth Hill, Yalin Wei, 
Ming Chen and Nikko Chan for their experimental work 
in undertaking the rheo-optical measurements.

REFERENCES

1. L.H. Sperling, Introduction to Physical Polymer Sci-
ence, Wiley Interscience, New Jersey, 1992.

2. P.G. de Gennes, Scaling Concepts in Polymer Physics, 
Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1979.

3. W.W. Graessley, Polymeric Liquids & Networks: Struc-
ture and Properties. New York, Garland Science, 2004.

4. M. Doi, S.F. Edwards, The Theory of Polymer Dynam-
ics, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986.

5. P.J. Flory, Principles of Polymer Chemistry. Ithaca, 
Cornell University Press, 1953.

6. P. Flory, Statistical Mechanics of Chain Molecules, 
Hanser Publications, New York, 1988.

7. J.D. Ferry, Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers. New 
York, John Wiley, 1980.

8. R.B. Bird; C.F. Curtiss; R.C. Armstrong, O. Hassager, 
Dynamics of Polymeric Liquids, Volume II, Kinetic 
Theory, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1987.

9. W. Kuhn, Kolloid Z. 1933, 62, 269.
10. G.B. Jeffery, Proc. Roy. Soc. London Series A 1922, 

102, 161.
11. G. Cheng, W.W. Graessley, Y.B. Melnichenko, Phys. 

Rev. Lett. 2009, 102, 157801.
12. M. Daoud, J.P. Cotton, B. Farnoux, G. Jannink, G. 

Sarma, H. Benoit, R. Duplessix, C. Picot, P.G. de 
Gennes, Macromolecules 1975, 8, 804.

13. L.R.G. Treloar, The Physics of Rubber Elasticity, 
Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1975.

14. G. Marrucci, J.J. Hermans, Macromolecules 1980, 13, 
380.

15. G. Marrucci, N. Grizzuti, J. Nonnewton Fluid Mech. 
1986, 21, 319.

16. R.B. Bird, J.R. Deaguiar, J. Nonnewton Fluid Mech. 
1983, 13, 149.

17. S. Gason, D.E. Dunstan, T.A. Smith, D.Y.C. Chan, L. 
R. White, D. V. Boger, J. Phys. Chem. B. 1997, 101, 
7732.

18. D.E. Dunstan, E.K. Hill, Y. Wei, Macromolecules, 
2004, 37, 1663.

19. N. Y. Chan, M. Chen, D.E. Dunstan, Eur. Phys. J. E, 
2009, 30, 37.

20. P. LeDuc, C. Haber, G. Bao, D. Wirtz, Nature 1999, 
399, 564.

21. R.E. Teixeira, H. . Babcock, E.S.G. Shaqfeh, S. Chu, 
Macromolecules 2004, 38, 581.

22. N.Y. Chan, M. Chen, X.-T. Hao, T.A. Smith, D.E. 
Dunstan, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2010, 1, 1912.

23. D.E. Dunstan, Eur. J. Phys. 2008, 29, 977.
24. D. Petera, M. Muthukumar, J. Chem. Phys. 1999, 111, 

7614.
25. C. Sendner, R.R. Netz, Eur. Phys. J. E, 2009, 30, 75.
26. E.C. Lee, S.J. Muller, Macromolecules 1999, 32, 3295.
27. C.E. Sing, A. Alexander-Katz, Biophys. J. 2010, 98, 

L35.
28. T.A. Springer, Blood 2014, 124, 1412.
29. X. Zhang, K. Halvorsen, C.-Z. Zhang, W.P. Wong, 

T.A. Springer, Science 2009, 324, 1330.
30. C.W. Macosko, Rheology, Principles, Measurement 

and Applications. New York, VCH Publishers, 1994.
31. D.E. Dunstan, Y. Wei. Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 2007, 

38, 93.
32. A.J. Goldman, R.G. Cox, H. Brenner, Chem. Eng. Sci. 

1967, 22, 653.
33. J. Happel, H. Brenner, Low Reynolds Number Hydro-

dynamics, Kluwer, Boston, 1983.
34. T.G. Mason, D. A. Weitz. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1995, 75, 

2770.
35. R.M. Neumann, J. Chem. Phys. 1999, 110, 7513.
36. R.M. Neumann, Phys. Rev. A. 1986, 34, 3486.
37. M. Rubinstein, R. H. Colby, Polymer Physics, Oxford 

University Press, 2003.
38. D. Song, R.K. Gupta, R.P. Chhabra, Ind. Eng. Chem. 

Res. 2011, 50, 13105.
39. H.A. Barnes, J.F. Hutton, K. Walters, An Introduction 

to Rheology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1989.
40. R.A. Stratton, J. Coll. Interface Sci. 1966, 22, 517.
41. R.A. L. Jones, Soft Condensed Matter, New York, 

Oxford University Press, 2002.
42. M. Minale, K.F. Wissbrun, D.F. Massouda, J. Rheol. 

2003, 47, 1.
43. B. Hammouda, A.I. Nakatani, D.A. Waldow, C.C. 

Han, Macromolecules 1992, 25, 2903.


	The Biological/Physical Sciences Divide, and the Age of Unreason
	Barry W. Ninham
	Developments of NMR - From Molecules to Human Behaviour and Beyond
	C.L. Khetrapal1* and K.V. Ramanathan2
	The Tribulations of the Inventor
	Pierre-Gilles De Gennes*
	Modelling polymers as compressible elastic spheres in Couette flow
	Donglin Xie and Dave E. Dunstan*
	From Water to the Stars: A Reinterpretation of Galileo’s Style*
	Louis Caruana SJ
	I Felt Reborn (Primo Levi): From the Nobel Dynamite Factory to a Remembrance Place
	Luigi Dei
	New Astronomical Observations: Joseph Weber’s Contribution to Gravitational Waves and Neutrinos Detection
	Stefano Gottardo
	Isaac Newton and Alchemy 
	Vincenzo Schettino
	Science is Not a Totally Transparent Structure: Ştefania Mărăcineanu and the Presumed Discovery of  Artificial Radioactivity
	Marco Fontani1*, Mary Virginia Orna2, Mariagrazia Costa1 and Sabine Vater1,3
	Manifesto of the journal
	Acknowledgments