Category: The Conversation

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Brittany Romanello, Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Arkansas

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has spent the past few weeks in a moment of both mourning and transition. On Sept. 28, 2025, a shooting and arson at a Latter-day Saints meetinghouse in Michigan killed four people and wounded eight more. What’s more, Russell M. Nelson, president of the church, died the day before at age 101. Based on protocol, his role will most likely be filled by Dallin H. Oaks, the longest-serving of the church’s top leaders.

The next president will inherit leadership of a religious institution that is both deeply American and increasingly global – diversity at odds with the way it’s typically represented in mainstream media, from “The Secret Life of Mormon Wives” to “The Book of Mormon” Broadway musical.

As a cultural anthropologist and ethnographer, I research Latter-day Saints communities across the United States, particularly Latina immigrants and young adults. When presenting my research, I’ve noticed that many people still closely associate the church with Utah, where its headquarters are located.

The church has played a pivotal role in Utah’s history and culture. Today, though, only 42% of its residents are members. The stereotype of Latter-day Saints as mostly white, conservative Americans is just one of many long-standing misconceptions about LDS communities and beliefs.

Many people are surprised to learn there are vibrant congregations far from the American West’s “Mormon Corridor.” There are devout Latter-day Saints everywhere from Ghana and the United Arab Emirates to Russia and mainland China.

Global growth

Joseph Smith founded The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in upstate New York in 1830 and immediately sent missionaries to preach along the frontier. The first overseas missionaries traveled to England in 1837.

Shortly after World War II, church leaders overhauled their missionary approach to increase the number of international missions. This strategy led to growth across the globe, especially in Central America, South America and the Pacific Islands.

Today, the church has over 17.5 million members, according to church records. A majority live outside the U.S., spread across more than 160 countries.

One way the church and researchers track this global growth is by construction of new temples.These buildings, used not for weekly worship but special ceremonies like weddings, were once almost exclusively located in the United States. Today, they exist in dozens of countries, from Argentina to Tonga.

During Nelson’s presidency, which began in 2018, he announced 200 new temples, more than any of his predecessors. Temples are a physical and symbolic representation of the church’s commitment to being a global religion, although cultural tensions remain.

Among U.S. members, demographics are also shifting. Seventy-two percent of American members are white, down from 85% in 2007, according to the Pew Research Center. Growing numbers of Latinos – 12% of U.S. members – have played a significant role sustaining congregations across the country.

There are congregations in every U.S. state, including the small community of Grand Blanc, Michigan, site of the tragic shooting. Suspect Thomas Jacob Sanford, who was fatally shot by police, had gone on a recent tirade against Latter-day Saints during a conversation with a local political candidate.

In the following days, an American member of the church raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Sanford’s family.

Growing pains

Despite the church’s diversity, its institutional foundations remain firmly rooted in the United States. The top leadership bodies are still composed almost entirely of white men, and most are American-born.

As the church continues to grow, questions arise about how well the norms of a Utah-based church fit the realities of members in Manila or Mexico City, Bangalore or Berlin. How much room is there, even in U.S. congregations, for local cultural expressions of faith?

Latino Latter-day Saints and members in Latin America, for example, have faced pushback against cultural traditions that were seen as distinctly “not LDS,” such as making altars and giving offerings during Dia de los Muertos. In 2021, the church launched a Spanish-language campaign using Day of the Dead imagery to increase interest among Latinos. Many members were happy to see this representation. Still, some women I spoke with said that an emphasis on whiteness and American nationalism, as well as anti-immigrant rhetoric they’d heard from other members, deterred them from fully celebrating their cultures.

Even aesthetic details, like musical styles, often reflect a distinctly American model. The standardized hymnal, for example, contains patriotic songs like “America the Beautiful.” This emphasis on American culture can feel especially out of sync in places in countries with high membership rates that have histories of U.S. military or political interventions.

Expectations about clothing and physical appearance, too, have prompted questions about representation, belonging and authority. It was only in 2024, for instance, that the church offered members in humid areas sleeveless versions of the sacred garments Latter-day Saints wear under clothing as a reminder of their faith.

Historically, the church viewed tattoos as taboo – a violation of the sanctity of the body. Many parts of the world have thousands of years of sacred tattooing traditions – including Oceania, which has high rates of church membership.

Change ahead?

Among many challenges, the next president of the church will navigate how to lead a global church from its American headquarters – a church that continues to be misunderstood and stereotyped, sometimes to the point of violence.

The number of Latter-day Saints continues to grow in many parts of the world, but this growth brings a greater need for cultural sensitivity. The church, historically very uniform in its efforts to standardize Latter-day Saints history, art and teachings, is finding that harder to maintain when congregations span dozens of countries, languages, customs and histories.

Organizing the church like a corporation, with a top-down decision-making process, can also make it difficult to address painful racial histories and the needs of marginalized groups, like LGBTQ+ members.

The transition in leadership offers an opportunity not only for the church but for the broader public to better understand the multifaceted, global nature of Latter-day Saints’ lives today.

Brittany Romanello does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The new president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will inherit a global faith far more diverse than many realize – https://theconversation.com/the-new-president-of-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-will-inherit-a-global-faith-far-more-diverse-than-many-realize-266337

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Gregory P. Magarian, Thomas and Karole Green Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis

The assassination in September 2025 of conservative activist Charlie Kirk has heightened attention on the relationship between political rhetoric and political violence.

Even before police had identified a suspect, President Donald Trump blamed the shooting on the “rhetoric” of the “radical left.” The Trump administration has since acted to silence left-leaning speakers and is threatening to intensify its attacks on left-wing political speech.

But my decades of studying free speech law have convinced me that suppressing political rhetoric, even through social norms rather than law, undermines the discussion, debate and constructive disagreement essential for a healthy democracy.

Gun proliferation complicates the problem by making political violence much easier to carry out.

Rise of political violence

Political violence – by which I mean any physical attack on people that aims to achieve a political goal – harms democracy by shifting the field of political disagreement from debate to aggression.

Under the U.S. constitutional system of limited government and individual rights, political violence by the government – for example, government assaults on anti-government protesters – is among the gravest threats to liberty.

But political violence committed by private individuals or groups also corrodes constitutional democracy. In the United States, acts of private political violence against members of government and against ordinary people have both increased dramatically in recent years.

Political assassinations are the most vivid form of political violence. The Kirk assassination is only the latest example.

In June 2025, a shooter with a “hit list” of left-liberal targets assassinated Minnesota Democratic Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband. In December 2024, a shooter angry about health insurance costs killed United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. In July 2024, a shooter wounded Trump at a campaign rally in a failed assassination attempt.

Political violence also includes bias-motivated murders. In 2022, a white supremacist murdered 10 Black patrons at a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y. In 2019, an anti-immigrant racist murdered 23 mostly Latino shoppers at a Wal-Mart in El Paso, Texas. In 2018, an antisemite murdered 11 congregants at a Pittsburgh synagogue.

In those incidents and numerous others, extreme political ideas appear to have motivated the attackers. The linkage of extremist speech to lethal violence has prompted calls to legally restrict or punish extremist speech.

Political violence, free speech and cultural editing

The First Amendment, however, protects extremist speech, including advocacy of violence. Violent rhetoric must actually incite or threaten violence to lose the First Amendment’s shelter.

If law cannot curb the sorts of speech that may inspire political violence, what about social norms – widely shared beliefs about what speech is socially acceptable or appropriate?

Much speech that the First Amendment protects from government regulation eventually disappears from public discourse. That happens through a process I call “cultural editing”: popular and institutional rejection of outmoded or repellent ideas. For example, no serious medical conference discusses treating hay fever with cocaine, and no respectable political science panel includes Nazis.

The Trump administration’s blaming of the Kirk assassination on “radical left” rhetoric points toward a deeper level of cultural editing.

Trump and other conservatives have not cited speech that advocated violence against Kirk. Instead, some conservative activists, spurred on by Trump administration officials, called for harassing and punishing critics of Kirk’s statements and actions.

But such criticisms of Kirk, whatever their merits or lack thereof, fall within the scope of ordinary political debate.

Kirk was not a government official, but he had strong influence in the Trump administration. Robust democratic discourse requires space for people to criticize such powerful figures. Large-scale cultural editing of those criticisms, amounting to suppression of left-leaning views, would hurt the public’s ability to discuss and resolve political disagreements.

However, Trump and others who push for suppressing harsh political rhetoric might argue that the stakes of verbal attacks have increased. They might say that U.S. political culture can no longer indulge political invective because political violence has become more common.

Political violence and guns

That argument for suppressing harsh political speech ignores an independent cause of political violence: gun proliferation.

Most political violence in the U.S. involves guns. Guns make political violence easier by erasing the distance between extremist ideas and lethal action. Hate or fanaticism can end a life in an instant, hundreds of yards from the victim.

The U.S. has by far the highest number of civilian guns and rate of civilian gun ownership in the world. Since 2008, when the Supreme Court declared an individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, annual U.S. gun purchases have increased from about 9 million to about 16 million.

Governments often find regulating speech easier, even though less effective, than tackling underlying problems. At times, federal and state governments have addressed political violence by regulating guns. The 1994 federal assault weapons ban exemplifies regulatory efforts to curb overall gun violence.

But the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment cases now appear to bar strong gun regulations.

People in a democratic society need freedom to make harsh, even extreme political statements with a minimum of cultural editing. The Second Amendment protects access to lethal weapons. This combination of free speech and gun rights makes the growing problem of political violence much harder to solve.

Gregory P. Magarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Political violence: What can happen when First Amendment free speech meets Second Amendment gun rights – https://theconversation.com/political-violence-what-can-happen-when-first-amendment-free-speech-meets-second-amendment-gun-rights-265223

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jessica D. Ayers, Assistant Professor of Psychological Science, Boise State University

Despite how natural friendship can feel, people rarely stop to analyze it. How do you know when someone will make a good friend? When is it time to move on from a friendship? Oftentimes, people rely on gut intuitions to answer these kinds of questions.

In psychology research, there’s no universally accepted definition of a friend. Traditionally, when psychologists have analyzed friendship, it’s often been through the lens of exchange. How much did that friend do for me? How much did I do for them? The idea is that friendships are transactional, where friends stick around only as long as they are getting at least as much as they are giving in the friendship.

But this focus doesn’t capture what feels like the essence of friendship for many people. We and our colleagues think another model for relationships – what we call risk-pooling – better matches what many people experience. In this kind of friendship, no one is keeping track of who did what for whom.

Our research over the past decade suggests that this kind of friendship was essential for our ancient ancestors to survive the challenges they encountered. And we feel it’s essential for surviving the challenges of life today, whether navigating personal struggles or dealing with natural disasters.

A focus on what friends give you

The traditional social exchange theory of friendship views relationships as transactions where people keep a tally of costs and benefits. Building on this framework, researchers have suggested that you approach each friendship with a running list of pluses and minuses to decide whether to maintain the bond. You keep friendships that provide more benefits than costs, and you end those that don’t.

The theory holds that this balancing act comes into play when making decisions about what kinds of friendships to pursue and how to treat your friends. It’s even made its way into pop psychology self-help spaces.

We contend that the biggest issue with social exchange theory is that it misses the nuances of real-life relationships. Frankly, the theory’s wrong: People often don’t use this cost-to-benefit ratio in their friendships.

Less accounting, more supporting

Anybody who has seen a friend through tough times – or been the one who was supported – can tell you that keeping track of what a friend does for you isn’t what friendships are about. Friendships are more about companionship, enjoyment and bonding. Sometimes, friendship is about helping just because your friend is in need and you care about their well-being.

Social exchange theory would suggest that you’d be better off dropping someone who is going through cancer treatment or a death in the family because they’re not providing as many benefits to you as they could. But real-life experiences with these situations suggest the opposite: These are the times when many people are most likely to support their friends.

Our research is consistent with this intuition about the shortcomings of social exchange theory. When we surveyed people about what they want in a friend, they didn’t place a high value on having a friend who is conscientious about paying back any debts – something highly valued from a social exchange perspective.

People considered other traits – such as loyalty, reliability, respectfulness and being there in times of need – to be much more important. These qualities that relate to emotional commitment were seen as necessities, while paying back was seen as a luxury that mattered only once the emotional commitment was met.

Having friends who will help you when you’re struggling, work with you in the friendship and provide emotional support all ranked higher in importance than having a friend who pays you back. While they might not always be able to provide tangible benefits, friends can show they care in many other ways.

Of course, friendship isn’t always positive. Some friends can take advantage by asking too much or neglecting responsibilities they could handle themselves. In those cases, it can be useful to step back and weigh the costs and benefits.

Friendship is more than the sum of its parts

But how do friendships actually help people survive? That is one question that we investigated as part of The Human Generosity Project, a cross-disciplinary research collaboration.

The risk-pooling rather than exchange pattern of friendship is something that we found across societies, from “kere kere” in Fiji to “tomor marang” among the Ik in Uganda. People help their friends in times of need without expecting to be paid back.

The Maasai, an Indigenous group in Kenya and Tanzania who rely on cattle herds to make their living, cultivate friends who help them when they are in need, with no expectation about paying each other back. People ask for help from these special friends, called osotua partners, only when they are in genuine need, and they give if they are asked and able.

These partnerships are not about everyday favors – rather, they are about surviving unpredictable, life-altering risks. Osotua relationships are built over a lifetime, passed down across generations and often marked with sacred rituals.

When we modeled how these osotua relationships function over time, we found they help people survive when their environments are volatile and when they ask those most likely to be able to help. These relationships lead to higher rates of survival for both partners compared to those built on keeping track of debts.

These friends act as social insurance systems for each other, helping each other when needs arise because of unpredictable and uncontrollable events.

And we see this in the United States, just as we do in smaller-scale, more remote societies. In one study, we focused on ranchers in southern Arizona and New Mexico embedded in a network of what they call “neighboring.” They don’t expect to be paid back when they help their neighbors with unpredictable challenges such as an accident, injury or illness. We also found this same pattern in an online study of U.S.-based participants.

In contrast, people such as the ranchers we studied are more likely to expect to be paid back for help when needs arise because of more predictable challenges such as branding cattle or paying bills.

Catastrophic insurance, not tit for tat

What all this research suggests is that friendship is less about the exchange of favors and more about being there for each other when unforeseeable disaster strikes. Friendship seems more like an insurance plan designed to kick in when you need it most rather than a system of balanced exchange.

What lets these partnerships endure is not only generosity, but also restraint and responsibility: Maasai expect their osotua partners to take care of themselves when they can and to ask only when help is truly needed. That balance of care, respect and self-management offers a useful model.

In a world of growing uncertainty, cultivating risk-pooling friendships and striving to be a good partner yourself may help you build resilience. Our ancestors survived with the help of this kind of relationship; our future may depend on them too.

Athena Aktipis receives funding from the National Science Foundation. She is the Executive Director of the Cooperative Futures Institute.

Jessica D. Ayers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Friendships aren’t just about keeping score – new psychology research looks at why we help our friends when they need it – https://theconversation.com/friendships-arent-just-about-keeping-score-new-psychology-research-looks-at-why-we-help-our-friends-when-they-need-it-258549

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jie Huang, Chair Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology

When the 2025 Nobel Prize in Chemistry honored Omar Yaghi – the “father of metal-organic frameworks,” or MOFs – along with Susumu Kitagawa and Richard Robson, it celebrated more than the creation of a new class of crystalline materials. It recognized a revolution quietly reshaping how scientists capture, store and sense molecules. These MOFs could allow for sensor technologies that make workplaces, the environment and human bodies safer.

What are MOFs, and why do they matter?

MOFs are made by linking metal ions – atoms that carry an electrical charge – with organic molecules, the carbon-based building blocks found in most living things. Together they form tiny, sponge-like structures full of microscopic pores. You can imagine them as an atomic-scale scaffold filled with nano-sized rooms, each precisely engineered to host certain molecules like guests.

Because chemists can mix and match different metals and organic linkers, there are thousands of possible MOFs – each with unique properties. Depending on how they’re structured, some have so much internal surface area that a single gram could cover a football field.

This sponge-like porosity – meaning lots of tiny holes inside – lets MOFs trap and release gases, store energy-rich fuels like hydrogen, and capture harmful pollutants. MOFs can use a variety of chemicals in their structure, which lets researchers fine-tune how strongly an MOF interacts with specific molecules.

These features have already inspired potential uses such as capturing carbon dioxide from the air to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, pulling clean water from humid air, and delivering medicines inside the body. Over the past decade, the unique properties of MOFs have also opened new possibilities for sensing and detection.

Since 2016, our team of engineers has been developing MOF-based sensors that can detect certain gases and vapors in an environment in real time. These materials’ unique properties are opening new possibilities for sensing in health, safety and environmental monitoring.

From a storage material to a sensing material

When an MOF takes in gas or liquid molecules, its tiny framework changes ever so slightly: It may change in size, how it bends light, or how it conducts electricity, depending on what and how many molecules it absorbs.

By connecting MOFs to devices that can sense changes in light or electricity, researchers can turn these tiny shifts into measurable signals such as light, frequency or voltage. The signals then reveal what chemical is present and how much of it there is. In simple terms, when molecules enter or leave the MOF’s pores, they slightly change how light travels through it or how electricity behaves around it, and those changes become the sensor’s readable output.

Our group at Missouri University of Science and Technology has developed several kinds of MOF-based sensor platforms. Across all these platforms, the core idea is the same: MOFs act as selective sponges that temporarily hold certain gas molecules in their tiny cages, and our devices measure the timing and amount of this uptake and release.

In one study, we attached a single crystal of a copper-based MOF called HKUST-1 to the smooth, flat end of a cut optical fiber – the same kind of thin glass strand used to carry internet and phone signals.

This crystal-fiber combination worked as a tiny device that could measure how light waves interfere with each other. As nearby gas molecules moved into the tiny pores of the MOF crystal, the way it bent and reflected light changed slightly. The optical fiber – connected to a light source and detector – picked up these changes, allowing us to see in real time how many gas molecules the material was taking in.

Our probes show not just that gas molecules enter the tiny cages of the MOF, but also how fast they come and go. By measuring both the amount and the speed of adsorption and release, we can tell which molecules are being taken up and in what proportion, when several are present together. This dynamic view helps us see, in real time, how the material selects one target gas over others. It turns adsorption into a measurable, useful signal for sensing and identification.

In health care, an MOF can act like a selective sponge for specific breath molecules that indicate real, measurable diseases. For example, an MOF designed to adsorb acetone can capture and concentrate this gas from exhaled breath. Acetone levels rise above normal values in people with diabetic ketoacidosis, allowing the sensor to clearly and quantitatively detect the disease.

Likewise, an MOF that selectively adsorbs ammonia can concentrate this compound from exhaled breath. Ammonia levels increase above normal values in people with chronic kidney disease, so the sensor can provide a definite indicator of reduced kidney function. Integrating such MOFs into sensor hardware would allow for sensitive, noninvasive screening for these two diseases, based on quantifiable breath markers.

Coating a material in a thin layer of MOFs can take hours. But recently, we developed a quick and simple “droplet-drying” method that forms a crystal layer of the copper-based MOF HKUST-1 directly onto the end of an optical fiber in under two minutes. The resulting film, only about 1/20th the width of a human hair, acted as a high-performance gas sensor that detected humidity, ethanol or carbon dioxide in the environment within seconds.

We also combined MOFs with a hand-held metal device that can sense changes in microwave signals – a bit like how a radio antenna picks up invisible waves in the air. When gas molecules entered the MOF layer, they slightly changed how the device responded to those waves, allowing it to detect gases with remarkable sensitivity.

This sensor made for a low-cost, portable device that could tell one kind of gas molecule apart from another, rather than just detecting that some gas is present. It’s like having a nose that can tell apples from oranges, not just detect that something smells fruity.

Our research suggests that MOF sensors within compact, energy-efficient devices can pick out specific molecules – even when only trace amounts are present in the air. The pores of an MOF can be designed to concentrate specific target molecules. All molecules smaller than the window to an MOF cage will get into the cage. So, we design the sensors so that the molecules we are interested in sensing will reside in the cages longer. The huge internal surface area created by these pores makes them incredibly responsive. Even just a few trapped molecules can trigger a clear signal.

These sensors also work at room temperature and our research suggests they are more precise and adaptable than many traditional chemical sensors.

Toward real-world impact

The main challenges lie in improving MOFs’ long-term durability and environmental resistance. Many frameworks degrade under humidity or heat, though some research groups are looking into how to make them more stable.

When combined with machine-learning algorithms, these sensors can learn to recognize patterns from several gases at once, rather than detecting just one chemical at a time – much like how a human nose can tell different smells apart. This capability could even extend to human breath monitoring, where subtle changes in exhaled gases provide early clues to diseases such as diabetes, lung infections or cancer.

Researchers are working to embed MOFs into flexible films, printed circuits and wireless devices. With these new advances and further research, MOFs could bridge chemistry and engineering one day. As the Nobel Prize recognized, MOFs exemplify how design at the molecular scale can help mitigate problems humans face at a global scale.

If researchers can scale up this technology and overcome the challenges, networks of fiber-optic and microwave MOF sensors could one day monitor industrial plants, pipelines and even human breath for unwanted chemicals to improve safety, efficiency and health.

Jie Huang receives research funding from the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the National Institutes of Health.

Rex Gerald receives research funding from the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the National Institutes of Health.

Bohong Zhang and Chen Zhu do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Our engineering team is making versatile, tiny sensors from the Nobel-winning ‘metal-organic frameworks’ – https://theconversation.com/our-engineering-team-is-making-versatile-tiny-sensors-from-the-nobel-winning-metal-organic-frameworks-267103