Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Professor Emeritus Lee Grodzins, pioneer in nuclear physics, dies at 98

News Feed
Thursday, March 20, 2025

Nuclear physicist and MIT Professor Emeritus Lee Grodzins died on March 6 at his home in the Maplewood Senior Living Community at Weston, Massachusetts. He was 98.   Grodzins was a pioneer in nuclear physics research. He was perhaps best known for the highly influential experiment determining the helicity of the neutrino, which led to a key understanding of what's known as the weak interaction. He was also the founder of Niton Corp. and the nonprofit Cornerstones of Science, and was a co-founder of the Union of Concerned Scientists.He retired in 1999 after serving as an MIT physics faculty member for 40 years. As a member of the Laboratory for Nuclear Science (LNS), he initiated the relativistic heavy-ion physics program. He published over 170 scientific papers and held 64 U.S. patents.“Lee was a very good experimental physicist, especially with his hands making gadgets,” says Heavy Ion Group and Francis L. Friedman Professor Emeritus Wit Busza PhD ’64. “His enthusiasm for physics spilled into his enthusiasm for how physics was taught in our department.”Industrious son of immigrantsGrodzins was born July 10, 1926, in Lowell, Massachusetts, the middle child of Eastern European Jewish immigrants David and Taube Grodzins. He grew up in Manchester, New Hampshire. His two sisters were Ethel Grodzins Romm, journalist, author, and businesswoman who later ran his company, Niton Corp.; and Anne Lipow, who became a librarian and library science expert.His father, who ran a gas station and a used-tire business, died when Lee was 15. To help support his family, Lee sold newspapers, a business he grew into the second-largest newspaper distributor in Manchester.At 17, Grodzins attended the University of New Hampshire, graduating in less than three years with a degree in mechanical engineering.  However, he decided to be a physicist after disagreeing with a textbook that used the word “never.”“I was pretty good in math and was undecided about my future,” Grodzins said in a 1958 New York Daily News article. “It wasn’t until my senior year that I unexpectedly realized I wanted to be a physicist. I was reading a physics text one day when suddenly this sentence hit me: ‘We will never be able to see the atom.’ I said to myself that that was as stupid a statement as I’d ever read. What did he mean ‘never!’ I got so annoyed that I started devouring other writers to see what they had to say and all at once I found myself in the midst of modern physics.”He wrote his senior thesis on “Atomic Theory.”After graduating in 1946, he approached potential employers by saying, “I have a degree in mechanical engineering, but I don’t want to be one. I’d like to be a physicist, and I’ll take anything in that line at whatever you will pay me.”He accepted an offer from General Electric’s Research Laboratory in Schenectady, New York, where he worked in fundamental nuclear research building cosmic ray detectors, while also pursuing his master’s degree at Union College. “I had a ball,” he recalled. “I stayed in the lab 12 hours a day. They had to kick me out at night.”BrookhavenAfter earning his PhD from Purdue University in 1954, he spent a year as a lecturer there, before becoming a researcher at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) with Maurice Goldhaber’s nuclear physics group, probing the properties of the nuclei of atoms.In 1957, he, with Goldhaber and Andy Sunyar, used a simple table-top experiment to measure the helicity of the neutrino. Helicity characterizes the alignment of a particle’s intrinsic spin vector with that particle’s direction of motion. The research provided new support for the idea that the principle of conservation of parity — which had been accepted for 30 years as a basic law of nature before being disproven the year before, leading to the 1957 Nobel Prize in Physics — was not as inviolable as the scientists thought it was, and did not apply to the behavior of some subatomic particles.The experiment took about 10 days to complete, followed by a month of checks and rechecks. They submitted a letter on “Helicity of Neutrinos” to Physical Review on Dec. 11, 1957, and a week later, Goldhaber told a Stanford University audience that the neutrino is left-handed, meaning that the weak interaction was probably one force. This work proved crucial to our understanding of the weak interaction, the force that governs nuclear beta decay.“It was a real upheaval in our understanding of physics,” says Grodzins’ onetime postdoc and longtime colleague Stephen Steadman. The breakthrough was commemorated in 2008, with a conference at BNL on “Neutrino Helicity at 50.” Steadman also recalls Grodzins’ story about one night at Brookhaven, where he was working on an experiment that involved a radioactive source inside a chamber. Lee noticed that a vacuum pump wasn’t working, so he tinkered with it a while before heading home. Later that night, he gets a call from the lab. “They said, ‘Don't go anywhere!’” recalls Steadman. It turns out the radiation source in the lab had exploded, and the pump filled the lab with radiation. “They were actually able to trace his radioactive footprints from the lab to his home,” says Steadman. “He kind of shrugged it off.”The MIT years       Grodzins joined the faculty of MIT in 1959, where he taught physics for four decades. He inherited Robley Evans’ Radiation Laboratory, which used radioactive sources to study properties of nuclei, and led the Relativistic Heavy Ion Group, which was affiliated with the LNS.In 1972, he launched a program at BNL using the then-new Tandem Van de Graaff accelerator to study interactions of heavy ions with nuclei. “As the BNL tandem was getting commissioned, we started a program, together with Doug Cline at the University of Rochester, tandem to investigate Coulomb-nuclear interference,” says Steadman, a senior research scientist at LNS. “The experimental results were decisive but somewhat controversial at the time. We clearly detected the interference effect.” The experimental work was published in Physical Review Letters.Grodzins’ team looked for super-heavy elements using the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Super-Hilac, investigated heavy-ion fission and other heavy-ion reactions, and explored heavy-ion transfer reactions. The latter research showed with precise detail the underlying statistical behavior of the transfer of nucleons between the heavy-ion projectile and target, using a theoretical statistical model of Surprisal Analysis developed by Rafi Levine and his graduate student. Recalls Steadman, “these results were both outstanding in their precision and initially controversial in interpretation.”In 1985, he carried out the first computer axial tomographic experiment using synchrotron radiation, and in 1987, his group was involved in the first run of Experiment 802, a collaborative experiment with about 50 scientists from around the world that studied relativistic heavy ion collisions at Brookhaven. The MIT responsibility was to build the drift chambers and design the bending magnet for the experiment.“He made significant contributions to the initial design and construction phases, where his broad expertise and knowledge of small area companies with unique capabilities was invaluable,” says George Stephens, physics senior lecturer and senior research scientist at MIT.Professor emeritus of physics Rainer Weiss ’55, PhD ’62 recalls working on a Mossbauer experiment to establish if photons changed frequency as they traveled through bright regions. “It was an idea held by some to explain the ‘apparent’ red shift with distance in our universe,” says Weiss. “We became great friends in the process, and of course, amateur cosmologists.”“Lee was great for developing good ideas,” Steadman says. “He would get started on one idea, but then get distracted with another great idea. So, it was essential that the team would carry these experiments to their conclusion: they would get the papers published.”MIT mentorBefore retiring in 1999, Lee supervised 21 doctoral dissertations and was an early proponent of women graduate students in physics. He also oversaw the undergraduate thesis of Sidney Altman, who decades later won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. For many years, he helped teach the Junior Lab required of all undergraduate physics majors. He got his favorite student evaluation, however, for a different course, billed as offering a “superficial overview” of nuclear physics. The comment read: “This physics course was not superficial enough for me.”“He really liked to work with students,” says Steadman. “They could always go into his office anytime. He was a very supportive mentor.”“He was a wonderful mentor, avuncular and supportive of all of us,” agrees Karl van Bibber ’72, PhD ’76, now at the University of California at Berkeley. He recalls handing his first paper to Grodzins for comments. “I was sitting at my desk expecting a pat on the head. Quite to the contrary, he scowled, threw the manuscript on my desk and scolded, ‘Don't even pick up a pencil again until you've read a Hemingway novel!’ … The next version of the paper had an average sentence length of about six words; we submitted it, and it was immediately accepted by Physical Review Letters.”Van Bibber has since taught the “Grodzins Method” in his graduate seminars on professional orientation for scientists and engineers, including passing around a few anthologies of Hemingway short stories. “I gave a copy of one of the dog-eared anthologies to Lee at his 90th birthday lecture, which elicited tears of laughter.”Early in George Stephans’ MIT career as a research scientist, he worked with Grodzins’ newly formed Relativistic Heavy Ion Group. “Despite his wide range of interests, he paid close attention to what was going on and was always very supportive of us, especially the students. He was a very encouraging and helpful mentor to me, as well as being always pleasant and engaging to work with. He actively pushed to get me promoted to principal research scientist relatively early, in recognition of my contributions.”“He always seemed to know a lot about everything, but never acted condescending,” says Stephans. “He seemed happiest when he was deeply engaged digging into the nitty-gritty details of whatever unique and unusual work one of these companies was doing for us.”Al Lazzarini ’74, PhD ’78 recalls Grodzins’ investigations using proton-induced X-ray emission (PIXE) as a sensitive tool to measure trace elemental amounts. “Lee was a superb physicist,” says Lazzarini. “He gave an enthralling seminar on an investigation he had carried out on a lock of Napoleon’s hair, looking for evidence of arsenic poisoning.”Robert Ledoux ’78, PhD ’81, a former professor of physics at MIT who is now program director of the U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency with the Department of Energy, worked with Grodzins as both a student and colleague. “He was a ‘nuclear physicist’s physicist’ — a superb experimentalist who truly loved building and performing experiments in many areas of nuclear physics. His passion for discovery was matched only by his generosity in sharing knowledge.”The research funding crisis starting in 1969 led Grodzins to become concerned that his graduate students would not find careers in the field. He helped form the Economic Concerns Committee of the American Physical Society, for which he produced a major report on the “Manpower Crisis in Physics” (1971), and presented his results before the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and at the Karlsruhe National Lab in Germany.   Grodzins played a significant role in bringing the first Chinese graduate students to MIT in the 1970s and 1980s.One of the students he welcomed was Huan Huang PhD ’90. “I am forever grateful to him for changing my trajectory,” says Huang, now at the University of California at Los Angeles. “His unwavering support and ‘go do it’ attitude inspired us to explore physics at the beginning of a new research field of high energy heavy ion collisions in the 1980s. I have been trying to be a ‘nice professor’ like Lee all my academic career.”Even after he left MIT, Grodzins remained available for his former students. “Many tell me how much my lifestyle has influenced them, which is gratifying,” Huang says. “They’ve been a central part of my life. My biography would be grossly incomplete without them.”Niton Corp. and post-MIT workGrodzins liked what he called “tabletop experiments,” like the one used in his 1957 neutrino experiment, which involved a few people building a device that could fit on a tabletop. “He didn’t enjoy working in large collaborations, which nuclear physics embraced.” says Steadman. “I think that’s why he ultimately left MIT.”In the 1980s, he launched what amounted to a new career in detection technology. In 1987, after developing a scanning proton-induced X-ray microspectrometer for use measuring elemental concentrations in air, he founded the Niton Corp., which developed, manufactured, and marketed test kits and instruments to measure radon gas in buildings, lead-based paint detection, and other nondestructive testing applications. (“Niton” is an obsolete term for radon.)“At the time, there was a big scare about radon in New England, and he thought he could develop a radon detector that was inexpensive and easy to use,” says Steadman. “His radon detector became a big business.”He later developed devices to detect explosives, drugs, and other contraband in luggage and cargo containers. Handheld devices used X-ray fluorescence to determine the composition of metal alloys and to detect other materials. The handheld XL Spectrum Analyzer could detect buried and surface lead on painted surfaces, to protect children living in older homes. Three Niton X-ray fluorescence analyzers earned R&D 100 awards.“Lee was very technically gifted,” says Steadman.In 1999, Grodzins retired from MIT and devoted his energies to industry, including directing the R&D group at Niton.His sister Ethel Grodzins Romm was the president and CEO of Niton, followed by his son Hal. Many of Niton’s employees were MIT graduates. In 2005, he and his family sold Niton to Thermo Fisher Scientific, where Lee remained as a principal scientist until 2010.In the 1990s, he was vice president of American Science and Engineering, and between the ages of 70 and 90, he was awarded three patents a year. “Curiosity and creativity don’t stop after a certain age,” Grodzins said to UNH Today. “You decide you know certain things, and you don’t want to change that thinking. But thinking outside the box really means thinking outside your box.”“I miss his enthusiasm,” says Steadman. “I saw him about a couple of years ago and he was still on the move, always ready to launch a new effort, and he was always trying to pull you into those efforts.”A better worldIn the 1950s, Grodzins and other Brookhaven scientists joined the American delegation at the Second United Nations International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy in Geneva.Early on, he joined several Manhattan Project alums at MIT in their concern about the consequences of nuclear bombs. In Vietnam-era 1969, Grodzins co-founded the Union of Concerned Scientists, which calls for scientific research to be directed away from military technologies and toward solving pressing environmental and social problems. He served as its chair in 1970 and 1972. He also chaired committees for the American Physical Society and the National Research Council.As vice president for advanced products at American Science and Engineering, which made homeland security equipment, he became a consultant on airport security, especially following the 9/11 attacks. As an expert witness, he testified at the celebrated trial to determine whether Pan Am was negligent for the bombing of Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and he took part in a weapons inspection trip on the Black Sea. He also was frequently called as an expert witness on patent cases.In 1999, Grodzins founded the nonprofit Cornerstones in Science, a public library initiative to improve public engagement with science. Based originally at the Curtis Memorial Library in Brunswick, Maine, Cornerstones now partners with libraries in Maine, Arizona, Texas, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and California. Among their initiatives was one that has helped supply telescopes to libraries and astronomy clubs around the country.“He had a strong sense of wanting to do good for mankind,” says Steadman.AwardsGrodzins authored more than 170 technical papers and holds more than 60 U.S. patents. His numerous accolades included being named a Guggenheim Fellow in 1964 and 1971, and a senior von Humboldt fellow in 1980. He was a fellow of the American Physical Society and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and received an honorary doctor of science degree from Purdue University in 1998.In 2021, the Denver X-Ray Conference gave Grodzins the Birks Award in X-Florescence Spectrometry, for having introduced “a handheld XRF unit which expanded analysis to in-field applications such as environmental studies, archeological exploration, mining, and more.”Personal lifeOne evening in 1955, shortly after starting his work at Brookhaven, Grodzins decided to take a walk and explore the BNL campus. He found just one building that had lights on and was open, so he went in. Inside, a group was rehearsing a play. He was immediately smitten with one of the actors, Lulu Anderson, a young biologist. “I joined the acting company, and a year-and-a-half later, Lulu and I were married,” Grodzins had recalled. They were happily married for 62 years, until Lulu’s death in 2019.They raised two sons, Dean, now of Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Hal Grodzins, who lives in Maitland, Florida. Lee and Lulu owned a succession of beloved huskies, most of them named after physicists.After living in Arlington, Massachusetts, the Grodzins family moved to Lexington, Massachusetts, in 1972 and bought a second home a few years later in Brunswick, Maine. Starting around 1990, Lee and Lulu spent every weekend, year-round, in Brunswick. In both places, they were avid supporters of their local libraries, museums, theaters, symphonies, botanical gardens, public radio, and TV stations.Grodzins took his family along to conferences, fellowships, and other invitations. They all lived in Denmark for two sabbaticals, in 1964-65 and 1971-72, while Lee worked at the Neils Bohr Institute. They also traveled together to China for a month in 1975, and for two months in 1980. As part of the latter trip, they were among the first American visitors to Tibet since the 1940s. Lee and Lulu also traveled the world, from Antarctica to the Galapagos Islands to Greece.His homes had basement workshops well-stocked with tools. His sons enjoyed a playroom he built for them in their Arlington home. He also once constructed his own high-fidelity record player, patched his old Volvo with fiberglass, changed his own oil, and put on the winter tires and chains himself. He was an early adopter of the home computer.“His work in science and technology was part of a general love of gadgets and of fixing and making things,” his son, Dean, wrote in a Facebook post.Lee is survived by Dean, his wife, Nora Nykiel Grodzins, and their daughter, Lily; and by Hal and his wife Cathy Salmons. A remembrance and celebration for Lee Grodzins is planned for this summer. Donations in his name may be made to Cornerstones of Science.

An MIT faculty member for 40 years, Grodzins performed groundbreaking studies of the weak interaction, led in detection technology, and co-founded the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Nuclear physicist and MIT Professor Emeritus Lee Grodzins died on March 6 at his home in the Maplewood Senior Living Community at Weston, Massachusetts. He was 98.   

Grodzins was a pioneer in nuclear physics research. He was perhaps best known for the highly influential experiment determining the helicity of the neutrino, which led to a key understanding of what's known as the weak interaction. He was also the founder of Niton Corp. and the nonprofit Cornerstones of Science, and was a co-founder of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

He retired in 1999 after serving as an MIT physics faculty member for 40 years. As a member of the Laboratory for Nuclear Science (LNS), he initiated the relativistic heavy-ion physics program. He published over 170 scientific papers and held 64 U.S. patents.

“Lee was a very good experimental physicist, especially with his hands making gadgets,” says Heavy Ion Group and Francis L. Friedman Professor Emeritus Wit Busza PhD ’64. “His enthusiasm for physics spilled into his enthusiasm for how physics was taught in our department.”

Industrious son of immigrants

Grodzins was born July 10, 1926, in Lowell, Massachusetts, the middle child of Eastern European Jewish immigrants David and Taube Grodzins. He grew up in Manchester, New Hampshire. His two sisters were Ethel Grodzins Romm, journalist, author, and businesswoman who later ran his company, Niton Corp.; and Anne Lipow, who became a librarian and library science expert.

His father, who ran a gas station and a used-tire business, died when Lee was 15. To help support his family, Lee sold newspapers, a business he grew into the second-largest newspaper distributor in Manchester.

At 17, Grodzins attended the University of New Hampshire, graduating in less than three years with a degree in mechanical engineering.  However, he decided to be a physicist after disagreeing with a textbook that used the word “never.”

“I was pretty good in math and was undecided about my future,” Grodzins said in a 1958 New York Daily News article. “It wasn’t until my senior year that I unexpectedly realized I wanted to be a physicist. I was reading a physics text one day when suddenly this sentence hit me: ‘We will never be able to see the atom.’ I said to myself that that was as stupid a statement as I’d ever read. What did he mean ‘never!’ I got so annoyed that I started devouring other writers to see what they had to say and all at once I found myself in the midst of modern physics.”

He wrote his senior thesis on “Atomic Theory.”

After graduating in 1946, he approached potential employers by saying, “I have a degree in mechanical engineering, but I don’t want to be one. I’d like to be a physicist, and I’ll take anything in that line at whatever you will pay me.”

He accepted an offer from General Electric’s Research Laboratory in Schenectady, New York, where he worked in fundamental nuclear research building cosmic ray detectors, while also pursuing his master’s degree at Union College. “I had a ball,” he recalled. “I stayed in the lab 12 hours a day. They had to kick me out at night.”

Brookhaven

After earning his PhD from Purdue University in 1954, he spent a year as a lecturer there, before becoming a researcher at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) with Maurice Goldhaber’s nuclear physics group, probing the properties of the nuclei of atoms.

In 1957, he, with Goldhaber and Andy Sunyar, used a simple table-top experiment to measure the helicity of the neutrino. Helicity characterizes the alignment of a particle’s intrinsic spin vector with that particle’s direction of motion. 

The research provided new support for the idea that the principle of conservation of parity — which had been accepted for 30 years as a basic law of nature before being disproven the year before, leading to the 1957 Nobel Prize in Physics — was not as inviolable as the scientists thought it was, and did not apply to the behavior of some subatomic particles.

The experiment took about 10 days to complete, followed by a month of checks and rechecks. They submitted a letter on “Helicity of Neutrinos” to Physical Review on Dec. 11, 1957, and a week later, Goldhaber told a Stanford University audience that the neutrino is left-handed, meaning that the weak interaction was probably one force. This work proved crucial to our understanding of the weak interaction, the force that governs nuclear beta decay.

“It was a real upheaval in our understanding of physics,” says Grodzins’ onetime postdoc and longtime colleague Stephen Steadman. The breakthrough was commemorated in 2008, with a conference at BNL on “Neutrino Helicity at 50.” 

Steadman also recalls Grodzins’ story about one night at Brookhaven, where he was working on an experiment that involved a radioactive source inside a chamber. Lee noticed that a vacuum pump wasn’t working, so he tinkered with it a while before heading home. Later that night, he gets a call from the lab. “They said, ‘Don't go anywhere!’” recalls Steadman. It turns out the radiation source in the lab had exploded, and the pump filled the lab with radiation. “They were actually able to trace his radioactive footprints from the lab to his home,” says Steadman. “He kind of shrugged it off.”

The MIT years       

Grodzins joined the faculty of MIT in 1959, where he taught physics for four decades. He inherited Robley Evans’ Radiation Laboratory, which used radioactive sources to study properties of nuclei, and led the Relativistic Heavy Ion Group, which was affiliated with the LNS.

In 1972, he launched a program at BNL using the then-new Tandem Van de Graaff accelerator to study interactions of heavy ions with nuclei. “As the BNL tandem was getting commissioned, we started a program, together with Doug Cline at the University of Rochester, tandem to investigate Coulomb-nuclear interference,” says Steadman, a senior research scientist at LNS. “The experimental results were decisive but somewhat controversial at the time. We clearly detected the interference effect.” The experimental work was published in Physical Review Letters.

Grodzins’ team looked for super-heavy elements using the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Super-Hilac, investigated heavy-ion fission and other heavy-ion reactions, and explored heavy-ion transfer reactions. The latter research showed with precise detail the underlying statistical behavior of the transfer of nucleons between the heavy-ion projectile and target, using a theoretical statistical model of Surprisal Analysis developed by Rafi Levine and his graduate student. Recalls Steadman, “these results were both outstanding in their precision and initially controversial in interpretation.”

In 1985, he carried out the first computer axial tomographic experiment using synchrotron radiation, and in 1987, his group was involved in the first run of Experiment 802, a collaborative experiment with about 50 scientists from around the world that studied relativistic heavy ion collisions at Brookhaven. The MIT responsibility was to build the drift chambers and design the bending magnet for the experiment.

“He made significant contributions to the initial design and construction phases, where his broad expertise and knowledge of small area companies with unique capabilities was invaluable,” says George Stephens, physics senior lecturer and senior research scientist at MIT.

Professor emeritus of physics Rainer Weiss ’55, PhD ’62 recalls working on a Mossbauer experiment to establish if photons changed frequency as they traveled through bright regions. “It was an idea held by some to explain the ‘apparent’ red shift with distance in our universe,” says Weiss. “We became great friends in the process, and of course, amateur cosmologists.”

“Lee was great for developing good ideas,” Steadman says. “He would get started on one idea, but then get distracted with another great idea. So, it was essential that the team would carry these experiments to their conclusion: they would get the papers published.”

MIT mentor

Before retiring in 1999, Lee supervised 21 doctoral dissertations and was an early proponent of women graduate students in physics. He also oversaw the undergraduate thesis of Sidney Altman, who decades later won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. For many years, he helped teach the Junior Lab required of all undergraduate physics majors. He got his favorite student evaluation, however, for a different course, billed as offering a “superficial overview” of nuclear physics. The comment read: “This physics course was not superficial enough for me.”

“He really liked to work with students,” says Steadman. “They could always go into his office anytime. He was a very supportive mentor.”

“He was a wonderful mentor, avuncular and supportive of all of us,” agrees Karl van Bibber ’72, PhD ’76, now at the University of California at Berkeley. He recalls handing his first paper to Grodzins for comments. “I was sitting at my desk expecting a pat on the head. Quite to the contrary, he scowled, threw the manuscript on my desk and scolded, ‘Don't even pick up a pencil again until you've read a Hemingway novel!’ … The next version of the paper had an average sentence length of about six words; we submitted it, and it was immediately accepted by Physical Review Letters.”

Van Bibber has since taught the “Grodzins Method” in his graduate seminars on professional orientation for scientists and engineers, including passing around a few anthologies of Hemingway short stories. “I gave a copy of one of the dog-eared anthologies to Lee at his 90th birthday lecture, which elicited tears of laughter.”

Early in George Stephans’ MIT career as a research scientist, he worked with Grodzins’ newly formed Relativistic Heavy Ion Group. “Despite his wide range of interests, he paid close attention to what was going on and was always very supportive of us, especially the students. He was a very encouraging and helpful mentor to me, as well as being always pleasant and engaging to work with. He actively pushed to get me promoted to principal research scientist relatively early, in recognition of my contributions.”

“He always seemed to know a lot about everything, but never acted condescending,” says Stephans. “He seemed happiest when he was deeply engaged digging into the nitty-gritty details of whatever unique and unusual work one of these companies was doing for us.”

Al Lazzarini ’74, PhD ’78 recalls Grodzins’ investigations using proton-induced X-ray emission (PIXE) as a sensitive tool to measure trace elemental amounts. “Lee was a superb physicist,” says Lazzarini. “He gave an enthralling seminar on an investigation he had carried out on a lock of Napoleon’s hair, looking for evidence of arsenic poisoning.”

Robert Ledoux ’78, PhD ’81, a former professor of physics at MIT who is now program director of the U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency with the Department of Energy, worked with Grodzins as both a student and colleague. “He was a ‘nuclear physicist’s physicist’ — a superb experimentalist who truly loved building and performing experiments in many areas of nuclear physics. His passion for discovery was matched only by his generosity in sharing knowledge.”

The research funding crisis starting in 1969 led Grodzins to become concerned that his graduate students would not find careers in the field. He helped form the Economic Concerns Committee of the American Physical Society, for which he produced a major report on the “Manpower Crisis in Physics” (1971), and presented his results before the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and at the Karlsruhe National Lab in Germany.   

Grodzins played a significant role in bringing the first Chinese graduate students to MIT in the 1970s and 1980s.

One of the students he welcomed was Huan Huang PhD ’90. “I am forever grateful to him for changing my trajectory,” says Huang, now at the University of California at Los Angeles. “His unwavering support and ‘go do it’ attitude inspired us to explore physics at the beginning of a new research field of high energy heavy ion collisions in the 1980s. I have been trying to be a ‘nice professor’ like Lee all my academic career.”

Even after he left MIT, Grodzins remained available for his former students. “Many tell me how much my lifestyle has influenced them, which is gratifying,” Huang says. “They’ve been a central part of my life. My biography would be grossly incomplete without them.”

Niton Corp. and post-MIT work

Grodzins liked what he called “tabletop experiments,” like the one used in his 1957 neutrino experiment, which involved a few people building a device that could fit on a tabletop. “He didn’t enjoy working in large collaborations, which nuclear physics embraced.” says Steadman. “I think that’s why he ultimately left MIT.”

In the 1980s, he launched what amounted to a new career in detection technology. In 1987, after developing a scanning proton-induced X-ray microspectrometer for use measuring elemental concentrations in air, he founded the Niton Corp., which developed, manufactured, and marketed test kits and instruments to measure radon gas in buildings, lead-based paint detection, and other nondestructive testing applications. (“Niton” is an obsolete term for radon.)

“At the time, there was a big scare about radon in New England, and he thought he could develop a radon detector that was inexpensive and easy to use,” says Steadman. “His radon detector became a big business.”

He later developed devices to detect explosives, drugs, and other contraband in luggage and cargo containers. Handheld devices used X-ray fluorescence to determine the composition of metal alloys and to detect other materials. The handheld XL Spectrum Analyzer could detect buried and surface lead on painted surfaces, to protect children living in older homes. Three Niton X-ray fluorescence analyzers earned R&D 100 awards.

“Lee was very technically gifted,” says Steadman.

In 1999, Grodzins retired from MIT and devoted his energies to industry, including directing the R&D group at Niton.

His sister Ethel Grodzins Romm was the president and CEO of Niton, followed by his son Hal. Many of Niton’s employees were MIT graduates. In 2005, he and his family sold Niton to Thermo Fisher Scientific, where Lee remained as a principal scientist until 2010.

In the 1990s, he was vice president of American Science and Engineering, and between the ages of 70 and 90, he was awarded three patents a year. 

“Curiosity and creativity don’t stop after a certain age,” Grodzins said to UNH Today. “You decide you know certain things, and you don’t want to change that thinking. But thinking outside the box really means thinking outside your box.”

“I miss his enthusiasm,” says Steadman. “I saw him about a couple of years ago and he was still on the move, always ready to launch a new effort, and he was always trying to pull you into those efforts.”

A better world

In the 1950s, Grodzins and other Brookhaven scientists joined the American delegation at the Second United Nations International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy in Geneva.

Early on, he joined several Manhattan Project alums at MIT in their concern about the consequences of nuclear bombs. In Vietnam-era 1969, Grodzins co-founded the Union of Concerned Scientists, which calls for scientific research to be directed away from military technologies and toward solving pressing environmental and social problems. He served as its chair in 1970 and 1972. He also chaired committees for the American Physical Society and the National Research Council.

As vice president for advanced products at American Science and Engineering, which made homeland security equipment, he became a consultant on airport security, especially following the 9/11 attacks. As an expert witness, he testified at the celebrated trial to determine whether Pan Am was negligent for the bombing of Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and he took part in a weapons inspection trip on the Black Sea. He also was frequently called as an expert witness on patent cases.

In 1999, Grodzins founded the nonprofit Cornerstones in Science, a public library initiative to improve public engagement with science. Based originally at the Curtis Memorial Library in Brunswick, Maine, Cornerstones now partners with libraries in Maine, Arizona, Texas, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and California. Among their initiatives was one that has helped supply telescopes to libraries and astronomy clubs around the country.

“He had a strong sense of wanting to do good for mankind,” says Steadman.

Awards

Grodzins authored more than 170 technical papers and holds more than 60 U.S. patents. His numerous accolades included being named a Guggenheim Fellow in 1964 and 1971, and a senior von Humboldt fellow in 1980. He was a fellow of the American Physical Society and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and received an honorary doctor of science degree from Purdue University in 1998.

In 2021, the Denver X-Ray Conference gave Grodzins the Birks Award in X-Florescence Spectrometry, for having introduced “a handheld XRF unit which expanded analysis to in-field applications such as environmental studies, archeological exploration, mining, and more.”

Personal life

One evening in 1955, shortly after starting his work at Brookhaven, Grodzins decided to take a walk and explore the BNL campus. He found just one building that had lights on and was open, so he went in. Inside, a group was rehearsing a play. He was immediately smitten with one of the actors, Lulu Anderson, a young biologist. “I joined the acting company, and a year-and-a-half later, Lulu and I were married,” Grodzins had recalled. They were happily married for 62 years, until Lulu’s death in 2019.

They raised two sons, Dean, now of Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Hal Grodzins, who lives in Maitland, Florida. Lee and Lulu owned a succession of beloved huskies, most of them named after physicists.

After living in Arlington, Massachusetts, the Grodzins family moved to Lexington, Massachusetts, in 1972 and bought a second home a few years later in Brunswick, Maine. Starting around 1990, Lee and Lulu spent every weekend, year-round, in Brunswick. In both places, they were avid supporters of their local libraries, museums, theaters, symphonies, botanical gardens, public radio, and TV stations.

Grodzins took his family along to conferences, fellowships, and other invitations. They all lived in Denmark for two sabbaticals, in 1964-65 and 1971-72, while Lee worked at the Neils Bohr Institute. They also traveled together to China for a month in 1975, and for two months in 1980. As part of the latter trip, they were among the first American visitors to Tibet since the 1940s. Lee and Lulu also traveled the world, from Antarctica to the Galapagos Islands to Greece.

His homes had basement workshops well-stocked with tools. His sons enjoyed a playroom he built for them in their Arlington home. He also once constructed his own high-fidelity record player, patched his old Volvo with fiberglass, changed his own oil, and put on the winter tires and chains himself. He was an early adopter of the home computer.

“His work in science and technology was part of a general love of gadgets and of fixing and making things,” his son, Dean, wrote in a Facebook post.

Lee is survived by Dean, his wife, Nora Nykiel Grodzins, and their daughter, Lily; and by Hal and his wife Cathy Salmons. 

A remembrance and celebration for Lee Grodzins is planned for this summer. Donations in his name may be made to Cornerstones of Science.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

MIT Sea Grant students explore the intersection of technology and offshore aquaculture in Norway

AquaCulture Shock program, in collaboration with MIT-Scandinavia MISTI, offers international internships for AI and autonomy in aquaculture

Norway is the world’s largest producer of farmed Atlantic salmon and a top exporter of seafood, while the United States remains the largest importer of these products, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization. Two MIT students recently traveled to Trondheim, Norway to explore the cutting-edge technologies being developed and deployed in offshore aquaculture. Beckett Devoe, a senior in artificial intelligence and decision-making, and Tony Tang, a junior in mechanical engineering, first worked with MIT Sea Grant through the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP). They contributed to projects focusing on wave generator design and machine learning applications for analyzing oyster larvae health in hatcheries. While near-shore aquaculture is a well-established industry across Massachusetts and the United States, open-ocean farming is still a nascent field here, facing unique and complex challenges. To help better understand this emerging industry, MIT Sea Grant created a collaborative initiative, AquaCulture Shock, with funding from an Aquaculture Technologies and Education Travel Grant through the National Sea Grant College Program. Collaborating with the MIT-Scandinavia MISTI (MIT International Science and Technology Initiatives) program, MIT Sea Grant matched Devoe and Tang with aquaculture-related summer internships at SINTEF Ocean, one of the largest research institutes in Europe. “The opportunity to work on this hands-on aquaculture project, under a world-renowned research institution, in an area of the world known for its innovation in marine technology — this is what MISTI is all about,” says Madeline Smith, managing director for MIT-Scandinavia. “Not only are students gaining valuable experience in their fields of study, but they’re developing cultural understanding and skills that equip them to be future global leaders.” Both students worked within SINTEF Ocean’s Aquaculture Robotics and Autonomous Systems Laboratory (ACE-Robotic Lab), a facility designed to develop and test new aquaculture technologies. “Norway has this unique geography where it has all of these fjords,” says Sveinung Ohrem, research manager for the Aquaculture Robotics and Automation Group at SINTEF Ocean. “So you have a lot of sheltered waters, which makes it ideal to do sea-based aquaculture.” He estimates that there are about a thousand fish farms along Norway’s coast, and walks through some of the tools being used in the industry: decision-making systems to gather and visualize data for the farmers and operators; robots for inspection and cleaning; environmental sensors to measure oxygen, temperature, and currents; echosounders that send out acoustic signals to track where the fish are; and cameras to help estimate biomass and fine-tune feeding. “Feeding is a huge challenge,” he notes. “Feed is the largest cost, by far, so optimizing feeding leads to a very significant decrease in your cost.”During the internship, Devoe focused on a project that uses AI for fish feeding optimization. “I try to look at the different features of the farm — so maybe how big the fish are, or how cold the water is ... and use that to try to give the farmers an optimal feeding amount for the best outcomes, while also saving money on feed,” he explains. “It was good to learn some more machine learning techniques and just get better at that on a real-world project.” In the same lab, Tang worked on the simulation of an underwater vehicle-manipulator system to navigate farms and repair damage on cage nets with a robotic arm. Ohrem says there are thousands of aquaculture robots operating in Norway today. “The scale is huge,” he says. “You can’t have 8,000 people controlling 8,000 robots — that’s not economically or practically feasible. So the level of autonomy in all of these robots needs to be increased.”The collaboration between MIT and SINTEF Ocean began in 2023 when MIT Sea Grant hosted Eleni Kelasidi, a visiting research scientist from the ACE-Robotic Lab. Kelasidi collaborated with MIT Sea Grant director Michael Triantafyllou and professor of mechanical engineering Themistoklis Sapsis developing controllers, models, and underwater vehicles for aquaculture, while also investigating fish-machine interactions. “We have had a long and fruitful collaboration with the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) and SINTEF, which continues with important efforts such as the aquaculture project with Dr. Kelasidi,” Triantafyllou says. “Norway is at the forefront of offshore aquaculture and MIT Sea Grant is investing in this field, so we anticipate great results from the collaboration.”Kelasidi, who is now a professor at NTNU, also leads the Field Robotics Lab, focusing on developing resilient robotic systems to operate in very complex and harsh environments. “Aquaculture is one of the most challenging field domains we can demonstrate any autonomous solutions, because everything is moving,” she says. Kelasidi describes aquaculture as a deeply interdisciplinary field, requiring more students with backgrounds both in biology and technology. “We cannot develop technologies that are applied for industries where we don’t have biological components,” she explains, “and then apply them somewhere where we have a live fish or other live organisms.” Ohrem affirms that maintaining fish welfare is the primary driver for researchers and companies operating in aquaculture, especially as the industry continues to grow. “So the big question is,” he says, “how can you ensure that?” SINTEF Ocean has four research licenses for farming fish, which they operate through a collaboration with SalMar, the second-largest salmon farmer in the world. The students had the opportunity to visit one of the industrial-scale farms, Singsholmen, on the island of Hitra. The farm has 10 large, round net pens about 50 meters across that extend deep below the surface, each holding up to 200,000 salmon. “I got to physically touch the nets and see how the [robotic] arm might be able to fix the net,” says Tang. Kelasidi emphasizes that the information gained in the field cannot be learned from the office or lab. “That opens up and makes you realize, what is the scale of the challenges, or the scale of the facilities,” she says. She also highlights the importance of international and institutional collaboration to advance this field of research and develop more resilient robotic systems. “We need to try to target that problem, and let’s solve it together.”MIT Sea Grant and the MIT-Scandinavia MISTI program are currently recruiting a new cohort of four MIT students to intern in Norway this summer with institutes advancing offshore farming technologies, including NTNU’s Field Robotics Lab in Trondheim. Students interested in autonomy, deep learning, simulation modeling, underwater robotic systems, and other aquaculture-related areas are encouraged to reach out to Lily Keyes at MIT Sea Grant.

Celebrating the advancement of technology leadership through policy analysis and guidance

The MIT Technology and Policy Program marked 50 years with a symposium exploring its history of education, research, and impact — while looking ahead to technology policy issues of the future.

In 1965, after completing his PhD in civil engineering at MIT, Professor Richard de Neufville joined the first class of White House Fellows, one of the nation’s most prestigious programs for leadership and public service, through which he spent an intensive year working full-time at the highest levels of government. Soon after, de Neufville joined the MIT faculty and led a steering committee that developed what would become the MIT Technology and Policy Program (TPP). TPP was approved in 1975 and launched in 1976 as an Institute-wide hub of education and research, and included a two-year, research-based master’s degree, with de Neufville serving as its founding chair.This October, TPP held a symposium and celebration at MIT, marking TPP’s 50th year as an interdisciplinary effort focused on advancing the responsible leadership of technology through the integration of technical expertise and rigorous policy analysis in critical areas such as energy, the environment, security, innovation, and beyond.As the 1988 “TPP Fact Book” stated: “The Technology and Policy Program educates men and women for leadership on the important technological issues confronting society. We prepare our graduates to excel in their technical fields, and to develop and implement effective strategies for dealing with the risks and opportunities associated with those technologies. This kind of education is vital to the future of our society.”Now in its 50th year, TPP’s legacy of education, research, and impact has shaped more than 1,500 alumni who are among the most distinguished technology policy leaders across the world. TPP alumni often describe the program as life-changing and transformative — an educational experience that shaped their understanding of purpose, systems, and leadership in ways that continue to guide their careers throughout their lives. Today, over 50 TPP graduate students conduct research across the Institute on topics such as energy grid modeling, environmental protection, nuclear safety, industrial decarbonization, space system engineering and public policy, technoeconomic modeling of materials value chains, and governance of global digital systems and artificial intelligence.Working to bring technically-informed and scientifically robust insights to technology policy is as urgent today as it was 50 years ago, says Christine Ortiz, Morris Cohen Professor of Materials Science and Engineering and the current director of TPP. “The role of technology policy is more essential than ever, helping to shape national and international priorities and underpinning societal and planetary well-being,” said Ortiz in her opening remarks. “Today’s symposium is convened with urgency amid a rapidly shifting landscape. We are situated here today at the epicenter of profound technological advancement, reaffirming our collective responsibility to ensure that innovation advances the well-being of humanity and the health of our planet.”North stars and new routesThe TPP 50th Anniversary Symposium — North Stars and New Routes — held on Oct. 11, convened more than 630 participants from 30 countries, both in-person and virtually. The gathering brought together alumni, faculty, students, and global leaders to celebrate five decades of impact while exploring bold new directions for the future of technology and policy.Over the course of seven thematic sessions and 45 speakers, the symposium offered a sweeping view of the current issues shaping the next era of technology policy. Discussions spanned a wide range of topics, including energy systems modeling, global environmental governance, ecologically neutral manufacturing, design of global digital systems, trust as national security infrastructure, the future of technology policy as a domain of scholarship, and the role of technology policy in the future of the research university.The day opened with a dynamic panel examining the technical frontiers and possibilities of interactive energy systems modeling. Speakers highlighted the dual role of simulation tools as both advanced instruments for understanding decision outcomes and uncertainties, as well participatory platforms for engaging policymakers and stakeholders.The next session, focused on global environmental governance, explored new approaches to planetary cooperation and emphasized how data-driven policy, equitable technology transfer, and accountability mechanisms can strengthen international climate action. Panelists called for adaptive and integrated governance frameworks that mirror the interconnectedness and complexity of the environmental systems they aim to protect.In a session on ecologically neutral manufacturing, participants discussed advances in circular materials design and life-cycle modeling that reduce industrial emissions and resource intensity. Speakers underscored the importance of policies promoting reuse, recycling, and cleaner production — linking manufacturing innovation with both economic competitiveness and ecological resilience.Turning to the design and governance of global digital systems, keynote speaker David Clark, senior research scientist at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and a pioneering architect of the internet, examined how the architecture of digital networks both reflects and shapes societal values, power, and accountability. He noted that the internet’s original open design — built for innovation and resilience — now faces pressing challenges of trust, privacy, and control. The next generation of digital infrastructure, he argued, must embed trust and accountability into its very foundations. The subsequent panel expanded on these themes, exploring how global digital ecosystems are influenced by the competing incentives of governments, corporations, and users. Speakers called for governance models that integrate technical, economic, and ethical considerations — emphasizing that true accountability depends not only on external regulation, but on embedding human values directly into the design of technology.The theme of trust carried into the next discussion, with the focus on trust as infrastructure for security policy, where experts emphasized that national and global security must evolve to encompass cyber-trust, space governance, and technological resilience as essential infrastructures for stability in an era defined by AI and geopolitical complexity and uncertainty.In the final session, which explored the role of technology policy in the future of the research university, panelists discussed how research institutions can strengthen their societal role by embedding technology policy and interdisciplinary scholarship into the institutional structure. Speakers emphasized the need for universities to evolve into more cohesive, outward-looking engines of policy innovation — coordinating existing centers of excellence, improving communication between research and government, and expanding educational pathways that integrate engineering, social science, and civic engagement.Technology, policy, and powerIn a keynote address, Senator Edward J. Markey, U.S. senator for Massachusetts, delivered a compelling call for moral and democratic leadership in governing the technologies shaping modern life. He warned that the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence and digital systems has outpaced the ethical and policy frameworks needed to protect society, declaring that “the privacy protections of all preceding generations have broken down.” Markey called for a renewed commitment to AI civil rights and accountability in the digital age, urging that technology must be harnessed as “a tool for connection, not addiction,” and developed to advance human dignity, fairness, and shared prosperity.Framing technology as both a source of immense potential and a concentration of power, Markey argued that the defining question of our era is who controls that power, and to what end. He urged policymakers, researchers, and citizens alike to ensure that innovation strengthens democracy rather than undermines it. Closing on a note of determination and hope, Markey reminded the audience that technology policy is inseparable from human and planetary well-being: “Technology is power … the question is, who wields it and for what purpose. We must ensure it serves democracy, equality, and the future of our planet.”New Institute-wide policy initiative announcedThe symposium concluded with the announcement of an exciting new Institute-wide initiative, Policy@MIT, introduced by Maria Zuber, E.A. Griswold Professor of Geophysics and Presidential Advisor for Science and Technology Policy. Zuber described the effort as a bold and unifying step to synergize and amplify policy initiatives across MIT, strengthening the Institute’s capacity to inform evidence-based policymaking. Building upon the foundational work of TPP — within which the program will serve as a core pillar — Policy@MIT aims to connect MIT’s deep technical expertise with real-world policy challenges, foster collaboration across schools and disciplines, and train the next generation of leaders to ensure that science and technology continue to serve humanity and the planet.Extending MIT TPP’s legacy of technology and policy leadership As MIT charts the next half-century of leadership at the intersection of technology, policy, and society, TPP continues to serve as a cornerstone of this mission. Operating within the MIT Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS), the MIT School of Engineering, and the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing, TPP distinctively engages and integrates state-of-the-art modeling, simulation, and analytical methods in information and decision systems, statistics and data science, and the computational social sciences, with a diverse range of foundational, emerging, and cross-disciplinary policy analysis methods. Sitting at the confluence of engineering, computer science, and the social sciences, TPP equips students and researchers to study some of the most important and complex emerging issues related to technology through systems thinking, technical rigor, and policy analysis.Founding IDSS director Munther Dahleh, the William A. Coolidge Professor in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, described this integration as cultivating the “trilingual student” — someone fluent in data and information, social reasoning, and a technical domain. “What we’re trying to produce in the TPP program,” he explained, “is the person who can navigate all three dimensions of a problem.”Reflecting on TPP’s enduring mission, Ortiz concluded the symposium, “As we look ahead to the next 50 years, this is a pivotal moment for the Technology and Policy Program — both at MIT and globally. TPP holds tremendous potential for growth, translation, and impact as a leader in technology policy for the nation and the world.”

Stone tool discovery suggests very first humans were inventors

The find shows that the technology was passed down through thousands of generations.

Stone tool discovery suggests very first humans were inventors Pallab GhoshScience CorrespondentDavid BraunThey look like simple stones, but they were state of the art tools millions of years ago, made with great skill and precisonThe very first humans millions of years ago may have been inventors, according to a discovery in northwest Kenya.Researchers have found that the primitive humans who lived 2.75 million years ago at an archaeological site called Namorotukunan used stone tools continuously for 300,000 years.Evidence previously suggested that early human tool use was sporadic: randomly developed and quickly forgotten.The Namorotukunan find is the first to show that the technology was passed down through thousands of generations.According to Prof David Braun, of George Washington University, in Washington DC, who led the research, this find, published in the journal Nature Communications, provides incredibly strong evidence for a radical shake-up in our understanding of human evolution."We thought that tool use could have been a flash in the pan and then disappeared. When we see 300,000 years of the same thing, that's just not possible," he said."This is a long continuity of behaviour. That tool use in (humans and human ancestors) is probably much earlier and more continuous than we thought it was."David BraunThe stone tools were so sharp that the researchers could cut their fingers on some of themArchaeologists spent ten years at Namorotukunan uncovering 1,300 sharp flakes, hammerstones, and stone cores, each made by carefully striking rocks gathered from riverbeds. These are made using a technology known as Oldowan and is the first widespread stone tool-making method.The same kinds of tools appear in three distinct layers. The deeper the layer the further back the snapshot in time. Many of the stones were specially chosen for their quality, suggesting that the makers were skilled and knew exactly what they were looking for, according to the senior geoscientist on the research team, Dr Dan Palcu Rolier of the University of São Paulo in Brazil."What we see here in the site is an incredible level of sophistication," he told BBC News."These guys were extremely astute geologists. They knew how to find the best raw materials and these stone tools are exceptional. Basically, we can cut our fingers with some of them."Geological evidence suggests that tool use probably helped these people survive dramatic changes in climate. The landscape shifted from lush wetlands to dry, fire-swept grasslands and semideserts," said Rahab N. Kinyanjui, senior scientist at the National Museums of Kenya.These sharp environmental changes would normally force animal populations to adapt through evolution or move away. But the toolmakers in the region managed to thrive by using technology rather than biological adaptation, according to Dr Palcu Rolier."Technology enabled these early inhabitants of East Turkana to survive in a rapidly changing landscape - not by adapting themselves, but adapting their ways of finding food."The evidence of stone tools at different layers shows that for a long and continuous period, these primitive people flew in the face of biological evolution, finding a way of controlling the world around them, rather than letting the world control them.And this happened at the very beginning of the emergence of humanity, according to Dr Palcu Rolier."Tool use meant that they did not have to evolve by modifying their bodies to adapt to these changes. Instead, they developed the technology they needed to get access to the food: tools for ripping open animal carcasses and digging up plants."David BraunThe Namorotukunan site, located in Kenya's Turkana Basin, lies close to the ancient course of a long dried up major river which once attracted settlements of early humans and their ancestorsThere is evidence for this at the site: of animal bones being broken, being cut with these stone tools, which means that through these changes, they were consistently able to use meat as a way of sustenance."The technology gives these early inhabitants an advantage, says Dr Palcu Rolier."They are able to access different types of foods as environments change, their source of sustenance is changing, but because they have this technology, they can bypass these challenges and access new food."David BraunArchaeologists excavate a 2.58 million year old site in northern Kenya at the site of NamorotukunanAt around 2.75 million years ago, the region was populated by some of the very first humans, who had relatively small brains. These early humans are thought to have lived alongside their evolutionary ancestors: a pre-human group, called australopithecines, who had larger teeth and a mix of chimpanzee and human traits.The tool users at Namorotukunan were most likely one of these groups or possibly both.And the finding challenges the notion held by many experts in human evolution that continuous tool use emerged much later, between 2.4 and 2.2 million years ago, when humans had evolved relatively larger brains, according to Prof Braun."The argument is that we're looking at a pretty substantial brain size increase. And so, often the assertion has been that tool use allowed them to feed this large brain."But what we're seeing at Namorotukunan is that these really early tools are used before that brain size increase.""We have probably vastly underestimated these early humans and human ancestors. We can actually trace the roots of our ability to adapt to change by using technology much earlier than we thought, all the way to 2.75 million years ago, and probably much earlier."

Rewriting the Story of Human Migration: Scientists Uncover Lost Land Bridge to Europe

An “emotional and inspiring” archaeological find of Paleolithic tools has revealed a long-lost prehistoric passage that may have enabled movement between Ayvalık and Europe. Continuous stretches of land, now lying beneath the sea, may once have allowed early humans to move between what is now Türkiye and Europe, according to groundbreaking research in a region [...]

A Paleolithic handaxe with a broken distal end, discovered during the Ayvalık survey. Credit: Kadriye, Göknur, and HandeAn “emotional and inspiring” archaeological find of Paleolithic tools has revealed a long-lost prehistoric passage that may have enabled movement between Ayvalık and Europe. Continuous stretches of land, now lying beneath the sea, may once have allowed early humans to move between what is now Türkiye and Europe, according to groundbreaking research in a region that has remained largely unexamined. The findings, published on 19 September 2025 in the peer-reviewed Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, document the first evidence of a Paleolithic presence in Ayvalık. More significantly, they may reshape our understanding of how humans entered Europe. For decades, the prevailing view has been that Homo sapiens reached the continent mainly through the Balkans and the Levant, traveling from Africa into the Middle East. Yet, the recent discovery of 138 stone tools across 10 sites spanning 200 km² suggests a different possibility: long before Ayvalık became known for its olive groves and coastal landscapes, its northeastern Aegean shoreline may have provided an alternative pathway for humans adapting to a shifting prehistoric world. “Our archaeological discovery has unveiled that this now-idyllic region once potentially offered a vital land bridge for human movement during the Pleistocene era—when sea levels dropped and the now-submerged landscape was briefly exposed,” explains Dr Göknur Karahan, from the Department of Archaeology-Prehistory, at Hacettepe University, in Turkey, who was part of a fully female team of expert archaeologists from the country. General view of the Ayvalık region, where the Paleolithic survey was conducted. Credit: Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande“We are very excited and delighted with this discovery. These findings mark Ayvalık as a potential new frontier in the story of human evolution, placing it firmly on the map of human prehistory – opening up a new possibility for how early humans may have entered Europe.   “It feels like we are adding an entirely new page to the story of human dispersal. Our research raises exciting possibilities for future exploration, and we hope it emerges as a body of work that will shift the approach of Pleistocene archaeology for decades to come.”  How were these findings possible?  During the Ice Age, sea levels were more than 100 meters lower than today, revealing broad stretches of land that are now submerged. In that period, the islands and peninsulas of modern Ayvalık were connected as part of a single landmass, creating a natural corridor between Anatolia and Europe. The newly uncovered tools lie along the present coastline, offering direct evidence of people inhabiting and traveling across these landscapes that later disappeared beneath the sea. During the field survey in Ayvalık. from left to right, Göknur, Kadriye, and Hande. Credit: Göknur, Kadriye, and HandeUntil now, factors such as environmental changes and the depth at which remains are buried have made it difficult to identify and preserve archaeological evidence in the Ayvalık region. “In all these periods, the present-day islands and peninsulas of Ayvalık would have formed interior zones within an expansive terrestrial environment,” explains co-author Professor Kadriye Özçelik, from Ankara University.  “These paleogeographic reconstructions underscore the importance of the region for understanding hominin dispersals across the northeastern Aegean during the Pleistocene.”  What was found?   The region’s shifting geology and active coastlines in the North Aegean made preservation difficult and the number of items uncovered “limited.” However, this research team managed to uncover Levallois technologies from various Paleolithic periods, as well as handaxes and cleavers.     Among the most significant finds include Levallois-style flake tools, sophisticated implements linked to the Middle Paleolithic Mousterian tradition – these are often associated with Neanderthals and early Homosapiens.    “These large cutting tools are among the most iconic artifacts of the Paleolithic and are instantly recognizable even today, so are a very important find,” explains Dr Karahan.    “The presence of these objects in Ayvalık is particularly significant, as they provide direct evidence that the region was part of wider technological traditions shared across Africa, Asia, and Europe.” Field survey in Ayvalık from left to right, Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande. Credit: Kadriye, Göknur, and Hande Describing the initial discovery of the 131 items, Dr Karahan adds: “It was a truly unforgettable moment for us. Holding the first tools in our hands was both emotional and inspiring.  “And each find from there on was a moment of excitement for the whole team.   “Holding these objects —after walking across landscapes where no one had ever documented Paleolithic remains before— was unforgettable.”  What does this discovery tell us about early humans? The experts’ key argument hinges on the potential of Ayvalık as a dynamic site for interaction and exchange, facilitating early human movement between the Anatolia peninsula and Europe.   Exploring how Anatolia, with a specific focus on Ayvalık, and Europe were linked during glacial sea-level low stands offers alternative pathways for how early humans moved around the region beyond dominantly emphasised northern mainland-centered routes.  Addressing a gap in the scholarship, the authors’ work provides a new foundation for examining resources and migration routes in which Ayvalık may have featured as part of a mobility corridor.  The survey’s yield of tools demonstrates a “consistent use of Levallois technology and flake production… and a diversified toolkit,” whilst all artefacts together offer what the team state are “valuable insights into early human presence, raw material preferences, and technological variability.” “The findings paint a vivid picture of early human adaptation, innovation, and mobility along the Aegean,” Dr Karahan explains.  “The results confirmed that Ayvalık – which had never before been studied for its Paleolithic potential – holds vital traces of early human activity.”  Incredible recoveries, hundreds of thousands of years later  As this was a survey (carried out across a two-week period in June 2022) rather than an excavation, the team could not be certain of what they would find when they set off. They knew from the region’s geology and paleogeography that there was potential. They explored – often muddy, (particularly in lowland basins and coastal plains) – sites by foot.  What followed was a “discovery of such a diverse and well-preserved set of artifacts, which exceeded our expectations,” Dr Karahan says.   Although these recovery efforts were not without challenges, the authors explore what both the challenges and findings reveal in the paper.   They state: “The widespread, muddy cover was considered a limiting factor for the preservation and detectability of Paleolithic materials.   “However, despite these constraints, high-quality raw material sources, such as flint and chalcedony, were identified in multiple locations, including areas affected by alluvial deposition.” Future potential   Fellow author Dr Hande Bulut, from Düzce University, adds: “Ultimately, the results underline Ayvalık’s potential as a long-term hominin habitat and a key area for understanding Paleolithic technological features in the eastern Aegean.  “While preliminary, the current findings underscore the region’s potential to contribute to broader debates on Aegean connectivity and technological evolution during the Pleistocene.  “Excitingly, the region between the North Aegean and the Anatolian mainland, may still hold valuable clues to early occupation despite the challenges posed by active geomorphological processes.”  The team recommends future research uses a multidisciplinary approach to outline absolute dating, stratigraphic excavation, and paleoenvironmental reconstruction, which they describe as “essential to clarify the temporal depth and functional character of the Ayvalık assemblage.” Reference: “Discovering the Paleolithic Ayvalık: A Strategic Crossroads in Early Human Dispersals Between Anatolia and Europe” by Hande Bulut, Göknur Karahan and Kadriye Özçelik, 17 September 2025, Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology.DOI: 10.1080/15564894.2025.2542777 Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.Follow us on Google, Discover, and News.

EPA grants air permit, clears way for new deep-water oil port off Southeast Texas coast

The Texas GulfLink would be about 30 miles off the coast of Freeport. It's touted for first-of-its-kind technology to reduce emissions. Environmentalists and Brazoria County residents still have concerns.

This August 2014 shows the Gulf shoreline in Texas’ Bolivar Peninsula.The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued an air-quality permit for a proposed deep-water crude oil port about 30 miles off the shore of Freeport, a Gulf Coast town south of Houston. Its supporters say it takes an extra step toward reducing emissions, while environmental advocacy groups and some nearby residents worry it will still exacerbate pollution. The Texas GulfLink deep-water port would implement a "first-of-its-kind use of vapor capture and control technology mounted on an offshore support vessel," according to a news release issued Monday by the EPA. The agency notes that such technology has been used on shuttle tankers for decades with 96% emission-control efficiency. "Sentinel Midstream is proud to unveil a groundbreaking vapor control application that will revolutionize the loading of Very Large Crude Carriers in the Gulf of America," said Jeff Ballard, the CEO of Sentinel Midstream, of which Texas GulfLink is a subsidiary, in the EPA news release. "Developed by our Texas GulfLink team in close collaboration with the EPA, this innovative approach significantly reduces volatile organic compounds, setting a new industry standard for environmental performance and advances the implementation of Best Available Control Technology." Air pollutants that are emitted during the process of obtaining crude oil "will be captured at the tanker and routed via flexible hose to a control system located on an adjacent, dynamically positioned offshore support vessel," according to Brad Toups, an EPA official who wrote the permit and presented it during a public hearing in June. Those emissions, referred to as volatile organic compounds, are either stored and sold, or they're used as fuel. Sentinel Midstream did not immediately respond a request for comment Tuesday. The permit, under the Clean Air Act, is one piece of the puzzle toward the rig's development. The other is approval from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration, or MARAD. In February, MARAD issued a Record of Decision, indicating its approval of the project. RELATED: EPA approves long-awaited plan to clean up San Jacinto River waste pits near Houston Though the project takes steps toward reducing emissions, clean energy advocacy groups have expressed criticisms of the Texas GulfLink deep-water port. "Approving yet another massive offshore oil terminal like this will only worsen a global climate crisis that is already slamming Texans with flooding, heat waves, and drought," Jen Duggan, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, told Houston Public Media. "This terminal is expected to release more than 21,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year, as much as much as 4,321 cars and trucks driven for a year. It is good that the Trump Administration says the terminal will be using some pollution controls. But we should remember that ‘unleashing' more dirty fossil fuels like this also means more air and water pollution released upstream during the fracking, drilling, and processing of the oil before it even arrives at the oil export terminal. And then more pollution again when it is burned — all to the detriment of the climate and local communities." During a public EPA hearing in June, members of the Brazoria County community also shared concerns about the initiative. "This project doesn't benefit people in Brazoria County, it only benefits rich executives who continue to squeeze profits at the expense of communities like Freeport," said Riley Bennington, a Brazoria County resident, according to an EPA transcript of the hearing. "As a kid growing up in Texas, I really thought we'd be past this by now. We've had renewable energy figured out. Why is this even being considered?" Though most of the testimony during the June 25 public hearing opposed Texas GulfLink, the initiative wasn't completely without praise. Amy Dinn, an attorney from Lone Star Legal Aid representing Better Brazoria, said GulfLink's permits are "much better and more protective of the environment" than other such projects, though she still expressed concerns that not enough research was done on the ozone emissions and impacts of severe weather.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.