New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Soap Opera

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

One of the fascinations of blowing soap bubbles is the beautiful swirls of iridescent color that flow across their surface when the bubbles catch the light. But physicists have another reason for playing with soap films. These mystical whorls may provide the key to understanding important phenomena from the Great Red Spot on Jupiter to the intricacies of deep ocean currents.

WET SANDWICH. A soap film consists of a layer of water trapped between two layers of soap molecules. The water accounts for 98 percent of its volume.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The image shown above was made by Michael Rivera of the University of Pittsburgh along with Peter Vorobieff and Robert E. Ecke of the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory when they conducted the first quantitative measurements of the properties through an entire soap film; previous measurements were made on a point-by-point basis. The team reported its results in the August 17, 1998 issue of Physical Review Letters.

CURRENTS. Computer image shows swirling motion in a soap film; red indicates counterclockwise motion; blue, clockwise.

Lately, physicists have become interested in soap films because they provide a unique window into turbulence in two dimensions. The films consist of a thin slab of water sandwiched between two layers of soap molecules. The films range from a few microns (millionths of a meter) to several tens of microns in thickness. Yet they can have a surface area that is, by comparison, immense--several meters. So the fluid trapped between the layers is constrained to movement in two spatial dimensions.

To study these flow patterns, the Los Alamos researchers added highly reflective titanium dioxide particles to the fluid, and snapped pictures with a digital camera. The technique allowed them to obtain detailed images of thousands of points of the fluid every 160 to 300 microseconds. By tilting the film so it slid through a comb-like structure, they created turbulence and were able to measure the formation of swirling vortexes. The results indicated that the flow of energy was from larger to smaller eddies, where it gradually dissipated downstream.

There may be more truth than we thought to the old saw, "the world in a soap bubble."


Images: LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe