Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Science The 2000 Beanies

Scientists Inducted Into Chemistry "Hall of Fame" 35

First time accepted submitter ACXNew writes "The scientists behind three inventions that touch the lives of millions of people around the world will be inducted into a coveted scientific 'Hall of Fame' as the latest Heroes of Chemistry named by the American Chemical Society (ACS), the world's largest scientific society. Established in 1996, the ACS Heroes of Chemistry program recognizes scientists whose work in various fields of chemistry and chemical engineering has led to the successful innovation and development of commercial products that benefit humankind."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Scientists Inducted Into Chemistry "Hall of Fame"

Comments Filter:
  • by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Sunday August 19, 2012 @03:17PM (#41047691)
    You'd think the summary could at least list the 3 inventions that the scientists are being honored for: The first is an oral Hepatitis C drug, the second is a leukemia drug, and the third is for developing atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition technology, which can be used, among other things, for coating glass with certain chemicals to help change solar heating properties in windows, etc.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      It's interesting that only one of these is really "chemical." Old school chemistry is dead.

      • by jo_ham ( 604554 )

        It's interesting that only one of these is really "chemical." Old school chemistry is dead.

        Everything is a chemical.

        Anyone who makes anything, or studies something that is made of "stuff" is really just an applied chemist.

        (and yes, yes, us chemists are just applied physicists...) ;)

        • by c0lo ( 1497653 )

          It's interesting that only one of these is really "chemical." Old school chemistry is dead.

          Everything is a chemical.

          It's a bit funny to pretend a neutron start is "chemical", don't you think? (go no further than the Sun for a counter-example).

          Anyone who makes anything, or studies something that is made of "stuff" is really just an applied chemist.

          Well, can you write the chemical reaction between oxygen and the Higgs boson? (you know? The later is still "stuff").

          (and yes, yes, us chemists are just applied physicists...) ;)

          Oblig xkcd []

          • I'd recommend investing in "The Dragon's Egg" by Robert Forward.

            Safe to say it can withstand scratching by the hardest of hard-SF. And it's a damned good story too.

            As for a reaction between a Higg's boson and an oxygen atom ... I don't see that as a problem. No more a problem than (say) the reaction between a free electron and a metal plate. There will be a lot of "stuff" floating around in either reaction which doesn't actually play a meaningful role in the interaction , and conventionally one doesn't by

      • Drug synthesis isn't "chemistry?" Wow, the meth cookers will be queueing up to get you to testify at their trials.

        Interactions between a gas and a surface are not chemistry?

        Go on, enlighten us with your definition of what "old school chemistry" is. I'll get some Marmite toasties and a cuppa. (I can't stand popcorn.)
        (Oh, for the record ; IANA-Chemist ; but my day job involves understanding and advising on tonnes of chemistry being mixed by machines supervised by people who don't call themselves chemists ei

    • Or even the names of the three scientists being inducted into the "Hall of Fame"?
  • Laugh (Score:2, Funny)

    by koan ( 80826 )

    Is one of them the inventor of LSD?

    • No, but at least one of his colleagues, who is a Nobel Prize winning scientist and inventor of PCR DNA testing, swears by it []!
    • Re:Laugh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by vlm ( 69642 ) on Sunday August 19, 2012 @04:08PM (#41047987)

      Is one of them the inventor of LSD?

      Nominations are only accepted by corporations. Sounds weird but true. The ACS then guilt trips the nominating corp into paying all expenses for the "winner" to visit the conference. Its a weird intersection of the old "whos who" scam and "best employer award" scam and a way for a (very good) manager to get budget approved for conferences "Well see here boss, one of my guys just won an award, what do you mean we don't have budget for travel expenses, maybe since we're famous award winners now we could get the money from PRs budget?" Note these chemists (AFAIK) are cool and they do cool work and are totally above board, its just the "award" thats semi-shady.

      How that intersects with your concern is I have absolutely no idea in 2012 what corporation makes money off acid who has a acid related chemist on staff. A psych hospital might make money off it, but who's on staff that directly contributes to the chemistry? Maybe a CSI forensic chemist with a new detection scheme?

      This is why you will only see "Big Pharma" nominees, and not see, for example, a high school chemistry teacher or educator in general.

  • by theshowmecanuck ( 703852 ) on Sunday August 19, 2012 @03:58PM (#41047919) Journal
    Kieth Richards!
  • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Sunday August 19, 2012 @04:05PM (#41047967)

    These guys certainly did interesting research... but it's doubtful many people actually care who they are. Plus - "Heroes of Chemistry", really? Who came up with THAT?

    This whole thing smacks of a PR move by someone (or a group of "someone"s) who's irked at all the physics and NASA press of the last several years. "These guys are getting all the headlines! We need to find a way to get chemistry a piece of that pie!" But the problem is, no matter how important chemistry is - it's pretty boring stuff to non-chemists. This group has even admitted as much by picking winners doing research that most people wouldn't identify as chemistry at all.

    • by vlm ( 69642 )

      research that most people wouldn't identify as chemistry at all.

      Can't do any of those projects without a pretty good research chemist on staff.

      This brings up an interesting question of are there any current "big science" chemistry projects?

      In the past, sure. For all you pyros out there, there's "Ignition! an informal history of rocket propellant chemistry" was pretty hard core "big science" chemistry work. And "excuse me sir would you like to buy a kilo of isopropyl bromide" which is a biography of a guy who probably contributed to more EPA superfund sites than any ot

    • by jo_ham ( 604554 )

      It makes up for the fact that the Nobel Prize for Chemistry keeps being handed out to non-chemists I suppose.

      We were all shocked that the recent one was given to Suzuki for his eponymous palladium coupling reactions since it was actually awarded to a chemist for once.

      I know it's because there is no Nobel for biology etc, but you think they'd correct that rather than shoehorn everything into the one prize at the expense of chemists all over the place.

      Although, I'm unlikely to ever have to worry about being d

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 19, 2012 @04:07PM (#41047979)

    He could get elected to both the Chemistry and Baseball HoF's.

  • Inducted (Score:4, Funny)

    by rossdee ( 243626 ) on Sunday August 19, 2012 @06:33PM (#41048987)

    I thought Induction was an electromagnetism thing (ie physics) rather than a chemistry thing

  • My university and it's popular chemistry Youtube channel (winner of a webby, no less) is doing a "one day, one video per hour" celebration of one of the early pioneers of chemistry, Jons Jacob Berzellius - it's his birthday tomorrow.

    If you're interested in the elements, molecules and chemistry in general you should have a look at the channel - it has a video for every element on the table, along with many videos on chemistry itself including topical subjects that show up in the news. Come for the chemistry,

1 Angstrom: measure of computer anxiety = 1000 nail-bytes