Nobel Prize in Chemistry Awarded To Scientists for Creating a Tool To Build Molecules (nytimes.com) 22
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded on Wednesday to Benjamin List and David W.C. MacMillan for their development of a new tool to build molecules, work that has spurred advances in pharmaceutical research and lessened the impact of chemistry on the environment. From a report: Their work, while unseen by consumers, is an essential part in many leading industries and is crucial for research. Chemists are among those tasked with constructing molecules that can form elastic and durable materials, store energy in batteries or inhibit the progression of diseases.
But that work requires catalysts, which are substances that control and accelerate chemical reactions without becoming part of the final product. "For example, catalysts in cars transform toxic substances in exhaust fumes to harmless molecules," the Nobel committee said in a statement. "Our bodies also contain thousands of catalysts in the form of enzymes, which chisel out the molecules necessary for life." The problem was that there were just two types of catalysts available: metals and enzymes.
In 2000, Dr. List and Dr. MacMillan -- working independently of each other -- developed a new type of catalysis that reduced waste and allowed for novel ways to construct molecules. It is called asymmetric organocatalysis and builds upon small organic molecules. "This concept for catalysis is as simple as it is ingenious, and the fact is that many people have wondered why we didn't think of it earlier," said Johan Aqvist, chairman of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry. Virtually everyone on the planet has come across a product that has benefited from a chemist's expertise. The process of using catalysts to break down molecules or join them together is essential in industry and research.
In 2000, Dr. List and Dr. MacMillan -- working independently of each other -- developed a new type of catalysis that reduced waste and allowed for novel ways to construct molecules. It is called asymmetric organocatalysis and builds upon small organic molecules. "This concept for catalysis is as simple as it is ingenious, and the fact is that many people have wondered why we didn't think of it earlier," said Johan Aqvist, chairman of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry. Virtually everyone on the planet has come across a product that has benefited from a chemist's expertise. The process of using catalysts to break down molecules or join them together is essential in industry and research.
And? (Score:2)
Congrats to those chemists! I hope that they enjoy the honor and prize money.
I don't put much faith in the awards themselves though. They gave a Nobel prize to the creators of the lobotomy.
They gave peace prizes to President Obama and Henry Kissinger.
Not to mention all is the economic prizes which aren't even technically Nobel prizes.
Re: (Score:3)
The shine is starting to come off the Nobel Prize, no doubt.
But at least for now, it still carries some prestige, so congrats to the chemists, who, for now, I'll assume deserve it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The Nobel Committee tends to give the peace prize out not to the most peaceful people but in the hope that the prize itself brings about world peace. It's not necessarily driven by politics, but it does have an agenda that contradicts the most literal interpretation of the words Peace Prize.
The impractical alternative would be to give everyone except the politicians prizes. Those of us that do our jobs, raise our families, and love our neighbors.
Re: (Score:2)
The science prizes (physics, chemistry, medicine) are generally well deserved. There have been a few mistakes, like the one for lobotomy, but it was in 1949, different times, no neuroleptics back then.
I don't put the peace prize in the same category, it is mostly politics, I don't know about literature, but I suspect it is highly subjective and therefore controversial, as for the one for economy, as you said, it isn't even a Nobel prize.
molecular assembler... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Nature beat us to this by several billion years. See "ribosome".
Re: (Score:3)
Nature also beat us to stable and useful nuclear fusion... but that doesn't mean it won't be impressive as hell when we figure it out and solve our energy needs.
Next Year's Prize (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Worthy. (Score:3)
This is very much research that needed to be done and their work will greatly advance how we make very specific molecules. I cannot understate the importance of their work. These scientists are truly worthy of this award.
Nobel committee says (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If not, it's useless. The Species needs to get off this rock so we can get away from COVID and mine asteroids like the cool species we really are.
I have mod points, but can't see any tag for "Stupid".
Re: (Score:1)
You also don't have a "Space Nutter" tag, but that's what I was parodying. There are people who really do think that way.
Also the same people who thought by now we'd all live in 3D printed houses living in a VR headset universe.
White guys (Score:2)
More white guys. Just more evidence of the patriarchy and systemic racism.
Molecule building tool (Score:2)
Excuse me while I run off and dial in the instructions for octanitrocubane.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not very ambitious. Why not hang a few amine groups off the vertices?
2002 Easy On This Trend (Score:1)