Nano prizes

Lost amongst the hoopla of the Nobel Prize announcements last week, were the Feynman prizes for nanotechnology – awarded by the Foresight Nanotech Institute.

The experimental prize went to Sir Fraser Stoddart and, in an academic father-son type of thing, the theory prize went to David Leigh from the University of Edinburgh, who got his PhD in Stoddart’s group back in the Sheffield days in the 80s. Communication and student prizes were also awarded – details can be found here.

Another nano-related prize has also been recently announced:

The International Society for Nanoscale Science, Computation, and Engineering (ISNSCE) is soliciting nominations for its annual Nanoscience Prize. The Nanoscience prize is given every year to recognize and encourage outstanding research in all areas of nanoscience. Go to www.isnsce.org and click on News for more information.

Not quite as financially rewarding as the new Kavli nanoscience prize, but yet more recognition for good nano-related research can’t be a bag thing.

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Reactions – Jeroen Cornelissen

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

At first I was interested in process engineering, more in particular in ways how to increase efficiency, to make industrial processes cleaner and decrease pollution. After a while I got fascinated by all the chemistry behind this and decided to continue in that direction. During my major with Roeland Nolte, I ‘sold my soul’ when I for the first time felt the enormous excitement upon designing and synthesizing a new compound to find it had unique — and unexpected — properties.

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

Probably a musician. Besides science, and my family now, music has always been a big passion for me. It is also a profession that needs the right combination of skills and creativity in order to be successful.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

I think there are several themes of global concern to which chemists can contribute. Sustainability, of course, is very topical. New resources and catalytic processes are typical areas heavily connected to chemistry. But also the molecular understanding of processes in biology, more and more require the cross-disciplinary involvement of chemists. For example, the question ‘How does the brain work?’, without doubt needs the input of chemists to get closer to an answer.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

Leonardo da Vinci, likely the first multi-disciplinary scientist and artist. If someone who was born over 550 years ago still manages to inspire so many people, they must be truly an exceptional person.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

Occasionally, I help out others with certain measurements. The last time I really have set up and performed an experiment, it was the purification of some virus capsid protein materials about 18 months ago.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

That is a difficult question, I can not recall ever having read the same book twice. So it will have to be a book I have not read yet and there are so many… At this moment Muse – Absolution, is in my CD player, so I might take that one, but if I am in a different mood later it could also be Mozart or Metallica. Anyway, I am not the most patient person, I am a pretty good swimmer and one of my advisors once told me that you have to be willing to go for the impossible…

Jeroen Cornelissen is in the Institute for Molecules and Materials at the Radboud University Nijmegen in The Netherlands and works on hybrid materials of biopolymers and synthetic macromolecules, and on virus capsids as new reactors.

Did you hear the one about nanotechnology and football…

Mentions of nanotechnology in the popular press always interest me, but I wasn’t expecting this one: what do the England football team and nanotechnology have in common?

Well, the answer (which, to be fair, is quite contrived) can be found on page 94 of the Times today, in a story written by Martin Samuel.

The story opens with a simple statement:

There are many things that can be done with a spare 201 minutes.

Then follows a list of suggestions, some of them quite appealing (to me at least), such as watching Peter Jackson’s ‘The Return of the King’, and some of them not so, such as travelling from Plymouth station to Birmingham New Street – presumably by train, but that is left for the reader to assume.

My favourite however, is this suggestion:

The more scientifically minded may wish to attend a seminar entitled Computational Nanotechnology: Multiscale Modeling of Nanomaterials, by Kyeongjae Cho, of Stanford University, lasting 3hr 21min precisely.

So, what does this have to do with the England football team? Well, 201 minutes is, for all you Americans out there who love these sports statistics, the average length of time between goals scored by Michael Owen for England, when partnered with Wayne Rooney. Who knew!?

Contrived, yes, but where else will you find a story about Owen and Rooney that uses that kind of analogy – priceless!

Stuart

Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

Eyes on the prize

Well, I guess you’ve all heard the news by now that Gerhard Ertl has won the Nobel Prize in chemistry this year. This is, in my opinion, a thoroughly deserved award, which recognizes Ertl’s achievements in surface chemistry. He is one of the fathers of the area, famous for his seminal work on hydrogen adsorption to metal surfaces, the mechanism of the Haber-Bosch process and the oxidation of carbon monoxide on platinum. The Nobel Prize website has an excellent summary of his work here.

So did any of you predict the result? Top marks must surely go to Paul at ChemBark, who did indeed include Ertl on his shortlist of possible winners. I imagine all eyes will be on ChemBark next year for more top tips.

Of course, no Nobel prize can go by without some controversy, and some people are questioning why Gabor Somorjai (who was jointly awarded the Wolf Prize for chemistry with Ertl in 1998) wasn’t also honoured. But then again, the Nobel judges always seem to come in for criticism – I remember in previous years they were knocked for including too many winners…

I’ll be curious to see how much coverage the chemistry prize gets in the national press. The prize for medicine certainly attracted a lot of attention in the UK (but of course, one of the prizewinners was a Brit). The physics prize seems to have had less coverage, despite being branded as “The Physics of the iPod”. This year’s chemistry prize has perhaps the most obvious real-world relevance of recent Nobel awards for the subject – but will that be enough to inspire the press?

Andy

Andrew Mitchinson (Associate Editor, Nature)

Materials Girl: Moving up

Posted on behalf of Materials Girl


This is the final part of a three-post series

Being a chemist is not the only thing that evokes an “Oh!” or “Wow…” response – so does being an upperclassman still living in the dorms. We are swamped with freshmen and sophomores, and it has become an internal game for me to single out the new students. They tend to be more talkative and wide-eyed, not to mention garbed in trendy, clique-d, or “fashionable” attire from high school. Perhaps it is imagination, but they also seem to have an aura of being lost.

Still, it is not my place to consider myself much better those younger students, even if I never had problems with drastic change and separation anxiety. In a fleeting two years, my graduating class has progressed from being in their place, and in another two some of us will be there again. Like the current undergrad "noobs"*, I will have to find my place in a new, graduate circle and attempt to find out what to do with myself in the academic world. Ultimately, we all leave the stressful, but relatively safe, bubble of academia and plunge headlong into a new career.

How did you start, through what have you progressed, and to where are you heading?

*Internet lingo for a newcomer. From “newbie” to “newb” to “noob”. 🙂

Reactions – Steve Marsden

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

From the first moment I studied chemistry at school, I was hooked. I think it was the order and logic of the subject that appealed to me – the way that even at an early level you could take a few simple “knowns” or principles and extrapolate them to new reactions or phenomena. I certainly had no grand plan at that age to make a career from it – there are no scientists in the family – I just kept enjoying studying the subject from one level to the next. I feel fortunate to have a career doing something I enjoy and feel passionate about.

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

Any arena where you get paid to indulge your hobby or interest qualifies as a dream job. As a boy, it would have been right wing for Manchester United, then as a teenager probably guitarist in a rock band. Given that a lack of innate talent coupled with advancing years seem to have kyboshed both of those, I’ll go for winemaker. I’m in awe of the skills of the growers and blenders, and naturally fascinated by the underlying chemical processes. I’m quite keen on the end product too.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

This has been touched upon in the earlier posts, but I’d say that our biggest challenge is a social one, not a technological one. We seem to be in an age where many of the world’s ills (from global warming to scares over vaccinations) are being blamed on scientific/technological advance – largely fuelled by a popular media which is either scientifically illiterate or wilfully misrepresenting the facts in many cases. The scientific community has to contribute to the winning back of public confidence by better explaining publicly what we do, why we do it, and what the potential benefits (and risks) are. If we don’t, we endanger both future funding and the development of the next generation of science students.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

Richard Feynman. A truly remarkable intellect who lived through most of the defining moments of the 20th Century (scientific and otherwise), he was also a polymath and entertainer. If I could pick a living person, Keith Richards – he ought to have a few interesting stories to tell, provided he could remember them. I suspect the dinner would be more liquid than solid.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

Five years ago, trying to finish a short synthesis prior to a conference presentation after the postdoc on the project had to leave to take up a job. When the NMR spectrum of the product came back, the rest of the group circled ominously, sensing an opportunity to have some fun at my expense if the reaction had failed or the sample was dirty. As luck would have it, the spectrum was clean as a whistle, so I retired to my office with pride intact. I haven’t tempted fate by going back since!

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

I’m a bit of a vinyl/CD junkie, so just one CD is a tricky call. I take it iPods aren’t fair game? If not, then I’ll go for “Stories from the City, Stories from the Sea” by PJ Harvey – an eclectic enough album to keep me going for a few months at least. For my book I would take the first volume of Clive James’ autobiography, Unreliable Memoirs – a beautifully written description of a young boy growing up after his father’s death in the war that elicits tears of laughter and sympathy in equal measure.

Steve Marsden is in the School of Chemistry at the University of Leeds, UK, and works on the development of new synthetic methods and their application to the construction of complex bioactive molecules.

Materials Girl: Moving around

Posted on behalf of Materials Girl


This is part two of a three-post series

The first day of classes also provides a form of benevolent entertainment. Specifically, spotting students anxiously studying maps and shiny new class planners, as they scurry across the campus’ many acres. (After one quarter, I gave up on remembering to use a planner; instead, scheduling is primarily accomplished via phone and numerous Post-It notes. I’ve also discovered that getting lost on foot is easier than it seems).

Each term of each year in university has had its own challenges, as well as its unappreciated perks – mostly in the form of good professors. Unappreciated is the word, because undergrads typically just recognize that “those guys” are good teachers – or complain about the difficulty of their classes and the resulting loss of sleep. Rarely do they know that some of these individuals not only teach, but also run extensive research groups, publish groundbreaking scientific papers, and write for journals such as Science and Nature.

We take the knowledge and brilliance of many people for granted. (Those eccentric, strange-smelling professors roaming campus with disheveled clothing and starry expressions may not be quite as batty as they seem…). How often do others misjudge us? All that matters is that we strive to meet and rise above any high expectations that are set for our lowly, human selves…

Materials Girl: Moving in

Posted on behalf of Materials Girl:


This is the first part of a three-post series

Less than two weeks ago, organized chaos descended on campus as 9,000 undergraduates relocated from their homes to the dormitories. Those of us who volunteered as Move-In Assistants (MIAs) came early in exchange for “slave labor”, providing a smooth transition for the incoming hordes by decorating, hauling, directing, etc.

An MIA’s duties include giving shuttle tours for incoming families. This includes an inquiry of the incoming students’ majors, which inevitably results in a nervous, energetic chorus of “Undeclared!”, “Psychology!” or “English!” The mood is occasionally lifted by a dour proclamation of the intent to enter engineering, or even pre-med. Alas, it seems that the breed of chemists here is dying out in the wake of humanities, engineering, and – horrors – biochemistry!*

Stating my own major tends to draw blank expressions – we may as well be aliens from the planet Tetraphenylcyclopentadienone.** Freshmen, especially, seem to hold in awe anyone who studies any branch of chemistry, and others haven’t a clue what materials science engineering even is.

Having not attended school in the traditional fashion, I am at a loss to guess why there exists a relatively small number of chemistry applicants arriving from high school. What are they teaching before university? Have the ranks of chemists always seemed few? Hopefully, that is just the case at this one California school, and the land of chemists thrives elsewhere…

Seriously, they are all wonderful, but the ratio of biochemists and chemists is approximately 3:1 and feels like 100:1 – even less with materials chemists. The all-knowing *cough Facebook search at my school lists a mere 13 Chem/Mat-Sci majors, two-thirds of which are grad students.

**C29H20O, because that was the first interesting compound I synthesized during freshmen year. (Nothing soothed my nerves more than seeing fine, beautiful, dark purple crystals appear out of an unfathomably dark solution). Plus, the name is just cool. Say “tetraphenylcyclopentadienone” ten times fast.

Under the gun

We are currently finishing up our next issue (to be sent off to the production team where it magically becomes a ‘real’ journal (i.e., one that you can hold in your hand and show to your mom)) and so for the past couple of days our eyes have constantly been on the calendar. In particular, at this time of the month, our thoughts change from something vague, like, ‘did I remember to ask this scientist to write a review article for the journal’ or ‘how can I best explain that paper in a 200-word Research Highlight’ to something more specific, like ‘did we see the proofs of the Research Highlights yesterday’ or ‘did that author get back to us on whether her images were the wrong size,’ etc.

Having such defined deadlines is great for keeping things organized, and it reminds me how hard it was for me to ever get anything done as a postdoc since there were few (if any) external deadlines. Am I the only one who needs structure? Or if you all similarly find the vague concept of ‘needing to get things done’ uninspiring, what are your tips and tricks for buckling down and getting something finished?

Catherine (associate editor, Nature Chemical Biology)