Chandigarh, Thursday, December 17, 1998
|
Chandigarh, Thursday, December 17, 1998 |
Some surprises about Nobel Prizes Over the nine decades of
their existence, the lustre of the Nobel Prizes has been
somewhat dimmed by criticism of the selections, the
obvious omissions and the time-lag... |
  |
Over the nine decades of their existence, the lustre of the Nobel Prizes has been somewhat dimmed by criticism of the selections, the obvious omissions and the time-lag... by Pravin Kumar FEW eyebrows would have been lifted by the award of the 1997 Nobel Prize for Economics to Prof Amartya Sen. Indeed the surprise is that the award was so long in coming. Professor Sen was luckier than Trygve Haavelmo of the University of Oslo who got the 1989 award for fundamental contributions to econometrics, mostly made in the 1940s. Irritated, the 78-year-old Haavelmo told reporters: "I don’t like this type of prize", before unplugging the telephone and vanishing into the Norwegian countryside. Equally late was the award to Prof S. Chandrasekhar (Physics prize for 1983) who got it 50 years after his fundamental discovery of the limiting mass of dwarf white stars. Of course, one factor that delayed Chandrasekhar’s award was that the eminent astrophysicist Eddington disagreed with Chandrasekhar’s views, though the latter was vindicated by later workers. The record for a belated award is that of F.P. Rous who got the Medicine/Physiology award in 1966, at age 86, for his discovery in 1911 that a malignant tumour is caused by a virus. One physics laureate is said to have remarked that his own prize was delayed until... "the Nobel people finally saw that he had settled down ... and that he had become a model of a family man". The time-lag has been increasing in recent years, suggesting a heavy backlog of potential candidates. Alfred Bernhard Nobel, the Swedish scientist and inventor who instituted the awards, wanted to help the winners to become financially independent. But critics have faulted the award for being made to persons whose best work lay behind them. Laureates, on an average, have been 52 years of age when they are nominated. The reasons for the delay, as well as for the obvious omissions, are complex. Partly they lie in the terms of Nobel’s will and partly in the nomination process and in the organisational changes in scientific research since Nobel’s time. Nobel made a lot of money from his invention of a blasting-cap for nitro-glycerine and, later, from his invention of dynamite, but he hoped that his explosives would put an end to war. A year before his death in 1896, he drew up a will in which he directed that the interest from the bulk of his fortune be utilised in awarding five annual prizes to persons "who shall have contributed most to benefit mankind in the previous year". New disciplines The five areas mentioned in the will were: Literature, Peace, Physics, Chemistry and Medicine/Physiology. This naturally ruled out disciplines like molecular biology and radio astronomy which did not even exist in Nobel’s time. Lately, however, the Nobel committees have shed their innate conservatism in recognising ethology (winner, Konrad Lorenz, 1973) and radio astronomy (Martin Ryle and Anthony Hewish, 1974). In 1964, a new discipline, Economics, became eligible for the award. The criterion of recency, as implied in the phrase "preceding year", has also been liberally interpreted to mean that "the significance of the work must have become evident in the years immediately preceding the awards". On the other hand, the committee interpreted the stipulation quite literally when it picked Bednorz and Muller for the 1987 Physics award in recognition of their work, in early 1986, on superconductivity: this is the quickest award on record. By and large, the Nobel science awards have rewarded outstanding work. In the early years, the Nobel Committee were faced with an embarrass de riches and the problem was in what order the names should be selected. The early laureates included names such as Roentgen, Rayleigh, Marie Curie (a two-time winner), Pavlov and Koch, who lent the awards an aura which persisted even when lesser merit was honoured in the succeeding years. Notable omissions Nearly 700 Nobel laureates have been named to date. The Literature and Peace prizes are often awarded for political reasons. It is a moot point why Mahatma Gandhi did not get the Peace Prize or Graham Greene the Literature Prize. The science prizes are above politics, but there have been conspicuous omissions. For instance, Mandeleev, a father-figure in chemistry and originator of the Periodic Table of Elements. Mendeleev was nominated in 1905 and 1906 but lost. The explanation given is that his work "had been lectured on from the chairs of chemistry", that it had passed into the text-books. Mendeleev died in 1907, which ruled him out, for one of the conditions is that the awardee must be alive, not only at the time he is named but must also come to Sweden to receive his prize. Many of the 41 American laureates interviewed by Harriet Zuckerman for her book "The Scientific Elite" felt that there were others who were also deserving but overlooked by the Nobel committees. On the other hand, there have been obviously undeserving cases, e.g., Johannes Fibiger (1926, Medicine/Physiology) whose findings on the propagation of malignant tumours turned out to be artefacts. The Nobel Committee became so touchy about this award that they would not give another award for research on cancer till 1966, thus turning a blind eye to good work. At times the committees have even erred in evaluating work. The 1938 Physics award was given to Enrico Fermi for ‘having demonstrated the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation’. The committee did not suspect that he had in fact discovered the fission of the uranium atom. In the case of O.T. Avery, the committee was not prepared to believe that DNA was indeed the hereditary molecule of life; when they were ready to believe, Avery was dead. The Nobel Committees, however, do not retract their choices, which are finalised after an elaborate process, (see ‘Box’). Playing safe A committee member has remarked: (We) are not in the business of dispensing justice but rather in recognising excellence". But the committees have preferred to play safe rather than run the risk of recognising sub-standard work. This way, the number of "also-rans" has increased over the years. In 1962, Goran Liljestrand, the official historian of the Nobel Physiology/Medicine Prize, published his work "Nobel: the Man and his Prizes", from which it can be inferred that there were 69 names in Medicine and Physiology alone, who did work of Nobel calibre: only 14 since then made it to the award. To maintain the elite nature of the award, no more than three persons may share a prize, though the number of scientists, as well as disciplines, has vastly increased over the last nine decades. Jean Lindsten, secretary to the Nobel Committee, has remarked that it is increasingly difficult to pick winners, for research is becoming more and more a collaborative affair. In high-energy physics, individual scientists have to work as members of a team as well as distinguishing themselves for leadership and initiative. Big science is institutional, but the science prizes (unlike the Peace Prize) have never gone to institutions. Not all scientists who are missed out keep mum. Dominique Stehelin wrote to the Nobel Committee pointing out that he had been unfairly excluded from the 1989 Medicine/Physiology Prize, because he was the person who performed the crucial experiments for which J.M. Bishop and H.E. Varmus won the award. The latter two scientists had showed that, in animal cells, viral genes capable of causing cancer in fact originated from the cell genes. Varmus said that Stehelin had carried out the work but ‘under supervision’. Nature, the scientific journal in which the key paper had been published, commented in its issue dated November 23, 1989, that "it is up to those who award prizes to set the rules, but in the case of the relative merits of dirty hands to fertile minds, there seems to be not one..." Distortion Yet another criticism levelled against the Nobel awards is that they have tended to distort science history, by focussing more on successful than on brave but unsuccessful work. It seems that if Watson and Crick had not put forward their model of DNA, Linus Pauling would have done so. In Crick’s opinion, Rosalind Franklin, the crystallographer at King’s College, London, where Crick worked, would have solved the problem in another three months. In the early years, the awards tended to be distributed evenly among the eligible disciplines. In the later years, there was clustering in areas like nuclear physics, quantum electro-dynamics and molecular biology. In recent years, the Chemistry Prize has been bagged by biochemists, who also have walked away with the Medicine/Physiology award. All in all, the Nobel
Prizes in science do not necessarily coincide with what
scientists value most: recognition by their peers and
membership of academic bodies. But, both in the eyes of
scientists and laymen, the Nobel Prizes are the most
visible form of recognition, partly because of the money
attached to the awards, and partly because of the secular
ritual that takes place every December 10 at Stockholm
and Oslo. |
What goes on backstage FOR each discipline, there is a committee of five persons which invites nominations and selects winners. A committee member serves 12 years, and the terms are so staggered that there is a continuity of membership. In the autumn of each year, about 100 persons in 40 to 50 countries of the world are invited to send nominations for the Prizes. The following February, the prime contenders are short-listed by the committees, which also draws up a list of external authorities who could be asked to report on the proposals. By August-end the committees bring out a review containing the conclusions of the committees as well as external review. The short list is whittled down to one name which is sent to the Swedish Academy, which either accepts or changes the committees’ recommendations. The secretary-general of the Academy then calls up the winners and the press is informed. The prizes are then awarded at gala functions on December 10 at Oslo (for the Peace Prize) and Stockholm. A candidate for an award must get at least one nomination for the particular year. Nominations are confidential, but a few years ago the Nobel Foundation allowed the publication of material which was more than 50 years old. An analysis by the Office of the History of Science and Technology at the University of California and the Office of the History of Science at Uppsala University, Sweden, found that the nominations for Physics and Chemistry prizes between 1901 and 1937 were extremely uneven in their effect. Thus, Marie Curie received only four nominations but these won her two prizes, one for Physics and another for Chemistry. G.E. Hale was nominated 33 times and Sommerfield was nominated every year, except one, between 1917 and 1937, but both were ‘also-rans’. Of the scientists who received the highest number of nominations between 1901 and 1937, fully onehalf never won the Nobel. Despite the confidential nature of the nominations, BoG. Malstrom, who had chaired the Chemistry committee, told Science journal that, from the pattern of nominations, it is obvious that Americans discuss them with one another: those who nominated someone would write to him; if the latter won the Prize, he would conclude it was because the former had nominated him. — P. K. |
1. Name the scientist from this region who has recently been selected for the prestigious Meghnad Saha Award for the year 1996. To which organisation does he belong? 2. Continuing on the subject, what was the major subject of research of the eminent Indian scientist Meghnad Saha? Which national institute has been named after him? 3. Name the comet that was in the news recently. Who discovered it? What is its orbital period? 4. An American spacecraft that has been in space for about three years now will be the first spacecraft of the world to fly around an asteroid in January, 1999. Name the spacecraft and the asteroid. 5. Whereas the prices of potatoes and tomatoes have skyrocketed in India, these "cloned" vegetables are available in plenty in the stores of an Asian country at reasonable prices. Which is this country? 6. A Bangalore-based firm has developed a system by which one can turn on or off electrical appliances in one’s home or office by just making a phone call from anywhere, even from another city. What has such a system been named? 7. Hydrogen is the most abundant element. Which is the most stable element? 8. Dimo and dzomo are the two main livestock animals of Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir. Of which two animals are these cross-breeds? 9. What is common about "emu", "kiwi", "moa", "rhea" and "cassowary"? 10. Oral polio vaccine is in the news these days. Who developed this vaccine and in which year? ANSWERS 1. Dr K.N. Pathak;
Panjab University, Chandigarh. 2. Physics; Saha Institute
of Nuclear Physics, Calcutta. 3. Temple-Tuttle; William
Temple and Horace Tuttle discovered it independent of
each other; 33 years. 4. NEAR (near Earth Asteroid
Rendezvous); Eros. 5. Japan. 6. Telemagic. 7. Iron. 8.
Yak and cow. 9. These are all flightless birds. 10.
American researcher Albert Bruce Sabin in 1960. |
| H |
Gold digging plants New Zealand scientists have harvested a crop of gold digging plants, Reuter reports. The researchers used a technique called phytoextraction to encourage plants to take up gold from the soil into their roots and to above-ground shoots. After the shoots are dried and burned, the gold can be removed from the burned ash. "This technique might be used as a form of biological mining (phytomining) for gold," Robert Brooks, from the Massey University in New Zealand, said. Brooks and his colleagues treated soil with ammonium thiocyanate, a chemical used in mining operations to make gold soluble, and turned Brassica juncea plants into modern-day gold diggers. Brasscia juncea are a type of plant known as hyperaccumulators. Under controlled conditions, these plants can be used to extract dangerous metals and radioactive wastes from soil and water. Scientists are already using phytoextraction to clean up polluted or radioactive soil and water. But Brooks and his team said it is the first time it has been used to remove gold from soil. "We believe this is the first evidence of significant gold uptake by any plant. Apart from the economic ramifications, this technology opens up the way for phytoextraction of other noble metals", said Brooks. Cars recycle their plastic waste Automobile manufacturers in France, in association with steel and plastic manufacturers, have developed new recycling technologies to utilize automobile scraps. At present, only 75 per cent of each vehicle, can be recycled. The remainder consisting of glass, plastic and other residues is thrown away. The new technologies will increase scrap utilisation by 90 per cent by 2002 and from 2015 all vehicles reaching the end of their lives will be 95 per cent recyclable, according to Jean Paul Vallat, recycling project manager at Renault, a major French automobile company. Recycling was a popular concept in the motor industry in the 60s. As vehicles were mostly manufactured from steel, they scarcely damaged the environment at the end of their lives since most of their parts were recovered by the steel producers. The arrival of plastics and special alloys changed the situation in the 70s. From using around 15 kilos of plastics per car in 1960, they are touching 100 kilos (12 per cent of average weight) today. In 1992, Renault linked
up with Compagnie Francaise des Ferrailles (CFF), a
company specialising in the recycling of scrap metal, to
create a centre devoted to scrap vehicles. Using
systematic dismantling methods, 85 per cent of these
vehicles can be recycled and recovered. |
 |
 |
| | Nation | Punjab | Haryana | Himachal Pradesh | Jammu
& Kashmir | Chandigarh | | Editorial | Business | Sports | | Mailbag | Spotlight | World | 50 years of Independence | Weather | | Search | Subscribe | Archive | Suggestion | Home | E-mail | |