Chapter 446 The Final Meeting

In October, the streets and alleys of Stockholm are filled with festive atmosphere.

At this time, this city at the corner of the Baltic Sea will attract attention from all over the world because of the list of Nobel Prizes.

Although the awards are for the academicians of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the vast majority of Stockholm citizens are proud of this moment.

Interestingly enough, "they" haven't always been like this.

In the era when nationalism swept across Europe, many Swedes publicly complained and even criticized that a Swedish rich man or scholar (Nobel) neither donated his inheritance to the country nor to the Scandinavians. Any priority of the Navians to win the award will not leave benefits, but only countless troubles.

Even Hans Fuscher, then president of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, once complained that Nobel should donate the money directly to the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences instead of letting them do thankless awards, and refused to participate in the research review Details of the meeting.

Fortunately, with the unremitting efforts of Nobel's most trusted assistant, Lonna Solman, the then King of Sweden finally announced the effectiveness of the will, ending the controversy surrounding the 31 million crowns.

Facts have proved that from the perspective of history, most people are short-sighted. In that era without the Internet, few people had the opportunity to see the world beyond the Baltic Sea.

But looking back now, even if you search all over the world, it is difficult to find a more cost-effective investment than the 31 million crowns.

No city has ever been so honored for one award. There has never been a Swede, even the king or prime minister of Sweden, who has left such a huge and inexhaustible legacy to his country or nation.

Of course, there must be troubles that come with it.

Especially for the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which has watched over this will for more than a century.

As October 4th got closer, the atmosphere in this ivory tower became more and more tense compared to Stockholm, which became more and more lively.

Logically speaking, the list of Nobel Prizes should have been prepared three days ago.

But this time, the members of the Chemistry Prize Review Committee did not reach a consensus.

Although there have been several times in history, because the Nobel Committee's opinions could not reach a consensus, and the announcement time was delayed until mid-October, there is no reason why it will happen in this year's Nobel Prize selection .

At the urging of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the jury for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry met again.

Compared with the previous two years, there is no change in the list of the judging committee for the Chemistry Award. The only change is that Ms. Snogerup Linse (Snogerup·Linse) stepped back from the chairman and Claes Gustav, a member of the committee for 15 years Sen (Claes·Gustafasson) was promoted to chairman.

As for the other three academicians, they are Peter Brzezinski, professor of biochemistry at Stockholm University, Olof Ramstrom, professor of organic chemistry at KTH, and Professor Johan Aqvist, a big cow in the field of molecular biology and computational chemistry.

At the meeting, Ms. Linser, who was over half a century old, glanced sharply at several colleagues present, and said in a strong tone.

"It's just us, and the Royal Academy of Sciences wants us to make a decision as soon as possible, at least before the 4th."

In fact, they should have made their decision a month ago.

The chairman, Professor Klass, nodded.

"As Academician Linser said, we have to make a decision. This will be the last meeting. I hope that if you have any opinions, don't keep them in your heart."

The other three members looked at each other and nodded.

This will be the last time they discuss the issue.

It will also be the last review meeting of the year...

...

Objectively speaking, the thinking of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry judges is really confusing. The cryo-electron microscope in 2017 is okay, but the molecular machine in 2016 is a completely new concept. Although the results are good enough, it is not clear how long it will be practical. do not know.

For example, the most incomprehensible lithium battery, when predicting the Nobel Prize every year, everyone will include the name of the lithium battery giant Gudenav—that is, the legendary "Mr. Good Enough", but it has been delayed for so long , The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences seems to have forgotten his name.

In addition to the theoretical model of the electrochemical interface structure, Prof. Franz-Ulrich Hartl of the Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, and Arthur Horwich, professor of genetics at Yale University, on the protein folding in cells The study of the role and its impact is also a worthy consideration for the award.

Prior to this, the two big cows had already won the Lasker Award as the vane of the Nobel Prize. Almost 50% of the winners of this award eventually won the Nobel Prize in Medicine or Chemistry.

In addition, there are optogenetics, which has been developing rapidly recently, and motor proteins, etc.

It turns out that in the field of biology, it is indeed easier for chemists to make beautiful results.

At first glance, the big pit of creatures seems quite attractive.

Of course, the premise is that if the goal is to win the Nobel Prize...

After a preliminary exchange of opinions, the meeting continued to discuss the final nomination.

Not surprisingly, the focus of controversy is still on the "theoretical model of electrochemical interface structure".

And the atmosphere of controversy is becoming more and more intense...

Olof: "In any case, this year we should consider the real chemistry achievements. If Mr. Nobel knows that we have changed his favorite chemistry award into a 'biology award', I believe he will be happy in heaven." would be happy."

Peter emphasized fiercely: "But he's only 24! Even younger than Lawrence Bragg! Can't we wait until his 25th birthday to think about his name?"

Olof asked rhetorically: "But apart from him, are there other more outstanding achievements in the field of theoretical chemistry?"

Peter froze for a moment, frowned and thought for a moment, then said in a hesitant tone: "Research on molecular dynamics? Professor Robert Carr of Princeton is also doing excellent work in this field."

Olof shook his head: "I admit that his work is indeed excellent, but it is far from outstanding."

Peter grumbled: "Then award it to the folding of proteins in the cell! Why do we have to think about theoretical chemistry?"

Ms. Lindsay nodded: "I agree with Peter."

In the 2015 session, it was at her suggestion that the Nobel Prize was awarded to DNA repair.

And now, as she did then, she believes the award should go to biochemistry.

Orlof asked rhetorically: "Since we don't stick to the research direction, why do we have to stick to the age of the winners? Nobel didn't say in his will that he must distribute his estate to people in their fifties. old man."

John, who had been silent all the time, suddenly interjected at this moment: "I think what Academician Olof said makes sense, and the electrochemical interface structure is not only an achievement in the field of electrochemistry and theoretical chemistry, but also a groundbreaking research in the field of computational chemistry. contribution."

He is studying computational chemistry, and no one sitting here knows better than him how good the theoretical model is.

However, the biggest difference in the selection of the Nobel Prize is precisely here.

With the development of science, the boundaries between disciplines are becoming more and more blurred, but the distance between directions is getting farther and farther. It is still difficult for scholars outside the field to understand the research results in different directions, let alone horizontal comparison.

There seems to be a "melee" at the conference table.

Seeing Olof and Peter who were arguing with reason, Academician Klaas, the chairman of the committee, who had not spoken much, pondered for a moment, clapped his hands, and interrupted the quarrel at the conference table.

"Okay, gentlemen...and ladies, it doesn't make any sense to continue arguing. Let us make the final decision in the most democratic, fair, and traditional way."

Several people exchanged glances.

Although no consensus was reached, there was no opinion on what Academician Klass said.

When there is disagreement, there is no better solution than voting.

Seeing that the other committee members did not object, Academician Klass winked at the assistant next to him.

Reading the meaning in his eyes, the assistant stepped forward and placed an A4 paper on everyone's desk.

Picking up the pen and writing a word on the paper, Ms. Linser raised her eyebrows and looked at Klaas: "Have you already prepared it?"

"I have a hunch that it will end up like this," Academician Klass smiled, folded his piece of paper, and placed it gently in the middle of the table, "Anyways, our opinions rarely reach a consensus, don't we? "