Skip to main content

This Year's Nobel Prize in Chemistry

Image result for Dubochet

 The Nobel Prize in Chemistry this year went to three men who together pioneered cryo-electron microscopy. 

 The explanation of their work by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences includes this: "Researchers can now freeze biomolecules mid-movement and visualize processes they have never previously seen, which is decisive for both the basic understanding of life’s chemistry and for the development of pharmaceuticals.”

 Jacques Dubochet is Swiss, Joachim Frank is German born and a long time resident of the US, (thank God for our immigrants), Richard Henderson is a Scot.

 In the "philosophy of chemistry" article in wikipedia (yeah, using wikipedia today), one finds the following quote from philosopher Joachim Schummer: "Substance philosophers define a chemical reaction by the change of certain substances, whereas process philosophers define a substance by its characteristic chemical reactions."

 It's a nice line, and it is intended to convey the idea that the two philosophical approaches are symmetrical -- what can be said from one side can be re-described from the other. 

 Yet in terms of deep seated human habits, they are not symmetrical. I suspect we have an innate tendency to prefer the substance view over the process view, to predicate reactions of molecules rather than predicating molecules of reactions. 

 If so, the greater our ability to visualize those molecules, the stronger that prejudice. So perhaps we should be bittersweet about this achievement. 

 But they've surely deserved their champagne! That's an image of Dubochet above, by the way. 

   
Labels:

Comments

  1. BloggerOctober 8, 2017 at 3:54 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BloggerOctober 9, 2017 at 7:09 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more