No smilies, no avatars, no flashing gifs. Just discuss the issues of the day, from last night's telly via football to science or philosophy.
Started by brooklyn on Sep 30, 2019 1:55:20 PM
Baseball is Done. It is time for the 2019 NOBEL OLYMPICS!

So once again, sports fans, it's time to pick up your tout sheets and make your choices. Who will win the big prizes this year? I like Trump's modest acknowledgement that this isn't his turn: he

<<said at a press conference in New York this week that he should get the “Nobel Prize for a lot of things if they gave it out fairly, which they don’t.”>>

It would of course be lovely to see young Greta win it instead, but that's too much to hope for.

The first award: Physiology or Medicine, next Monday.

cozzer - 30 Sep 2019 14:39:02 (#1 of 33)

Ben Stokes is a shoo-in

cozzer - 30 Sep 2019 14:39:10 (#2 of 33)

Oh wait, that might be for something else.

cozzer - 30 Sep 2019 14:40:50 (#3 of 33)

Doudna and Charpentier should win, probably for Chemistry rather than Medicine (but I guess the committee could probably twist it to Medicine if they saw fit), maybe with Zhang. but they probably won't.

ZimAgain - 30 Sep 2019 14:42:46 (#4 of 33)

Is Kylie up for something this year?

Agaliarept - 30 Sep 2019 14:57:01 (#5 of 33)

As long as Ed Sheeran doesn't win it.

Ed Sheeran will probably win it.

brooklyn - 30 Sep 2019 15:21:25 (#6 of 33)

"Doudna and Charpentier"

for those who, like me, wouldn't recognize the "nominees" without a scorecard:

it seems that the ladies are very skilled gene editors (but that, for better or for worse, their interests are not purely academic).

I think I'd call this more in the physio-med field than the chemistry one. but whatever.

brooklyn - 30 Sep 2019 23:03:05 (#7 of 33)

and until we get to the first event, a warm-up story about this year's physiology or medicine Ig Nobel award (this one, the "Anatomy" award):

well-done, France!

see more generally:

brooklyn - 01 Oct 2019 13:50:58 (#8 of 33)

the 2019 Lasker award winners who obviously may factor into the first Nobel:

lots of Americans in this bunch!

brooklyn - 02 Oct 2019 14:01:39 (#9 of 33)

hot off the presses: a view of the various possibilities for the several science awards -- and a "political" conclusion that cancer can't win two years in a row.

TommyDGNR8 - 02 Oct 2019 14:08:24 (#10 of 33)

I think I'd call this more in the physio-med field than the chemistry one.

The chemistry prize has been full of biological contaminants for years.

brooklyn - 02 Oct 2019 14:12:27 (#11 of 33)

that is certainly consistent with today's article:

<<Using that strategy, Pendlebury thinks the chemistry Nobel could go to inventors of DNA sequencing techniques: Marvin Caruthers of the University of Colorado, Leroy Hood of the Institute for Systems Biology, and Michael Hunkapiller, CEO of DNA sequencing goliath Pacific Biosciences.“Without their [1980s] inventions,” Pendlebury said, “there would be no map of the human genome.”>>

thisonehasalittlehat - 02 Oct 2019 14:15:27 (#12 of 33)

We do this every year and every year europe wins. Now, I thought we might have to do UK, US, Europe this time around, but it turns out we're probably OK for another year. So Europe will win again, once more proving the soft and cossetted nature of US culture and society.

brooklyn - 02 Oct 2019 14:28:26 (#13 of 33)

you won't have a prayer in the baseball playoffs, though.

and I scoff at your sprinters.

TommyDGNR8 - 03 Oct 2019 09:18:30 (#14 of 33)

brooklyn - 03 Oct 2019 13:09:24 (#15 of 33)

a bronze! excellent.

brooklyn - 03 Oct 2019 13:39:38 (#16 of 33)

discussions of potential winners of the science awards, with descriptions of their achievements so simple that even I can understand them.

thisonehasalittlehat - 04 Oct 2019 16:04:29 (#17 of 33)

and I scoff at your sprinters.

You mean our World Champion 200m sprinter(s)?

brooklyn - 04 Oct 2019 18:31:54 (#18 of 33)

yes. especially that one.

but: Monday we get to the first real event. I acknowledge, he who scoffs last, scoffs best.

brooklyn - 07 Oct 2019 21:00:31 (#19 of 33)

the first results are in -- and we have an upset! there are three winners in physiology and medicine, and they seem not to have been on anyone's radar.

Kaelin, Ratcliffe, and Semenza are at Harvard, Oxford, and Johns Hopkins, respectively. I gather that they worked independently of one another. but their joint area: how do cells react to changing levels of oxygen?

now we know. well. scientists do, anyway. as best I can tell, cells are able to suck in harder when there isn't as much oxygen around, and less so when there's a lot.

it's not just important to mountain climbers. as the articles note:

so, sports fans: the gold medal standings after one event.


UK 1

Rest of the World: yet to step up to the plate.

tomorrow: physics.

brooklyn - 08 Oct 2019 13:50:53 (#20 of 33)

the physics prize goes to three, well, astronomers this year.

Michael Peebles, a "Canadian," gets half the cash. he "[laid] a foundation for modern cosmology," i.e. he made major advances in determining the evolution of the universe since the "big bang." Michael Mayor and Didier Queloz of Switzerland get the other half. they found the first "exoplanet," in 1995.

Peebles was born in Canada, but left Manitoba for Princeton after college graduation and has stayed there since. but: we'll give the point to Canada for now ("rulings subject to change if the US needs another medal").

Mayor is at the University of Geneva, but he spent a youthful year as a researcher at Cambridge and a semester in Hawaii -- doubtless atop Mauna Kea hoping it would decide to stay dormant. Queloz futzes between the U of Geneva and Cambridge.

the first of these three articles is the most informative about the work done by the winners:

and so the medal standings after two events:


Ch 2

UK 1

Canada 1

next up, tomorrow: Chemistry

Check Subscriptions
Home » International