The 2018 Nobel Prize in Chemistry - Periodic Table of Videos

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 жов 2018
  • The prize is awarded to Frances Arnold, George Smith, and Gregory Winter. More Nobel videos: bit.ly/periodicnobel
    More links and info in full description ↓↓↓
    This video features Martyn Poliakoff, Francesca Paradisi , and Nicholas Mitchell - all from the University of Nottingham.
    The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2018 was divided, one half awarded to Frances H. Arnold "for the directed evolution of enzymes", the other half jointly to George P. Smith and Sir Gregory P. Winter "for the phage display of peptides and antibodies."
    Support us on Patreon: / periodicvideos
    More chemistry at www.periodicvideos.com/
    Follow us on Facebook at / periodicvideos
    And on Twitter at / periodicvideos
    From the School of Chemistry at The University of Nottingham: bit.ly/NottChem
    With thanks to the Garfield Weston Foundation.
    Periodic Videos films are by video journalist Brady Haran: www.bradyharan.com/
    Brady's Blog: www.bradyharanblog.com
    Join Brady's mailing list for updates and extra stuff --- eepurl.com/YdjL9
  • Наука та технологія

КОМЕНТАРІ • 432

  • @periodicvideos
    @periodicvideos  5 років тому +36

    Catch our list of Nobel Prize videos from over the years: bit.ly/periodicnobel

    • @fukpoeslaw3613
      @fukpoeslaw3613 5 років тому

      where are 2016 and 2017?

    • @RoastCDuck
      @RoastCDuck 5 років тому

      Would bacteriophages replace Anti biotics or are those used for other purposes?

  • @shruthim5180
    @shruthim5180 5 років тому +110

    Professor Poliakoff, you're the only reason I want to come to Nottingham to pursue Chemistry. Since a really really really long time it has been my dream to meet you. Thanks a lot Brady, for helping Chemistry enthusiasts such as myself to connect in ideas and information

    • @periodicvideos
      @periodicvideos  5 років тому +22

      Nice to hear from you!

    • @shruthim5180
      @shruthim5180 5 років тому +6

      @@periodicvideos :)

    • @jameskitching6187
      @jameskitching6187 5 років тому +6

      It is a great place to study, i am in my second year, love it 😁.

    • @shruthim5180
      @shruthim5180 5 років тому +1

      @@jameskitching6187 Nice! Tell me more!!!

  • @dakota5569
    @dakota5569 5 років тому +94

    So basically she has developed an evolution algorithm (process) for developing and evolving enzymes. That's pretty cool.

    • @RadeticDaniel
      @RadeticDaniel 5 років тому +8

      In statistics and computer science, this method is called "genetic algorithm".
      See it applied to produce enzymes is quite a return to its origins and inspiration

    • @biologistvonriemann3580
      @biologistvonriemann3580 5 років тому +2

      @@RadeticDaniel Aren't genetic algorithms a subclass of evolutionary algorithms anyway ?

    • @cush6827
      @cush6827 4 роки тому

      Hence the Nobel prize.

    • @seanleith5312
      @seanleith5312 3 роки тому

      Nobel prize is not it used to be. They gave Osama one for free. You know cheap it had became.

  • @knumbtummy
    @knumbtummy 5 років тому +10

    I'm always so excited to see uploads from the professor =D

  • @mikesummers-smith4091
    @mikesummers-smith4091 5 років тому +11

    THE CHEMIST'S PRAYER
    Oh Lord, I pray upon my knees,
    That my organic syntheses,
    May no longer be inferior,
    To those conducted by bacteria.
    (Not by me; won a 1960s prize competition in IIRC J.Org.Chem,)

  • @shonaoneill5151
    @shonaoneill5151 5 років тому +167

    This is exciting science, so much has and is happening in my lifetime, a great period to be alive.

    • @timkuefer1523
      @timkuefer1523 5 років тому +1

      Check out Blockchain Technology! Its absolutly amazing, the web 3.0 is in development right now!

    • @mickmickymick6927
      @mickmickymick6927 5 років тому

      When will we be able to reverse aging?

    • @timkuefer1523
      @timkuefer1523 5 років тому

      @@mickmickymick6927 Elon Musk talks about that in the Interview with Joe Rogan, pretty interesting. AI is scary

    • @zebunker
      @zebunker 3 роки тому

      Maybe this is the only period in which you could possibly be alive, if humans are really alive.

  • @kelz4384
    @kelz4384 5 років тому +4

    I have so much respect for you professor, you explain everything so well and I've learned more from you than I ever did at school, thank you💕

  • @PedroDelimaMarcano
    @PedroDelimaMarcano 5 років тому +3

    Nice to see you professor. Great way to start the week.

  • @AshishGupta-ql9lq
    @AshishGupta-ql9lq 5 років тому +1

    as a biochemistry student i never felt more welcome at periodic videos

  • @stormeliuzv7270
    @stormeliuzv7270 5 років тому

    I love these videos you are making. Really great work!

  • @timdunk7278
    @timdunk7278 5 років тому +2

    Fascinating stuff and excellent description. Thank you.

  • @alanna4858
    @alanna4858 5 років тому +4

    Love this channel long time! Always love the content. Make 1000000 more x

  • @HisameArtwork
    @HisameArtwork 5 років тому

    Love these videos, thanks for making them ^_^

  • @Ballacha
    @Ballacha 5 років тому +101

    inorganic chemistry hasn't had a nobel prize in decades, literally. i want to know why. bias in the prize committee? not enough people working with inorganic molecules? not enough breakthroughs? why then?

    • @Croxmata
      @Croxmata 5 років тому +63

      Depends on how you define it. There have been Nobel Prizes given out for new analytical methods that can become useful in inorganic chemistry. Also the Nobel Prize of 2011 for quasicrystals was very much inorganic chemistry.

    • @andyyag9623
      @andyyag9623 5 років тому +24

      Same can be said for plasma physics, only one has been awarded for magnetohydrodynamics. No breakthroughs into uncharted territory, no essential problems solved, advancements comparatively have less of an impact on daily life, unpopular field, less people working on it.

    • @theburningtoastmonsterofur7028
      @theburningtoastmonsterofur7028 5 років тому +4

      Im working twards an inorganic chemestry degree

    • @ksilebo
      @ksilebo 5 років тому +12

      Since there is no price for molecular biotechnology, they have to give out the chemestry one for them. Biotechnology can really help people, its helps fight cancer and develops drugs etc etc. Alfred Nobel wanted to have the price go to people that make the most contribution and help mankind the most, so thats why inorganic chemists or "salt-guys" how i call em dont get the price

    • @SpritoftheStairwell
      @SpritoftheStairwell 5 років тому +6

      The selection committee works pretty much exclusively on biology applications... One would think a committee for such a broad topic would have more diverse research interests.

  • @snowballeffect7812
    @snowballeffect7812 5 років тому +6

    Wow, both awards are for some pretty insane science. I can't wait to see their applications in the mainstream.

    • @bumpty9830
      @bumpty9830 5 років тому +6

      "Mainstream applications," in our present profit-worshiping society, are generally commercial and kept secret in the name of higher profits. If you can't wait, vote against capitalists at every opportunity.

    • @snowballeffect7812
      @snowballeffect7812 5 років тому +5

      @@bumpty9830 Well, how would they profiteer off this technology if they don't make it marketable or useful in some way?

    • @shallfrisch1
      @shallfrisch1 5 років тому

      Matthew Went straight communist quicker than the collapse of a wave function upon measurement.

    • @Thatguywithlogic
      @Thatguywithlogic 5 років тому +2

      Phage display is definitely mainstream already!

  • @SunriseFireberry
    @SunriseFireberry 5 років тому +19

    At least they awarded the chem prize this year, which is more 'n I can say for lit. Congrats to Arnold, Smith & Winter.

    • @shonaoneill5151
      @shonaoneill5151 5 років тому +6

      Agreed, chemistry is in my opinion the most important of the sciences. It should/must be recognised as such.

    • @hassanes3360
      @hassanes3360 5 років тому +4

      @@shonaoneill5151 I think that chosing the 'most important' field is wrong because science is complementary and effectively they're all the same focus of the same study.

    • @twixeater1
      @twixeater1 5 років тому +4

      @@shonaoneill5151 The kind of work that won the prizes this year shows us that thinking of chemistry as a self-contained field is short-sighted. So much of modern science is the interface between engineering, biology, chemistry, and physics. If we pigeonhole ourselves into categories, we unnecessarily stifle ourselves and intellectual output. I say this as a scientist working at the interface of physical chemistry, engineering, and microbiology :p

    • @shonaoneill5151
      @shonaoneill5151 5 років тому +1

      @@hassanes3360 I understand what you are saying, but the field of chemistry is allowing new drugs to be developed that save lives, geology doesn't do this, nor physics etc etc.
      I am interested in chemistry especially because the development are always ongoing and massive, it changes lives for the better. Sure Physics is great, I love engineering and mechanics too. But for me Chemistry far out ways in the development of all the other sciences, in what is truly important. Just as a quick note, it was down to Physics to create nuclear fuel, and yet it is down to chemistry to clean up the mess that those fools left! This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree. We are all here to have a friendly debate.

    • @hassanes3360
      @hassanes3360 5 років тому +1

      @@shonaoneill5151 Imagine us without the discovery of electricity and engines and other things and also you're unifying chemistry and another Nobel for Medicine. Not all Chemistry is health based

  • @kourivi
    @kourivi 5 років тому +1

    Thank you all of you and not only me everyone proud of you 😊 i loved to be a professor 😊

  • @ericgulseth74
    @ericgulseth74 5 років тому

    What these two winners did sounds extremely similar to what a biofuels company I used to work for does.
    Specifically the modifying of cells to get the desired enzyme and the "treadmill" used to achieve that. Also the peptide markers used to identify the modified organisms from the second half.

  • @tomicron
    @tomicron 5 років тому

    heyyy, can someone explaijn me that light momentum thing? is it also mass times velocity? if so, which is it's mass? or is it just momentum depending on it's direction of propagation?

    • @shallfrisch1
      @shallfrisch1 5 років тому

      light does and does not have mass depending on how one conceptualizes what 'mass' means, google for more information.

  • @LiborTinka
    @LiborTinka 5 років тому +1

    I feel we finally move towards green chemistry - enzymes can do organic reactions with extreme efficiency and ease, no petrochemicals and multi-step processes are needed. So exciting. It's like solar cells vs photosynthesis. One requires many materials (some rare), chemicals and lots of energy to manufacture and is quite inefficient. The other is done by a simple plant you can grow in a pot and is extremely efficient.

  • @epincion
    @epincion 5 років тому

    Excellent. Thanks for this.

  • @nonofyabidnez5737
    @nonofyabidnez5737 5 років тому

    Fascinating as always

  • @MrMoo272
    @MrMoo272 4 роки тому

    That's crazy, she's basically taming and domesticating enzymes, selectively reproducing the ones with useful properties and getting rid of the ones with unwanted properties, just like how you would selectively breed an animal for domestication or a plant for better yields.
    It's so simple yet a genius idea

  • @foxxygearreviews7754
    @foxxygearreviews7754 5 років тому +1

    The future of this is that we will develop a rapid protein sequencing system for tumor biopsies - find a target protein that isn’t found in healthy cells, then use this technology to build and replicate an antibody. We then tag the antibody to a beta-emitter so you can target radiotherapy directly to the lesion without harming healthy tissue. I wish medical science would start following Moore’s law and leap ahead the way computer science has - I’m guessing it will be forty years before we can actually routinely apply this science in a practical everyday oncology scenario.

  • @af8828
    @af8828 5 років тому

    where can i get that tie

  • @NCF19XX
    @NCF19XX 4 роки тому

    Listened to Francis Arnold speak at the ACS national conference this year and it was great. Only thing is I feel like it’s more bio then chemistry since it’s all based around enzymes for chemistry.

  • @DeconvertedMan
    @DeconvertedMan 5 років тому +1

    awesome stuff!

  • @bluehues1600
    @bluehues1600 4 роки тому +1

    Please make a video about nobel prize in chemistry 2019

  • @duxangus
    @duxangus 5 років тому

    I saw a presentation by Francis Arnold at University Nebraska-Lincoln a month or so ago

  • @mattpet7913
    @mattpet7913 5 років тому +2

    That would be really handy for assemetric stereoisomer synthesis

  • @TheVeryHungrySingularity
    @TheVeryHungrySingularity 5 років тому

    This is so fascinating

  • @RandomSime
    @RandomSime 5 років тому

    How are the mutations in the viral DNA created? Are they manually edited in, or are they hit with radiation, or do the mutations occur naturally over generations?

  • @dathstar
    @dathstar 5 років тому

    How and ware do i summit a paper for Nobel Prize?

  • @trodenn4977
    @trodenn4977 5 років тому

    Is it related to the crispr?

  • @plutoniumproductions1698
    @plutoniumproductions1698 5 років тому +1

    Truely loved the video...

  • @veerabhadra3322
    @veerabhadra3322 5 років тому +6

    Sir I really love your channel , and I learn 104 elements and their use ,I it is all because your effects and grate idea ,I from India and your channel is recommended to all my friends and they are all get the knowledge about chemistry. If my English is wrong please sorry sir .and tanks sir.

  • @danielortega2441
    @danielortega2441 5 років тому +1

    Finally
    You covered this

  • @alias40anon
    @alias40anon 5 років тому

    I came to learn some science, read the comments and left with a little fewer brain cells quickly to prevent further damage. Thank you Mesdammes et Monsieurs

  • @Rayzersword
    @Rayzersword 4 роки тому +1

    Watching this in May 2020 "Viruses are not particularly friendly." Yeah, tell me about it xD

  • @thinkingape7655
    @thinkingape7655 5 років тому +1

    Brilliant! 🤘

  • @zoeingold4666
    @zoeingold4666 5 років тому +2

    Aside from this being really awesome science thankyou for raising the issues surrounding gender equality in STEM subjects. Visible role models such as Francis are so important and can make enormous differences to people's choices. Unfortunately the world isn't a utopia and discussions that recognise science and politics have to work together need to happen more often.

  • @Macieks300
    @Macieks300 5 років тому +1

    Are you going to make this year's Nobel Prize videos for physics and others as well?

    • @periodicvideos
      @periodicvideos  5 років тому +2

      We will do the physics one on Sixty Symbols (our physics channel)
      ua-cam.com/users/sixtysymbols

  • @MrMG43
    @MrMG43 5 років тому +1

    Wait a minute, biofuel like ethanol? Meaning we might eventually be able to get an enzyme that directly converts sugar to ethanol? As a homebrewer this blows my mind.

  • @Leon-kf2tx
    @Leon-kf2tx 5 років тому +5

    You are a great teacher.

  • @brboLikus
    @brboLikus 5 років тому +1

    OK, I know I misheard it, but "ninjaneer" is a heck of a name for the awarded scientists!!

  • @muhdzafri7551
    @muhdzafri7551 5 років тому +31

    You are a great professor

    • @ProfezorSnayp
      @ProfezorSnayp 5 років тому +1

      Not as great as Doomblehdoar.

    • @muhdzafri7551
      @muhdzafri7551 5 років тому +1

      @@ProfezorSnayp True but he's a fictional charactah.

  • @sniperammow4865
    @sniperammow4865 5 років тому +12

    I have always wanted to get a Nobel prize in physics, too bad I am stupid

    • @BassForever44
      @BassForever44 5 років тому +3

      hahahahahaha. You still can learn physics for your own amusement and pleasure, which in the long run is much more important than the prize.

    • @sniperammow4865
      @sniperammow4865 5 років тому +2

      @@BassForever44 yea but i still want to be an engineer or high school science teacher. but 79 is not going to get me into much :(

    • @BassForever44
      @BassForever44 5 років тому +1

      Who cares? Go for it!! If it makes you happy, it’ll make others happy

  • @kevinslater4126
    @kevinslater4126 5 років тому +1

    The more advanced chemistry becomes the more I'm convinced we live in a fantasy science fiction series.

  • @CheydeShaowid
    @CheydeShaowid 5 років тому

    Nice vid!

  • @celtgunn9775
    @celtgunn9775 5 років тому +29

    Bacteriaphages saved the life of a gentleman, I forget who he was. But I remember him. He was deathly sick! On his deathbed. This treatment absolutely saved him. It took a long time for him to recover, but he did! This scientist saved him.

    • @mistertheguy3073
      @mistertheguy3073 5 років тому +12

      Tina Abrahamson your comment reads like a poem, it has great rhythm.

  • @comradechris7975
    @comradechris7975 5 років тому +4

    Biological science always manages to hurt my head

  • @ProfezorSnayp
    @ProfezorSnayp 5 років тому +323

    Biology is just applied chemistry.
    Chemistry is just applied physics.
    Physics is just applied math.
    Math is just applied magic.

    • @timothyalabi
      @timothyalabi 5 років тому +33

      and logic is applied philosophy

    • @sandeepshastry6647
      @sandeepshastry6647 5 років тому +1

      Superb

    • @JanboelPe
      @JanboelPe 5 років тому +23

      @@timothyalabi math and philosophy are both applied logic

    • @senselessnothing
      @senselessnothing 5 років тому +2

      Logic is not unique though. There are many logical calculi.

    • @DANGJOS
      @DANGJOS 5 років тому +2

      Math is applied logic

  • @andrewstirling2051
    @andrewstirling2051 5 років тому

    Was the prize literally cut into the appropriate segments?

  • @Roxor128
    @Roxor128 5 років тому +1

    Say, was the 1935 winner related to the 1911 winner or is it just a coincidence of naming?

    • @AguaFluorida
      @AguaFluorida 5 років тому

      And both lucky chancers, the pair of 'em...

    • @GRosa
      @GRosa 5 років тому +2

      They're related: mother and daughter. I wonder if their descendants are still around.

  • @jdospassos
    @jdospassos 5 років тому +2

    Wait there, 4:05, as if engineering is not science.
    They are the Oompa Loompas of science :)
    ...This channel is just amazing :)

    • @omikronweapon
      @omikronweapon 4 роки тому

      lol. Trying to validate engineers by saying they're Oompa Loompas XD I'm sure they'd love to be compared to them.

  • @cush6827
    @cush6827 4 роки тому

    The life story of Frances Arnold is quite sad. So many early deaths.

  • @bumpty9830
    @bumpty9830 5 років тому +1

    So, it's a sort of biological version of optimization by "genetic algorithms", which in turn are sort of a computational version of biological evolution. Or, from another angle, it's not much more than a breeding program.

  • @doodelay
    @doodelay 5 років тому

    I hope there's a special type of Nobel which represents that it's a part of a whole. That way every scientist can take their Nobel home with them

  • @maxhaka4007
    @maxhaka4007 5 років тому

    Nice video ❤️

  • @SeducingJackel
    @SeducingJackel 5 років тому

    1:21 looks like my living room floor after Christmas morning... kids eh

  • @Milo-pn1zy
    @Milo-pn1zy 5 років тому +1

    Dank

  • @Falco.
    @Falco. 5 років тому

    Grande Francesca Paradisi

  • @ijunkie
    @ijunkie 2 роки тому

    Imagine how much more advanced we would be if science had progressed on more than half of the available brain power.

  • @stefanoleidi1006
    @stefanoleidi1006 5 років тому

    Lets gooo un italiana in periodic video!!!

  • @vblaas246
    @vblaas246 5 років тому

    Offended by the static cartoon of the protein, should have been an animation. Look up Drew Berry. Bravo Frances Arnold!

  • @superscatboy
    @superscatboy 5 років тому

    I feel like biologists inspired computer scientists to create genetic algorithms, and now the biologists are taking the idea back into their own work. And dude that's awesome.

  • @alekseysoldatenkov5675
    @alekseysoldatenkov5675 5 років тому +1

    Holy chit! This is dope!

  • @herrfleischgewehr
    @herrfleischgewehr 5 років тому

    very, very interesting.

  • @jcortese3300
    @jcortese3300 5 років тому +2

    They're not just developing drugs -- they're evolving them. Veddy interesting.

  • @medcologytutorials2636
    @medcologytutorials2636 5 років тому +2

    Omg I was eagerly waiting for this video 📹. I love how the professor simplifies tough concepts and he is my role model who inspired to take up science teaching as a career. I definitely believe Professor and the preodic table videos team will win the Nobel prize 🏆 for popularization of science. 😇

  • @djscottdog1
    @djscottdog1 5 років тому

    yest that can survive higher alcohol contents would help a lot, bioethonol.

  • @emelgiefro
    @emelgiefro 5 років тому

    Our dear professor looks like he has a nobel prize

  • @alkylester5385
    @alkylester5385 5 років тому

    Chemistry must be Respected.............

  • @conorgallagher746
    @conorgallagher746 5 років тому

    Francesca paradisi 😍 best lecturer ever

  • @liuby33
    @liuby33 5 років тому

    Greetings Professor :D

  • @petercarioscia9189
    @petercarioscia9189 5 років тому

    Who would dislike this?!

  • @martinwood744
    @martinwood744 5 років тому

    I think I should be awarded the Nobel prize for inventing the silent bicycle.

  • @dwurry1
    @dwurry1 5 років тому

    The technique of modifying enzymes is really similar to how machine learning bots are made in computer science.

    • @shallfrisch1
      @shallfrisch1 5 років тому

      evolution through non-random selection.

  • @akehapkap6143
    @akehapkap6143 5 років тому

    Go France's ❤️

  • @kirigayatoshiro2793
    @kirigayatoshiro2793 5 років тому

    The phage technique could it be used to cure cancer?!

  • @Nawmps
    @Nawmps 5 років тому

    Exploiting the "intelligence", or the basic rules of evolution as a basis for an almost AI like development of these enzymes. Incredible to see it actually being done.

    • @bumpty9830
      @bumpty9830 5 років тому

      It's interesting that you mention AI. There is a computational version of this idea that's been around for a few decades called "genetic algorithms."

  • @PajamaMan44
    @PajamaMan44 5 років тому

    Another chemistry prize given to biology. Great

  • @aviddavid8793
    @aviddavid8793 5 років тому

    Damn think about photosyntises.

  • @syahrulfachrudin6890
    @syahrulfachrudin6890 5 років тому +1

    I thought it was computational but its enzyme

  • @BuIIetBiII
    @BuIIetBiII 5 років тому

    10:45 is that western blotting?

  • @phonotical
    @phonotical 5 років тому +1

    You'd think they could just make three medals

  • @kromit
    @kromit 5 років тому +1

    This basically machine learning applied to enzymes

  • @Anchor9Studios
    @Anchor9Studios 5 років тому

    It’s been a while since we’ve had a Nobel Prize video. Love we have one for this year!

    • @periodicvideos
      @periodicvideos  5 років тому

      Our Nobel collection: ua-cam.com/play/PL9eEsN9D48mddEnxhyfM44MCw4F3PohOI.html

  • @jamesprince571
    @jamesprince571 5 років тому +8

    I hate that pure chemistry is not getting the Nobel prize like before 🙄😑

    • @twixeater1
      @twixeater1 5 років тому +3

      That's because interdisciplinary work is the future of science, really. It's only when we step out of our little prescriptive boxes that we realise the full potential of what we can do with science

    • @Inuyasha10121
      @Inuyasha10121 5 років тому +4

      Except that it is pure chemistry, just with the use of a biocatalyst instead of a "traditional" organic catalyst. Inorganic chemists do something similar by doing ligand swapping around their metal center cores. It's more difficult to predict changes in the context of a biocatalyst though, but the contributions made by Frances make it a viable and rapid method of developing proteins as potent biocatalysts. The goal isn't/wasn't to change metabolic pathways, it was to take interesting reactions from biology and make them work in a chemical context. Plus, biocatalysts are green, relatively easy to express and purify, and are incredibly regio, stereo, and chemo selective. Granted I'm biased, since I work in a lab headed by an alumni of Frances' lab. Bio-inspired, yes, but the application is pure chemistry.

    • @jamesprince571
      @jamesprince571 5 років тому

      Still lot of breakthrough inventions r made in chemistry like in organic inorganic and physical, but y those chemist not getting Nobel prize??.. only those biology related scientist receiving for past few years 😒

    • @ragushel2201
      @ragushel2201 5 років тому

      Define "pure" chemistry because you come across as painfully ignorant

  • @gigglysamentz2021
    @gigglysamentz2021 5 років тому +1

    YES! GO ENZYMES! 8D

  • @Baamthe25th
    @Baamthe25th 5 років тому +2

    It's a bit like they created GMOs or computer scientist generate algorithms, then ? Selecting the best, rince and repeat.

    • @bumpty9830
      @bumpty9830 5 років тому +3

      Yeah. Old fashioned selective breeding, the type that produced our "heirloom" tomatoes, for example, also works the same way.

  • @iliyan44
    @iliyan44 5 років тому

    That mac is making my eyes hurt

  • @demoror5585
    @demoror5585 3 роки тому

    Nature learning?

  • @XMeK
    @XMeK 5 років тому +20

    "This video features Martyn Poliakoff, Francesca ..."
    - Shouldn't that be Sir Martyn Poliakoff?

    • @periodicvideos
      @periodicvideos  5 років тому +4

      I didn’t put Sir Gregory Winter so thought it was only fair to drop Martyn’s too. ;)

    • @TomatoBreadOrgasm
      @TomatoBreadOrgasm 5 років тому

      @@periodicvideos Well it's NOT! SIR Martyn!

    • @PersonaRandomNumbers
      @PersonaRandomNumbers 5 років тому +1

      Sir Dr. Martyn Poliakoff, please! Don't just drop titles willy nilly.

    • @TomatoBreadOrgasm
      @TomatoBreadOrgasm 5 років тому

      @@PersonaRandomNumbers Oh no, you're right! I have shamed myself!

    • @twixeater1
      @twixeater1 5 років тому +1

      @@PersonaRandomNumbers Isn't it Professor Sir Martyn Poliakoff, if you're using the correct form?

  • @whoeveriam0iam14222
    @whoeveriam0iam14222 5 років тому

    if you win less than a full Nobel Prize do they cut the medal?

  • @carl8790
    @carl8790 2 роки тому

    I'm guessing nothing had happened during 2016 and 2017?

  • @thomas.02
    @thomas.02 5 років тому

    Nanomachines will have much overlap with - heck, indifferentiable from - molecular biology

  • @theultimatereductionist7592
    @theultimatereductionist7592 5 років тому +1

    Everything is math + moving atoms around.

  • @shantanu.3924
    @shantanu.3924 5 років тому

    Surerbacha

  • @swingardium706
    @swingardium706 5 років тому +156

    The people that are complaining about all the references to the fact that Frances Arnold is a woman: she did not win the Nobel Prize because she is a woman, she won it because she is an incredible chemist. The video references her gender to a) motivate more women to study STEM subjects, and b) show how far we've come with regards to gender equality in research awards.

    • @SophiaAstatine
      @SophiaAstatine 5 років тому +11

      Glad someone understands it. Although if those encouraged women scroll down into the comment section of this video. They might very quickly find the Jihadwatch fanboy Tacos Obscure attacking them for even believing they can be part of science.

    • @ericl1421
      @ericl1421 5 років тому +11

      An industry has become obsessed with a persons genitals.
      Progressive: Progress, it's in the name.

    • @SophiaAstatine
      @SophiaAstatine 5 років тому +1

      @@ericl1421 It was always obsessed with genitals. But supposedly its different genitals now.

    • @ciaphascyne8866
      @ciaphascyne8866 5 років тому +8

      the more brains that work on a problem the faster it gets solved. its just that simple, folks! help your brothers and sisters and they will help you.

    • @xCorvus7x
      @xCorvus7x 5 років тому +30

      The question is why anybody should care about gender differences in sciences (or try to change them) and bringing more women into sciences (aside from the fact that they outnumber men in some sciences or science-related fields, and alot of other fields already).
      This is not 1900. Women and men have the same academic opportunities (actually, there are more female than male students), everything else should be up to personal preference, interest.
      So what is the point of going further than pointing out an example of awarding equality?