- Email: [email protected]
Nobel prizes for the 21st century
EDITORIAL
Nobel prizes for the 21st century The verdict of leading scientists is clear. We need to rekindle the spirit of Nobel’s great legacy
she was shoehorned into the peace category. The basic science prizes in chemistry, physics and “physiology or medicine” still reflect Nobel’s 19th-century world view. In fact, the only alteration to the Nobel line-up in 108 years was the creation by the Bank of Sweden in 1968 of the economics prize, and one might question whether this has really served to recognise the “greatest benefit” to humanity. The winners of the 1997 prize were the brains behind Long-Term Capital Management – the gigantic hedge fund whose near-collapse a year later was a harbinger of greater financial woes to come.
“THE merchant of death is dead.” That was the headline of an 1888 obituary of Alfred Nobel, who had amassed a fortune by selling explosives. The notice was premature, however: it was actually Alfred’s brother Ludvig who had died. The arms manufacturer “The prizes in chemistry, physics and ‘physiology or medicine’ still reflect did not like what he saw, so the story goes, Nobel’s 19th-century world view” and was thus inspired to burnish his legacy. When Nobel wrote his will it contained instructions to create a series of prizes for So do the prizes need to change? We those who confer the “greatest benefit on asked a range of prominent scientists, and mankind”. The awards remain the most most replied with an emphatic yes (see page prestigious in science. It is questionable, 6). After a month of debate, they decided though, whether they still live up to Nobel’s to call for the creation of new Nobel prizes noble intentions. for the global environment and public health. A Nobel prize can elevate brilliant but The group also said that the existing medicine little-known innovators to influential prize should be reconfigured to recognise visionaries with global reach. Few people achievements across the life sciences, from outside Kenya, for example, had heard of ecology to molecular biology. Wangari Maathai and her attempts to boost What would Alfred Nobel make of these sustainable development and human rights proposals if he were alive today? We believe until she was awarded the 2004 peace prize. that he would feel that they captured the The resulting media attention gave her a spirit of his will. The people who do the most golden opportunity to spread her message. for the world over this century may well be Maathai is just one recent laureate whose the organisations and individuals who – achievements fit awkwardly into the prizes’ we hope – are able to rein in climate change framework. Her work on environmental and and eradicate diseases. Let’s make sure those social justice is relevant to peace-keeping, achievements can be fully recognised by the but it is hardly conflict resolution. Even so, most prestigious prizes of all. ■
What’s hot on NewScientist.com TECH Touchscreen Lego Piling special blocks onto a new touchscreen “table” offers a whole new way to interact with the virtual world. Watch how it works in our video ONLINE WARFARE Gamers more aggressive to strangers Levels of testosterone in computer gamers surged when they were competing against strangers, but not friends – as you’d expect in real warfare
ASTRONOMY Reclaim the night sky Iranian photographer Babak Tafreshi has won the 2009 Lennart Nilsson scientific photography prize – see his stunning images of the sky in our gallery ASTEROIDS The world’s best impact craters About 150 such craters are known on Earth. See our gallery of the most spectacular examples
Earth will be OK, but for us it’s not so good IT MADE for disturbing reading when we asked scientists to speculate on what the world would be like if the global average temperature rose by 4 °C. They were happy to oblige, and the results formed the basis of the cover story for our 28 February issue. Now climate scientists have firmed up their speculations with modelling studies, and their conclusions are, if anything, more worrying (see page 14). A 4 °C rise would be a disaster. It is not hard to imagine that if we fail to get a grip on the climate, civilisation will collapse altogether. So we asked another question: if we consume ourselves back to the Stone Age, what happens next? Would Earth recover? The answers paint a strangely comforting picture of our planet’s future (see page 32) – but they don’t leave a lot of room for us or our descendants. ■
New MacDonald IF YOU can recite Old MacDonald Had a Farm you’re already familiar with most domestic animals. But have you ever wondered why that list has stayed the same for centuries? Charles Darwin thought the process of domestication was “insensibly slow”. Hard-to-tame species backed that perception, but it will change once we find domestication’s genetic basis (see page 40). So what should MacDonald farm next? Tame African buffalo, perhaps? Or has domestication gone far enough? Give us your views at www.bit.ly/Kybfd. ■
Big Impact poll WEB ‘Time telescope’ could boost internet speed A “telescope” that is able to “magnify time” could dramatically increase the amount of data that can be sent through fibre-optic cables, speeding up broadband connections If you would like to make a comment online about any of the articles in this issue, you can do so by visiting the article at www.newscientist.com
WE WANT to hear from you. What recent advance has had the biggest positive impact? For the next month we will be running the Big Impact poll to find out. Navigate to www.bit.ly/ 47jKvp to vote on the suggestions of leading lights, including author Simon Singh and satellite engineer Martin Sweeting, or suggest your own. The poll is supported by the EPSRC – the main UK government agency for funding research in engineering and the physical sciences. The agency has launched www.impactworld.org.uk which, in the words of UK science minister Paul Drayson, offers a “fascinating insight” into how technologies are tackling the biggest challenges.
3 October 2009 | NewScientist | 3
Nobel prizes for the 21st century The verdict of leading scientists is clear. We need to rekindle the spirit of Nobel’s great legacy
she was shoehorned into the peace category. The basic science prizes in chemistry, physics and “physiology or medicine” still reflect Nobel’s 19th-century world view. In fact, the only alteration to the Nobel line-up in 108 years was the creation by the Bank of Sweden in 1968 of the economics prize, and one might question whether this has really served to recognise the “greatest benefit” to humanity. The winners of the 1997 prize were the brains behind Long-Term Capital Management – the gigantic hedge fund whose near-collapse a year later was a harbinger of greater financial woes to come.
“THE merchant of death is dead.” That was the headline of an 1888 obituary of Alfred Nobel, who had amassed a fortune by selling explosives. The notice was premature, however: it was actually Alfred’s brother Ludvig who had died. The arms manufacturer “The prizes in chemistry, physics and ‘physiology or medicine’ still reflect did not like what he saw, so the story goes, Nobel’s 19th-century world view” and was thus inspired to burnish his legacy. When Nobel wrote his will it contained instructions to create a series of prizes for So do the prizes need to change? We those who confer the “greatest benefit on asked a range of prominent scientists, and mankind”. The awards remain the most most replied with an emphatic yes (see page prestigious in science. It is questionable, 6). After a month of debate, they decided though, whether they still live up to Nobel’s to call for the creation of new Nobel prizes noble intentions. for the global environment and public health. A Nobel prize can elevate brilliant but The group also said that the existing medicine little-known innovators to influential prize should be reconfigured to recognise visionaries with global reach. Few people achievements across the life sciences, from outside Kenya, for example, had heard of ecology to molecular biology. Wangari Maathai and her attempts to boost What would Alfred Nobel make of these sustainable development and human rights proposals if he were alive today? We believe until she was awarded the 2004 peace prize. that he would feel that they captured the The resulting media attention gave her a spirit of his will. The people who do the most golden opportunity to spread her message. for the world over this century may well be Maathai is just one recent laureate whose the organisations and individuals who – achievements fit awkwardly into the prizes’ we hope – are able to rein in climate change framework. Her work on environmental and and eradicate diseases. Let’s make sure those social justice is relevant to peace-keeping, achievements can be fully recognised by the but it is hardly conflict resolution. Even so, most prestigious prizes of all. ■
What’s hot on NewScientist.com TECH Touchscreen Lego Piling special blocks onto a new touchscreen “table” offers a whole new way to interact with the virtual world. Watch how it works in our video ONLINE WARFARE Gamers more aggressive to strangers Levels of testosterone in computer gamers surged when they were competing against strangers, but not friends – as you’d expect in real warfare
ASTRONOMY Reclaim the night sky Iranian photographer Babak Tafreshi has won the 2009 Lennart Nilsson scientific photography prize – see his stunning images of the sky in our gallery ASTEROIDS The world’s best impact craters About 150 such craters are known on Earth. See our gallery of the most spectacular examples
Earth will be OK, but for us it’s not so good IT MADE for disturbing reading when we asked scientists to speculate on what the world would be like if the global average temperature rose by 4 °C. They were happy to oblige, and the results formed the basis of the cover story for our 28 February issue. Now climate scientists have firmed up their speculations with modelling studies, and their conclusions are, if anything, more worrying (see page 14). A 4 °C rise would be a disaster. It is not hard to imagine that if we fail to get a grip on the climate, civilisation will collapse altogether. So we asked another question: if we consume ourselves back to the Stone Age, what happens next? Would Earth recover? The answers paint a strangely comforting picture of our planet’s future (see page 32) – but they don’t leave a lot of room for us or our descendants. ■
New MacDonald IF YOU can recite Old MacDonald Had a Farm you’re already familiar with most domestic animals. But have you ever wondered why that list has stayed the same for centuries? Charles Darwin thought the process of domestication was “insensibly slow”. Hard-to-tame species backed that perception, but it will change once we find domestication’s genetic basis (see page 40). So what should MacDonald farm next? Tame African buffalo, perhaps? Or has domestication gone far enough? Give us your views at www.bit.ly/Kybfd. ■
Big Impact poll WEB ‘Time telescope’ could boost internet speed A “telescope” that is able to “magnify time” could dramatically increase the amount of data that can be sent through fibre-optic cables, speeding up broadband connections If you would like to make a comment online about any of the articles in this issue, you can do so by visiting the article at www.newscientist.com
WE WANT to hear from you. What recent advance has had the biggest positive impact? For the next month we will be running the Big Impact poll to find out. Navigate to www.bit.ly/ 47jKvp to vote on the suggestions of leading lights, including author Simon Singh and satellite engineer Martin Sweeting, or suggest your own. The poll is supported by the EPSRC – the main UK government agency for funding research in engineering and the physical sciences. The agency has launched www.impactworld.org.uk which, in the words of UK science minister Paul Drayson, offers a “fascinating insight” into how technologies are tackling the biggest challenges.
3 October 2009 | NewScientist | 3