Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Nobel Prize WInners’ Category


2020 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats to Paul R. Milgrom and Robert B. Wilson

Reporter: Aviva Lev- Ari, PhD, RN

UPDATED on 10/16/2020

The Nobel Prize for economic sciences this year went to Paul MIlgrom and Robert Wilson. Milgrom is recognized as one of the world’s great experts in auction theory, and I interviewed him for my book In the Plex (finally out in paper next February!) about Google’s clever AdWords approach to bidding, which was crafted by Google engineer Eric Veach along with his boss Salar Kamangar. I’d asked Milgrom to compare the AdWords system to the competitor, Overture:

One fan of Veach’s system was the top auction theorist, Stanford economist Paul Milgrom. “Overture’s auctions were much less successful,” says Milgrom. “In that world, you bid by the slot. If you wanted to be in third position, you put in a bid for third. If there’s an obvious guy to win the first position, nobody would bid against him, and he’d get it cheap. If you wanted to be in every position, you had to make bids for each of them. But Google simplified the auction. Instead of making eight bids for the eight positions, you made one single bid. The competition for second position will automatically raise the price for the first position. So the simplification thickens the market. The effect is that it guarantees that there’s competition for the top positions.”

Veach and Kamangar’s implementation was so impressive that it changed even Milgrom’s way of thinking. “Once I saw this from Google, I began seeing it everywhere,” he says, citing examples in spectrum auctions, diamond markets, and the competition between Kenyan and Rwandan coffee beans. “I’ve begun to realize that Google somehow or other introduced a level of simplification to ad auctions that was not included before.” And it wasn’t just a theoretical advance. “Google immediately started getting higher prices for advertising than Overture was getting,” he notes.

SOURCE

From: WIRED’s Steven Levy <wired@newsletters.wired.com>

Date: Friday, October 16, 2020 at 8:00 AM

To: “Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN” <AvivaLev-Ari@alum.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Clarence Thomas wants to rethink internet speech. Be afraid

 

 

Paul Milgrom (left) and Robert Wilson share the 2020 Nobel prize in economic sciences for improvements to auction theory and invention of new auction formats.

Image Credit: Elena Zhukova for the Stanford Graduate School of Business

 

 

UPDATED on 10/13/2020

The 2020 Nobel prize in economic sciences rewards work on an ancient form of transaction that has acquired new complexity and urgency in the modern age: the auction.

Insights in auction theory made by Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson, both of Stanford University in California, have found applications ranging from the pricing of government bonds to the licensing of radio-spectrum bands in telecommunications.

Diane Coyle of the University of Cambridge, UK, says that the Nobel, announced on 12 October, will be widely welcomed. “These two not only did foundational work themselves”, she says, “but also inspired cohorts of younger researchers.”

Economist Preston McAfee of Google agrees. “I, and thousands like me, use the fruits of their work on a daily basis to make markets work better — to improve pricing, to manage incentives, to facilitate decision-making, to increase efficiency.”

Their research has intersected with computer science and communications engineering to lay the foundations for many online platforms, Coyle adds.

Economist John Kagel of Ohio State University in Columbus, USA, called it “an outstanding selection”.

Online platforms such as eBay have raised public awareness of some of the complexities of auctions. There are many ways to stage them: for example, in a so-called “English auction” the item on offer simply goes to the highest bidder; whereas in a “Dutch auction” the selling starts from a high price, and bidders submit the price they are willing to pay.

But bidding is affected by many more factors that might reduce the seller’s final profit, cause losses for the winning bidder, create inefficiencies of allocation, or harm the public good. The work of the two laureates has helped to reduce these problems and to suggest new, more efficient ways for auctions to be conducted.

One problem is that different bidders can have different degrees of knowledge about an item for sale. For example, in a property auction, all bidders for a property will have access to some public information such as its resale value. But other kinds of information — such as hidden structural damage — will be private and not known to everyone.

A bidder who does not have such information might end up overpaying if they want to buy the property. They might be able to infer what others know about the value if bids are public – and people start to drop out – but not if bids are private.

In the late 1960s and 1970s, Wilson showed what happens to prices and profits in auctions when bidders have different degrees of private information.

Furthermore, if information about a property is highly uncertain — if the nature of the neighbourhood is rapidly changing, say — that could make buyers cautious and reduce the seller’s profit. In the 1980s, Milgrom — a former doctoral student of Wilson’s — developed models (partly in conjunction with Robert Weber of Northwestern University) that showed there is then an incentive for sellers to gather and share expert information with bidders, within different auction formats. The predictions of how such public information helps prevent losses to sellers and increases their revenue have been born out by experiments, says Kagel.

A spectrum of options

Auctions can be more complex when the goods for sale are divisible into parts or batches — for example, when governments sell licenses to companies bidding to operate in energy, telecommunications or transportation markets. One issue for such auctions is that sellers are vulnerable to collusion between buyers to keep the buying price down. Wilson’s work in the 1970s helped to identify these problems and to design new auctions to avoid them, for example in markets for electricity provision.

The sales of items might also be interdependent. A classic example in the 1990s was the sale of radio-frequency bands to telecom companies for mobile-phone networks — which many countries decided was best done through auctions.

If rights to frequency bands were simply auctioned region by region, a national telecoms company couldn’t be sure of acquiring the same frequency everywhere. And the value to them for one region would depend on whether they could buy the same frequency band elsewhere. The resulting patchwork of coverage would be inconvenient for users too.

To tackle such problems, Milgrom and Wilson (and independently, McAfee) devised the simultaneous multiple-round auction (SMRA). Here, bidders can place bids over several rounds of bidding. This gives them a chance to glean something about others’ private information while bidding, creating fairer and more efficient outcomes.

This approach was used in 1994 for auctioning telecom licenses in the United States, and has been adopted in Canada, India, and several European and Scandinavian countries. Milgrom has also devised other formats that ease some of the shortcomings of the SMRA.

“Unlike many theoreticians, Wilson and Milgrom brought their work to the real world, and transformed government policies toward auctions around the world,” says McAfee.

“There was no question that these two would win the Nobel prize at some point,” says economist Paul Klemperer of the University of Oxford. “It could have happened at any time in the past 20 years.”

“One could even imagine Paul Milgrom having a second Nobel prize,” he adds, for his work in information economics and industrial organization. Milgrom has given a Nobel acceptance speech before: in 1996, as a stand-in for William Vickery, who died three days after the announcement of his prize for laying the foundations of auction theory in the 1960s.

SOURCE

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02904-2?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=6b3b78efc9-briefing-dy-20201013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-6b3b78efc9-43323101

 

Prize announcement. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Media AB 2020. Mon. 12 Oct 2020

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2020/prize-announcement/

 

The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2020

Paul R. Milgrom

© Nobel Media. Ill. Niklas Elmehed.

Paul R. Milgrom

Prize share: 1/2

Robert B. Wilson

© Nobel Media. Ill. Niklas Elmehed.

Robert B. Wilson

Prize share: 1/2

The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2020 was awarded jointly to Paul R. Milgrom and Robert B. Wilson “for improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats.”

Prize announcement

Announcement of the 2020 Prize in Economic Sciences by Professor Göran K. Hansson, Secretary General of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, on 12 October 2020.

“This prize is about avoiding the winner’s curse”

Immediately after the announcement, Tommy Andersson, member of the committee for the Prize in Economic Sciences, was interviewed by freelance journalist Joanna Rose regarding the 2020 Prize in Economic Sciences.

Press release: The Prize in Economic Sciences 2020

English
English (pdf)
Swedish
Swedish (pdf)

Logo

12 October 2020

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2020 to

Paul R. Milgrom
Stanford University, USA

Robert B. Wilson
Stanford University, USA

“for improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats”

 

Their theoretical discoveries have improved auctions in practice

This year’s Laureates, Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson, have studied how auctions work. They have also used their insights to design new auction formats for goods and services that are difficult to sell in a traditional way, such as radio frequencies. Their discoveries have benefitted sellers, buyers and taxpayers around the world.

People have always sold things to the highest bidder, or bought them from whoever makes the cheapest offer. Nowadays, objects worth astronomical sums of money change hands every day in auctions, not only household objects, art and antiquities, but also securities, minerals and energy. Public procurements can also be conducted as auctions.

Using auction theory, researchers try to understand the outcomes of different rules for bidding and final prices, the auction format. The analysis is difficult, because bidders behave strategically, based on the available information. They take into consideration both what they know themselves and what they believe other bidders to know.

Robert Wilson developed the theory for auctions of objects with a common value – a value which is uncertain beforehand but, in the end, is the same for everyone. Examples include the future value of radio frequencies or the volume of minerals in a particular area. Wilson showed why rational bidders tend to place bids below their own best estimate of the common value: they are worried about the winner’s curse – that is, about paying too much and losing out.

Paul Milgrom formulated a more general theory of auctions that not only allows common values, but also private values that vary from bidder to bidder. He analysed the bidding strategies in a number of well-known auction formats, demonstrating that a format will give the seller higher expected revenue when bidders learn more about each other’s estimated values during bidding.

Over time, societies have allocated ever more complex objects among users, such as landing slots and radio frequencies. In response, Milgrom and Wilson invented new formats for auctioning off many interrelated objects simultaneously, on behalf of a seller motivated by broad societal benefit rather than maximal revenue. In 1994, the US authorities first used one of their auction formats to sell radio frequencies to telecom operators. Since then, many other countries have followed suit.

“This year’s Laureates in Economic Sciences started out with fundamental theory and later used their results in practical applications, which have spread globally. Their discoveries are of great benefit to society,” says Peter Fredriksson, chair of the Prize Committee.

Illustrations

The illustrations are free to use for non-commercial purposes. Attribute ”© Johan Jarnestad/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences”

Illustration: Auctions (pdf)
Illustration: Winner’s curse (pdf)
Illustration: Auction frequencies (pdf)

Read more about this year’s prize

Popular science background: The quest for the perfect auction
Scientific Background: Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats

 

Paul R. Milgrom, born 1948 in Detroit, USA.
Ph.D. 1979 from Stanford University, Stanford, USA. Shirley and Leonard Ely Jr. Professor of Humanities and Sciences, Stanford University, USA.

Robert B. Wilson, born 1937 in Geneva, USA.
D.B.A. 1963 from Harvard University, Cambridge, USA. Adams Distinguished Professor of Management, Emeritus, Stanford University, USA.

 

The Prize amount: 10 million Swedish kronor, to be shared equally between the Laureates.
Further information: www.kva.se and http://www.nobelprize.org
Press contact: Eva Nevelius, Press Secretary, +46 70 878 67 63, eva.nevelius@kva.se
Experts: Tommy Andersson, +46 73 358 26 54, tommy.andersson@nek.lu.se, Tore Ellingsen, +46 70 796 10 49, tore.ellingsen@hhs.se, Torsten Persson, +46 79 313 39 04, torsten.persson@iies.su.se, Committee for the Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel

SOURCE

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2020/summary/

Read Full Post »


The University of California has a proud legacy of winning Nobel Prizes, 68 faculty and staff have been awarded 69 Nobel Prizes.

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

PREVIOUS PRIZE WINNERS

The University of California has a proud legacy of winning Nobel Prizes that stretches all the way back to 1939, when Ernest O. Lawrence was awarded the prize in physics for his invention of the cyclotron. In the years since, dozens of other University of California faculty and staff have been awarded this highest international honor for their contributions in medicine, economics, physics and more.

Today, 68 faculty and staff have been awarded 69 Nobel Prizes.

View as grid

Name

Campus affiliation

Field of study

Year of award

  • Jennifer Doudna

    UC Berkeley

    Chemistry

    2020

  • Andrea Ghez

    UCLA

    Physics

    2020

  • Reinhard Genzel

    UC Berkeley

    Physics

    2020

  • Randy Schekman

    UC Berkeley

    Physiology or medicine

    2013

  • Lloyd Shapley

    UCLA

    Economics

    2012

  • Shinya Yamanaka

    UC San Francisco

    Physiology or medicine

    2012

  • Saul Perlmutter

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    2011

  • Elizabeth Blackburn

    UC San Francisco

    Physiology or medicine

    2009

  • Oliver E. Williamson

    UC Berkeley

    Economics

    2009

  • Roger Y. Tsien

    UC San Diego

    Chemistry

    2008

  • George Smoot

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    2006

  • Richard R. Schrock

    UC Riverside

    Chemistry

    2005

  • David Gross

    UC Santa Barbara

    Physics

    2004

  • Finn E. Kydland

    UC Santa Barbara

    Economic sciences

    2004

  • Irwin Rose

    UC Irvine

    Chemistry

    2004

  • Robert F. Engle

    UC San Diego

    Economic sciences

    2003

  • Clive Granger

    UC San Diego

    Economic sciences

    2003

  • Sydney Brenner

    UC San Diego

    Physiology or medicine

    2002

  • George Akerlof

    UC Berkeley

    Economic sciences

    2001

  • Alan J. Heeger

    UC Santa Barbara

    Chemistry

    2000

  • Herbert Kroemer

    UC Santa Barbara

    Physics

    2000

  • Daniel McFadden

    UC Berkeley

    Economic sciences

    2000

  • Louis J. Ignarro

    UCLA

    Physiology or medicine

    1998

  • Walter Kohn

    UC Santa Barbara

    Chemistry

    1998

  • Robert B. Laughlin

    UC Livermore Lab

    Physics

    1998

  • Paul D. Boyer

    UCLA

    Chemistry

    1997

  • Steven Chu

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    1997

  • Stanley B. Prusiner

    UC San Francisco

    Physiology or medicine

    1997

  • Paul Crutzen

    UC San Diego

    Chemistry

    1995

  • Mario J. Molina

    UC San Diego

    Chemistry

    1995

  • Frederick Reines

    UC Irvine

    Physics

    1995

  • F. Sherwood Rowland

    UC Irvine

    Chemistry

    1995

  • John Harsanyi

    UC Berkeley

    Economic sciences

    1994

  • Harry Markowitz

    UC San Diego

    Economic sciences

    1990

  • J. Michael Bishop

    UC San Francisco

    Physiology or medicine

    1989

  • Harold E. Varmus

    UC San Francisco

    Physiology or medicine

    1989

  • Donald J. Cram

    UCLA

    Chemistry

    1987

  • Yuan T. Lee

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Chemistry

    1986

  • Gerard Debreu

    UC Berkeley

    Economic sciences

    1983

  • Czeslaw Milosz

    UC Berkeley

    Literature

    1980

  • Roger Guillemin

    UC San Diego

    Physiology or medicine

    1977

  • Renato Dulbecco

    UC San Diego

    Physiology or medicine

    1975

  • George Emil Palade

    UC San Diego

    Physiology or medicine

    1974

  • John Robert Schrieffer

    UC Santa Barbara

    Physics

    1972

  • Hannes Alfven

    UC San Diego

    Physics

    1970

  • Luis Walter Alvarez

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    1968

  • Robert W. Holley

    UC San Diego

    Physiology or medicine

    1968

  • Julian Schwinger

    UCLA

    Physics

    1965

  • Charles H. Townes

    UC Berkeley

    Physics

    1964

  • Maria Goeppert-Mayer

    UC San Diego

    Physics

    1963

  • Francis Crick

    UC San Diego

    Physiology or medicine

    1962

  • Melvin Calvin

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Chemistry

    1961

  • Donald A. Glaser

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    1960

  • Willard Libby

    UCLA

    Chemistry

    1960

  • Owen Chamberlain

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    1959

  • Emilio Segrè

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Chemistry

    1959

  • Linus Pauling

    UC San Diego

    Chemistry, Peace

    1954, 1962

  • Edwin McMillan

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Chemistry

    1951

  • Glenn T. Seaborg

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Chemistry

    1951

  • William Giauque

    UC Berkeley

    Chemistry

    1949

  • John Howard Northrop

    UC Berkeley

    Chemistry

    1946

  • Wendell Meredith Stanley

    UC Berkeley

    Chemistry

    1946

  • Ernest Lawrence

    UC Berkeley/Berkeley Lab

    Physics

    1939

  • Harold Urey

    UC San Diego

    Chemistry

    1934

HOW UC NOBEL LAUREATES ARE COUNTED

Our list of Nobel Prize winners includes University of California faculty and staff who were affiliated with UC when they received their award. It also includes faculty and staff who joined UC after receiving their Nobel Prize. And although we are immensely proud of the many UC alumni who have gone on to receive Nobel Prizes, they are not counted here. Nor are visiting scholars or others who had short-term assignments with UC. Finally, our Nobelist list is a “lifetime” list and includes those living, retired or deceased.

SOURCE

https://nobel.universityofcalifornia.edu/

Read Full Post »


The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020: Emmanuelle Charpentier & Jennifer A. Doudna

Reporters: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D. and Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

UPDATED on 11/12/2020

Harvard’s Jack Szostak congratulates former advisee Jennifer Doudna

It was a toast from one Nobel laureate to another, sweetened by the pride of a mentor to a prized student.

When Jennifer Doudna Ph.D. ’89 was honored on Wednesday with the Nobel Prize in chemistry for her work on the CRISPR gene-editing technique, she became the second person to gain such an honor from the lab of Jack Szostak, a genetics professor at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, and professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

Szostak, who won the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine in 2009 for work on how telomere caps keep the body’s chromosomes from breaking down, advised Doudna’s doctoral work on RNA and on Wednesday raised a glass in honor of Doudna, now at the University of California, Berkeley. In a tweet, Szostak expressed his delight at seeing someone he once guided through her early scientific steps soar to science’s highest reaches:

Doudna received the prize together with Emmanuelle Charpentier, for their work discovering and developing CRISPR as a precise gene-editing tool. In just the eight years since the pair announced their discovery the use of the technique has rapidly spread to a host of fields, allowing researchers to alter the code of life and develop resistant crops, new medical therapies, and even anticipate curing inherited diseases.

 

UPDADTED on 11/2/2020

 

Announcement of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020

Live webcast from the press conference where the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences will announce the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020.

 

 

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020 to

Emmanuelle Charpentier
Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens, Berlin, Germany

Jennifer A. Doudna
University of California, Berkeley, USA

“for the development of a method for genome editing”

Genetic scissors: a tool for rewriting the code of life

Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna have discovered one of gene technology’s sharpest tools: the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors. Using these, researchers can change the DNA of animals, plants and microorganisms with extremely high precision. This technology has had a revolutionary impact on the life sciences, is contributing to new cancer therapies and may make the dream of curing inherited diseases come true.

Researchers need to modify genes in cells if they are to find out about life’s inner workings. This used to be time-consuming, difficult and sometimes impossible work. Using the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors, it is now possible to change the code of life over the course of a few weeks.

“There is enormous power in this genetic tool, which affects us all. It has not only revolutionised basic science, but also resulted in innovative crops and will lead to ground-breaking new medical treatments,” says Claes Gustafsson, chair of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry.

As so often in science, the discovery of these genetic scissors was unexpected. During Emmanuelle Charpentier’s studies of Streptococcus pyogenes, one of the bacteria that cause the most harm to humanity, she discovered a previously unknown molecule, tracrRNA. Her work showed that tracrRNA is part of bacteria’s ancient immune system, CRISPR/Cas, that disarms viruses by cleaving their DNA.

Charpentier published her discovery in 2011. The same year, she initiated a collaboration with Jennifer Doudna, an experienced biochemist with vast knowledge of RNA. Together, they succeeded in recreating the bacteria’s genetic scissors in a test tube and simplifying the scissors’ molecular components so they were easier to use.

In an epoch-making experiment, they then reprogrammed the genetic scissors. In their natural form, the scissors recognise DNA from viruses, but Charpentier and Doudna proved that they could be controlled so that they can cut any DNA molecule at a predetermined site. Where the DNA is cut it is then easy to rewrite the code of life.

Since Charpentier and Doudna discovered the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors in 2012 their use has exploded. This tool has contributed to many important discoveries in basic research, and plant researchers have been able to develop crops that withstand mould, pests and drought. In medicine, clinical trials of new cancer therapies are underway, and the dream of being able to cure inherited diseases is about to come true. These genetic scissors have taken the life sciences into a new epoch and, in many ways, are bringing the greatest benefit to humankind.

Illustrations

The illustrations are free to use for non-commercial purposes. Attribute ”© Johan Jarnestad/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences”

Illustration: Using the genetic scissors (pdf)
Illustration: Streptococcus’ natural immune system against viruses:CRISPR/Cas9 pdf)
Illustration: CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors (pdf)

Read more about this year’s prize

Popular information: Genetic scissors: a tool for rewriting the code of life (pdf)
Scientific Background: A tool for genome editing (pdf)

Emmanuelle Charpentier, born 1968 in Juvisy-sur-Orge, France. Ph.D. 1995 from Institut Pasteur, Paris, France. Director of the Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens, Berlin, Germany.

Jennifer A. Doudna, born 1964 in Washington, D.C, USA. Ph.D. 1989 from Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, USA and Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

SOURCE

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/2020/press-release/

 

Nobel Prize in Chemistry awarded to scientists who discovered CRISPR gene editing tool for ‘rewriting the code of life’

(CNN)The Nobel Prize in Chemistry has been awarded to Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna for the development of a method for genome editing.

They discovered one of gene technology’s sharpest tools: the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors. Using these, researchers can change the DNA of animals, plants and micro-organisms with extremely high precision.
Before announcing the winners on Wednesday, Göran K. Hansson, secretary-general for the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, said that this year’s prize was about “rewriting the code of life.”
The American biochemist Jennifer A. Doudna (left) and French microbiologist Emmanuelle Charpentier, pictured together in 2016.
 
The CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing tools have revolutionized the molecular life sciences, brought new opportunities for plant breeding, are contributing to innovative cancer therapies and may make the dream of curing inherited diseases come true, according to a press release from the Nobel committee.
 
 
There have also been some ethical concerns around the CRISPR technology, however.
Charpentier, a French microbiologist, and Doudna, an American biochemist, are the first women to jointly win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, and the sixth and seventh women to win the chemistry prize.
close dialog

 

Jennifer Doudna wins 2020 Nobel Prize in chemistry

 

First Day in a Nobel Life: Jennifer Doudna

12,365 views
Oct 7, 2020
 
Scenes from day that UC Berkeley Professor Jennifer Doudna won the Nobel Prize For the full story, visit: https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/10/07/… University of California, Berkeley, biochemist Jennifer Doudna today won the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, sharing it with colleague Emmanuelle Charpentier for the co-development of CRISPR-Cas9, a genome editing breakthrough that has revolutionized biomedicine. CRISPR-Cas9 allows scientists to rewrite DNA — the code of life — in any organism, including human cells, with unprecedented efficiency and precision. The groundbreaking power and versatility of CRISPR-Cas9 has opened up new and wide-ranging possibilities across biology, agriculture and medicine, including the treatment of thousands of intractable diseases. Doudna and Charpentier, director of the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology, will share the 10 million Swedish krona (more than $1 million) prize. “This great honor recognizes the history of CRISPR and the collaborative story of harnessing it into a profoundly powerful engineering technology that gives new hope and possibility to our society,” said Doudna. “What started as a curiosity‐driven, fundamental discovery project has now become the breakthrough strategy used by countless researchers working to help improve the human condition. I encourage continued support of fundamental science as well as public discourse about the ethical uses and responsible regulation of CRISPR technology.” Video by Clare Major & Roxanne Makasdjian
SOURCE

 

Jennifer Doudna wins 2020 Nobel Prize in chemistry

 

Jennifer Doudna in the PBS Movie CRISPR

Our critically-acclaimed documentary HUMAN NATURE is now streaming on NETFLIX. #HumanNatureFilm. Find out more about the film on our website.

 

Other Articles on the Nobel Prize in this Open Access Journal Include:

2020 Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine for Hepatitis C Discovery goes to British scientist Michael Houghton and US researchers Harvey Alter and Charles Rice

CONTAGIOUS – About Viruses, Pandemics and Nobel Prizes at the Nobel Prize Museum, Stockholm, Sweden 

AACR Congratulates Dr. William G. Kaelin Jr., Sir Peter J. Ratcliffe, and Dr. Gregg L. Semenza on 2019 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

2018 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for contributions to Cancer Immunotherapy to James P. Allison, Ph.D., of the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Dr. Allison shares the prize with Tasuku Honjo, M.D., Ph.D., of Kyoto University Institute, Japan

2017 Nobel prize in chemistry given to Jacques Dubochet, Joachim Frank, and Richard Henderson  for developing cryo-electron microscopy

2016 Nobel Prize in Chemistry awarded for development of molecular machines, the world’s smallest mechanical devices, the winners: Jean-Pierre Sauvage, J. Fraser Stoddart and Bernard L. Feringa

Correspondence on Leadership in Genomics and other Gene Curations: Dr. Williams with Dr. Lev-Ari

Programming life: An interview with Jennifer Doudna by Michael Chui, a partner of the McKinsey Global Institute

Read Full Post »


2020 Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine for Hepatitis C Discovery goes to British scientist Michael Houghton and US researchers Harvey Alter and Charles Rice

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2020

Harvey J. Alter

Ill. Niklas Elmehed. © Nobel Media.

Harvey J. Alter

Prize share: 1/3

Michael Houghton

Ill. Niklas Elmehed. © Nobel Media.

Michael Houghton

Prize share: 1/3

Charles M. Rice

Ill. Niklas Elmehed. © Nobel Media.

Charles M. Rice

Prize share: 1/3

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2020 was awarded jointly to Harvey J. Alter, Michael Houghton and Charles M. Rice “for the discovery of Hepatitis C virus.”

 

Nobel Prize for Medicine goes to Hepatitis C discovery

The winners are British scientist Michael Houghton and US researchers Harvey Alter and Charles Rice.

The Nobel Prize committee said their discoveries ultimately “saved millions of lives”. The virus is a common cause of liver cancer and a major reason why people need a liver transplant.

In the 1960s, there was huge concern that people receiving donated blood were getting chronic hepatitis (liver inflammation) from an unknown, mysterious disease. The Nobel Prize committee said a blood transfusion at the time was like “Russian roulette”. Highly sensitive blood tests mean such cases have now been eliminated in many parts of the world, and effective anti-viral drugs have also been developed. “For the first time in history, the disease can now be cured, raising hopes of eradicating Hepatitis C virus from the world,” the prize committee said. However, the 70 million people are currently living with the virus, which still kills around 400,000 a year.

The mystery killer

The viruses Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B had been discovered by the mid-1960s.

But Prof Harvey Alter, while studying transfusion patients at the US National Institutes of Health in 1972, showed there was another, mystery, infection at work. Patients were still getting sick after receiving donated blood. He showed that giving blood from infected patients to chimpanzees led to them developing the disease.

The mysterious illness became known as “non-A, non-B” hepatitis in and the hunt was now on.

Prof Michael Houghton, while at the pharmaceutical firm Chiron, managed to isolated the genetic sequence of the virus in 1989. This showed it was a type of flavivirus and it was named Hepatitis C.

And Prof Charles Rice, while at Washington University in St. Louis, applied the finishing touches in 1997. He injected a genetically engineered Hepatitis C virus into the liver of chimpanzees and showed this could lead to hepatitis.

SOURCE

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54418463

2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2019 Nobel Prize in Medicine went to:

 

Read Full Post »


The History, Uses, and Future of the Nobel Prize, 1:00pm – 6:00pm, Thursday, October 4, 2018, Harvard Medical School

Reporter in Real Time: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Center for the History of Medicine

Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine

invites you to register for

 The History, Uses, and Future of the Nobel Prize

1:00pm – 6:00pm, Thursday, October 4, 2018

A half-day symposium bringing together an international group of historians and Nobel laureates to consider the history of the Nobel Prize and its enduring social, political, and scientific roles

PROGRAM

Panel I: Scientific Credit and the History of the Nobel Prize

Chair: Allan Brandt (Harvard Medical School and Harvard University) /

Jacalyn M. Duffin (Queen’s University): Commemorating Excellence: the Nobel Prize and the Historical Sociology of Science /

Nils Hansson, Thorsten Halling,  and

Heiner Fangerau (Heinrich Heine-University): The First US-American Nobel Prize Nominees in Medicine (and why they failed) /

Jeffrey Flier (Harvard Medical School): The Past, Present, and Future of Scientific Credit in Biomedicine

 

Panel II: The Nobel – and Ig Nobel – Prize in Practice

Chair: David S. Jones (Harvard Medical School and Harvard University) /

David Kaiser (Massachusetts Institute of Technology): But Does it Scale? Awarding Nobel Prizes in Physics amid Exponential Growth /

Marc Abrahams (Annals of Improbable Research/Ig Nobel Prizes): Ig Nobel: Research that Makes You Laugh, then Makes You Think

 

Panel III: The Uses and Future of the Nobel Prize

Chair: Scott H. Podolsky (Harvard Medical School) /

Eric Chivian, Ira Helfand,

Bernard Lown,

James Muller, and

John Pastore (leadership of IPPNW, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, 1985): Decreasing the Nuclear Threat to Humanity – Nobel Peace Prizes to IPPNW in 1985 and ICAN in 2017 /

Torsten Wiesel (recipient, Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, 1981): Nobel – Excellence Forever /

Jack Szostak (recipient, Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, 2009): Opportunities and Responsibilities that Come with Winning the Nobel Prize

 

SOURCE

From: Center for the History of Medicine <chm=hms.harvard.edu@mail45.sea31.mcsv.net> on behalf of Center for the History of Medicine <chm@hms.harvard.edu>

Reply-To: Center for the History of Medicine <chm@hms.harvard.edu>

Date: Monday, September 24, 2018 at 3:14 PM

To: Aviva Lev-Ari <AvivaLev-Ari@alum.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Only 9 days away! Register for The History, Uses, and Future of the Nobel Prize on 10/4

Read Full Post »


2017 Nobel prize in chemistry given to Jacques Dubochet, Joachim Frank, and Richard Henderson  for developing cryo-electron microscopy

 

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Here’s what the images that just won the Nobel prize in chemistry look like and why they’re so transformative

IMAGE SOURCE
Over the last few years, researchers have published atomic structures of numerous complicated protein complexes. a. A protein complex that governs the circadian rhythm. b. A sensor of the type that reads pressure changes in the ear and allows us to hear. c. The Zika virus.
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
SOURCE

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2017

4 October 2017

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2017 to

Jacques Dubochet
University of Lausanne, Switzerland

Joachim Frank
Columbia University, New York, USA

and

Richard Henderson
MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, UK

“for developing cryo-electron microscopy for the high-resolution structure determination of biomolecules in solution”

 

Cool microscope technology revolutionises biochemistry

We may soon have detailed images of life’s complex machineries in atomic resolution. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2017 is awarded to Jacques Dubochet, Joachim Frank and Richard Henderson for the development of cryo-electron microscopy, which both simplifies and improves the imaging of biomolecules. This method has moved biochemistry into a new era.

A picture is a key to understanding. Scientific breakthroughs often build upon the successful visualisation of objects invisible to the human eye. However, biochemical maps have long been filled with blank spaces because the available technology has had difficulty generating images of much of life’s molecular machinery. Cryo-electron microscopy changes all of this. Researchers can now freeze biomolecules mid-movement and visualise processes they have never previously seen, which is decisive for both the basic understanding of life’s chemistry and for the development of pharmaceuticals.

Electron microscopes were long believed to only be suitable for imaging dead matter, because the powerful electron beam destroys biological material. But in 1990, Richard Henderson succeeded in using an electron microscope to generate a three-dimensional image of a protein at atomic resolution. This breakthrough proved the technology’s potential.

Joachim Frank made the technology generally applicable. Between 1975 and 1986 he developed an image processing method in which the electron microscope’s fuzzy twodimensional images are analysed and merged to reveal a sharp three-dimensional structure.

Jacques Dubochet added water to electron microscopy. Liquid water evaporates in the electron microscope’s vacuum, which makes the biomolecules collapse. In the early 1980s, Dubochet succeeded in vitrifying water – he cooled water so rapidly that it solidified in its liquid form around a biological sample, allowing the biomolecules to retain their natural shape even in a vacuum.

Following these discoveries, the electron microscope’s every nut and bolt have been optimised. The desired atomic resolution was reached in 2013, and researchers can now routinely produce three-dimensional structures of biomolecules. In the past few years, scientific literature has been filled with images of everything from proteins that cause antibiotic resistance, to the surface of the Zika virus. Biochemistry is now facing an explosive development and is all set for an exciting future.

Read more about this year’s prize

Popular Information
Pdf 2.7 MB

Scientific Background
Pdf 837 Kb

To read the text you need Acrobat Reader.

Image – 3D structures (pdf 1.4 MB)
© Johan Jarnestad/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Image – Blobology (pdf 8.5 MB)
© Martin Högbom/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Image – Dubochet’s preparation method (948 kB)
© Johan Jarnestad/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Image – Frank’s image analysis (pdf 1 MB)
© Johan Jarnestad/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

 


Jacques Dubochet, born 1942 in Aigle, Switzerland. Ph.D. 1973, University of Geneva and University of Basel, Switzerland. Honorary Professor of Biophysics, University of Lausanne, Switzerland.
www.unil.ch/dee/en/home/menuinst/people/honorary-professors/prof-jacques-dubochet.html

Joachim Frank, born 1940 in Siegen, Germany. Ph.D. 1970, Technical University of Munich, Germany. Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics and of Biological Sciences, Columbia University, New York, USA.
http://franklab.cpmc.columbia.edu/franklab/

Richard Henderson, born 1945 in Edinburgh, Scotland. Ph.D. 1969, Cambridge University, UK. Programme Leader, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, UK.
www2.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/groups/rh15/

Prize amount: 9 million Swedish krona, to be shared equally between the Laureates.
Further information: http://www.kva.se and http://nobelprize.org

SOURCE

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2017/press.html

Read Full Post »


2017 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine jointly to Jeffrey C. Hall (ex-Brandeis, University of Maine), Michael Rosbash (Brandeis University) and Michael W. Young (Rockefeller University in New York) for their discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm

 

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Press Release

2017-10-02

The Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institutet has today decided to award

the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

jointly to

Jeffrey C. Hall, Michael Rosbash and Michael W. Young

for their discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm

READ the Summary

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2017/press.html

 

Jeffrey C. Hall was born 1945 in New York, USA. He received his doctoral degree in 1971 at the University of Washington in Seattle and was a postdoctoral fellow at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena from 1971 to 1973. He joined the faculty at Brandeis University in Waltham in 1974. In 2002, he became associated with University of Maine.

Michael Rosbash was born in 1944 in Kansas City, USA. He received his doctoral degree in 1970 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. During the following three years, he was a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland. Since 1974, he has been on faculty at Brandeis University in Waltham, USA.

Michael W. Young was born in 1949 in Miami, USA. He received his doctoral degree at the University of Texas in Austin in 1975. Between 1975 and 1977, he was a postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University in Palo Alto. From 1978, he has been on faculty at the Rockefeller University in New York.

 

Key publications

Zehring, W.A., Wheeler, D.A., Reddy, P., Konopka, R.J., Kyriacou, C.P., Rosbash, M., and Hall, J.C. (1984). P-element transformation with period locus DNA restores rhythmicity to mutant, arrhythmic Drosophila melanogaster. Cell 39, 369–376.

Bargiello, T.A., Jackson, F.R., and Young, M.W. (1984). Restoration of circadian behavioural rhythms by gene transfer in Drosophila. Nature 312, 752–754.

Siwicki, K.K., Eastman, C., Petersen, G., Rosbash, M., and Hall, J.C. (1988). Antibodies to the period gene product of Drosophila reveal diverse tissue distribution and rhythmic changes in the visual system. Neuron 1, 141–150.

Hardin, P.E., Hall, J.C., and Rosbash, M. (1990). Feedback of the Drosophila period gene product on circadian cycling of its messenger RNA levels. Nature 343, 536–540.

Liu, X., Zwiebel, L.J., Hinton, D., Benzer, S., Hall, J.C., and Rosbash, M. (1992). The period gene encodes a predominantly nuclear protein in adult Drosophila. J Neurosci 12, 2735–2744.

Vosshall, L.B., Price, J.L., Sehgal, A., Saez, L., and Young, M.W. (1994). Block in nuclear localization of period protein by a second clock mutation, timeless. Science 263, 1606–1609.

Price, J.L., Blau, J., Rothenfluh, A., Abodeely, M., Kloss, B., and Young, M.W. (1998). double-time is a novel Drosophila clock gene that regulates PERIOD protein accumulation. Cell 94, 83–95.

Keeping time on our human physiology

The biological clock is involved in many aspects of our complex physiology. We now know that all multicellular organisms, including humans, utilize a similar mechanism to control circadian rhythms. A large proportion of our genes are regulated by the biological clock and, consequently, a carefully calibrated circadian rhythm adapts our physiology to the different phases of the day (Figure 3). Since the seminal discoveries by the three laureates, circadian biology has developed into a vast and highly dynamic research field, with implications for our health and wellbeing.

The circadian clock

Figure 3. The circadian clock anticipates and adapts our physiology to the different phases of the day. Our biological clock helps to regulate sleep patterns, feeding behavior, hormone release, blood pressure, and body temperature.

SOURCE

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2017/press.html

 

Medicine Nobel awarded for work on circadian clocks, Jeffrey Hall, Michael Rosbash and Michael Young unpicked molecular workings of cells’ daily rhythms.

Ewen CallawayHeidi Ledford

02 October 2017

https://www.nature.com/news/medicine-nobel-awarded-for-work-on-circadian-clocks-1.22736?WT.ec_id=NEWSDAILY-20171002

Other Related Research 

Charles Weitz, Ph.D., M.D.
Robert Henry Pfeiffer Professor of Neurobiology

Mammalian Circadian Clocks

Circadian clocks are molecular oscillators with ~24-hour periods that drive daily biological rhythms.  Such clocks are found in all of the major branches of life, and they likely represent ancient timekeeping systems important for predicting daily environmental cycles on our rotating planet.  In mammals, circadian clocks are present in most if not all cells. These distributed clocks control a myriad of processes, in aggregate creating coherent 24-hour programs of physiology and behavior.

A picture of how circadian clocks are built has emerged in the last two decades.  The core mechanism is a transcriptional feedback loop, wherein the protein products of several clock genes build the molecular machinery to inhibit the transcription factor responsible for their own production.  The molecular components of circadian clocks are conserved from insects to humans.

The Weitz lab uses molecular biology, biochemistry, genetics, and structural biology to investigate the mammalian circadian clock.  The focus of our efforts at present is to understand the circadian clock in terms of the integrated functions of its several multi-protein machines.  This effort is principally based on the purification of endogenous circadian clock protein complexes from mouse tissues and their biochemical analysis and structural study by cryo-electron microscopy.

Fig. 1.  Class-average electron microscopy images of the mouse nuclear PER complex, a core circadian clock machine.  It is a 1.9-MDa assembly of about thirty proteins that appears as a quasi-spherical, beaded particle of 40-nm diameter. Our current work provides an initial low-resolution view of the structural organization of endogenous clock machinery from a eukaryote.  We aim to obtain high-resolution structures.

Selected papers:

Duong HA, Robles MS, Knutti K, Weitz CJ.  A molecular mechanism for circadian clock negative feedback. Science  332, 1436-1439 (2011).

Padmanabhan K, Robles MS, Westerling T, Weitz CJ.  Feedback regulation of transcriptional termination by the mammalian circadian clock PERIOD complex. Science  337, 599-602 (2012).

Kim JY, Kwak PB, Weitz CJ. Specificity in circadian clock feedback from targeted reconstitution of the NuRD co-repressor.  Mol. Cell  56, 738-748 (2014).

Aryal RA, Kwak PB, Tamayo AG, Chiu PL, Walz T, Weitz CJ.  Macromolecular assemblies of the mammalian circadian clock.  Mol. Cell  (2017, in press).

SOURCE

http://neuro.hms.harvard.edu/people/faculty/charles-weitz

Circadian Clock’s Inner Gears

https://hms.harvard.edu/news/circadian-clock%E2%80%99s-inner-gears?utm_source=linkedin&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=hms-linkedin-general

Other related articles Published in this Open Access Online Scientific Journal included the following: 

Search Keyword “Sleep” – 161 Scientific Articles

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/?s=Sleep

Search Keyword “Circadian” Rhythm

Ultra-Pure Melatonin Product Helps Maintain Sleep for Up to 7 Hours

Curator: Gail S. Thornton, M.A.

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2017/06/11/ultra-pure-melatonin-product-helps-maintain-sleep-for-up-to-7-hours/

 

Alteration in Reduced Glutathione level in Red Blood Cells: Role of Melatonin

Author: Shilpa Chakrabarti, PhD

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/06/11/alteration-in-reduced-glutathione-level-in-red-blood-cells-role-of-melatonin/

 

Melatonin and its effect on acetylcholinesterase activity in erythrocytes

Author: S. Chakravarty, PhD

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/03/09/melatonin-and-its-effect-on-acetylcholinesterase-activity-in-erythrocytes/

 

Day and Night Variation in Melatonin Level affects Plasma Membrane Redox System in Red Blood Cells

Author: Shilpa Chakravarty, PhD

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/23/httpwww-ncbi-nlm-nih-govpubmed22561555/

 

Prolonged Wakefulness: Lack of Sufficient Duration of Sleep as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Diseases – – Indications for Cardiovascular Chrono-therapeutics

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2014/02/02/prolonged-wakefulness-lack-of-sufficient-duration-of-sleep-as-a-risk-factor-for-cardiovascular-diseases-indications-for-cardiovascular-chrono-therapeutics/

Read Full Post »


UPDATED ON JANUARY 23, 2018

Program for 2/16/2018 – ELA’s 36th Birthday Party

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN 

 

Eight Iconic Photos Of Bob Dylan, Newly Anointed Nobel Laureate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/15/eight-iconic-photos-of-bob-dylan-newly-anointed-nobel-laureate_a_21583461/

 

Top 10 Bob Dylan Songs – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG8y0rRYjEI

 

My seection

  • Blowing In The Wind (Live On TV, March 1963) – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWwgrjjIMXA

  • Bob Dylan – Just Like A Woman Lyrics | Genius Lyrics

https://genius.com/Bob-dylan-just-like-a-woman-lyrics

  • Sad-Eyed Lady of The Lowlands

https://vimeo.com/37021142

  • Bob Dylan 2016 Nobel Prize – A Hard Rain’s A Gonna Fall live – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPx7PFSv7fo

 

2018 – NOBEL OFFICIAL WEBSITE: Bob Dylan – Nobel Lecture 

The 114 Nobel laureates in Literature from 1901 to 2017 have come from the following countries:

Country Number
France 16
United Kingdom 12
United States 11
Germany 8
Sweden 8
Italy 6
Spain 6
Ireland 3
Poland 4
Russia/USSR 4
Denmark 3
Norway 3
Chile 2
China 2
Greece 2
Japan 2
South Africa 2
Switzerland 2
Austria 1
Australia 1
Belarus 1
Belgium 1
Bulgaria 1
Canada 1
Colombia 1
Czechoslovakia 1
Egypt 1
Finland 1
Guatemala 1
Hungary 1
Iceland 1
India 1
Israel 1
Mauritius 1
Mexico 1
Nigeria 1
Peru 1
Portugal 1
Saint Lucia 1
Turkey 1
Yugoslavia 1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_in_Literature

  • Bob Dylan – Nobel Lecture

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2016/dylan-lecture.html

 

Critiques

 

  • Why Bob Dylan Matters – Richard F. Thomas – Hardcover

https://www.harpercollins.com/9780062685735/why-bob-dylan-matters

 

  • Bob Dylan “EYES ON THE PRIZE” Documentary Fantastic insightful. – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUcyUoIFW04

 

  • Al Kooper: The Making of Bob Dylan’s Blonde on Blonde / The Record That Changed Nashville – YouTubE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01IE0vVN08c

 

  • Bob Dylan Documentary Interviews Performances and Pretentious Cravats. – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0-ktuJ_aWY&list=PLHf3qtS3ZJYde39j9A4eAIbOsjsNpbSmB&index=28

 

  • The Bob Dylan Documentary 2017. Great insight into the greatest singer/songwriter – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MndC8ZzV8ac

 

Samples

 

Neighborhood Bully — SONG ON ISRAEL >>>> Barry Shrage on Bob Dylan¹s Long-Lost Israel Song | JewishBoston

https://www.jewishboston.com/the-jewishboston-podcast-episode-23-barry-shrage-on-bob-dylans-long-lost-israel-song/#utm_source=JewishBoston+This+Week&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2018-01-11

 

Top 25 Bob Dylan Studio Albums – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Uy5Wn_Fs2c

 

UPDATED on Jun 5, 2017

Acceptance Speech – Bob Dylan – 2016 Nobel Prize Gala

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Published on Jun 5, 2017

WATCH VIDEO
Bob Dylan received the 2016 Nobel Prize in Literature “for having created new poetic expressions within the great American song tradition”.

UPDATED on 6/15/2017

Bob Dylan – Nobel Lecture

English
Swedish
© THE NOBEL FOUNDATION 2017
The Nobel Foundation has not obtained the right to assign any usage right to the Nobel Lecture to any third party, and any such rights may thus not be granted. All rights to the Nobel Lecture by Bob Dylan are reserved and the Nobel Lecture may not be published or otherwise used by third parties with one exception: the audio file containing the Nobel Lecture, as published at Nobelprize.org, the official website of the Nobel Prize, may be embedded on other websites.

 

 

Listen to Bob Dylan’s Nobel Lecture on SoundCloud

Nobel Lecture

5 June 2017

SOURCE
https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2016/dylan-lecture.html

 

UPDATED on 2/12/2017

Bob Dylan speech at the 2016 Nobel Banquet

Published on Dec 15, 2016

Bob Dylan’s speech at the 2016 Nobel Banquet as read by American Ambassador to Sweden Azita Raji.
© Nobel Media AB / Production SVT

WATCH VIDEO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bi3Ws2Qm8ck

 

Bob Dylan to Provide Nobel Prize Speech, Patti Smith to Perform

Smith to cover “A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall” at Nobel gala

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/bob-dylan-to-provide-nobel-speech-patti-smith-to-perform-w453745

 

HOW DOES IT FEEL

By Patti Smith

December 14, 2016

 

Patti Smith singing the song “A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall” at Nobel gala

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/patti-smith-on-singing-at-bob-dylans-nobel-prize-ceremony

 

Patti Smith sings A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall

Youtube

https://youtu.be/DVXQaOhpfJU

 

Bob Dylan sings A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall

Youtube

https://youtu.be/KbQlPyLfhJ0

 

The Nobel Prize in Literature 2016
Bob Dylan

Bob Dylan – Banquet Speech

Banquet speech by Bob Dylan given by the United States Ambassador to Sweden Azita Raji, at the Nobel Banquet, 10 December 2016.

Ambassador Azita Raji gives the banquet speech.
Copyright © Nobel Media AB 2016
Photo: Alexander Mahmoud

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7srHl56X07g

 

But, like Shakespeare, I too am often occupied with the pursuit of my creative endeavors and dealing with all aspects of life’s mundane matters. “Who are the best musicians for these songs?” “Am I recording in the right studio?” “Is this song in the right key?” Some things never change, even in 400 years.

Not once have I ever had the time to ask myself, “Are my songs literature?”

So, I do thank the Swedish Academy, both for taking the time to consider that very question, and, ultimately, for providing such a wonderful answer.

My best wishes to you all,

Bob Dylan

Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 2016

 

SOURCE

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2016/dylan-speech.html

 

 

Bob Dylan Awarded Nobel Prize in Literature, Scientists cited his Verses in Scientific Article Titles

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

In 1964, I was in the 9th grade in High School in Haifa, Israel, our very gifted English teacher, brought to class Bob Dylan and explained in class how important it is to expose high school students to his very creative poetic expressions and lyrics which had an influence on her as a Literature Critique.

Our English teacher, Tamara has immigrated to Israel from the UK. Tamara Sachs, who Chaired the Committee for Curriculum Development for the English Language Arts Subject Matter at Ministry of Education in Israel, was also the Editor of the Textbook used for English Subject matter in Israeli high Schools for the 9th and 10th grades. She created Textbooks that had Contemporary Literature contents beside the Classic English Text taught in high School in Israel and part of the National Standardized Matriculation Exam at the end of the 12th grade.

I enjoyed Bob Dylan songs ever since, 1964 to Present.

I took my family to attend his performance in the Berkshires, MA on JUL 2016 SATURDAY, 7:00 PM

Bob Dylan with Mavis Staples

Tanglewood – Koussevitzky Music Shed – Lenox, MA 

View Map

Tanglewood welcomes Bob Dylan with special guest Mavis Staples to the Koussevitzky Music Shed on Saturday, July 2 at 7 p.m. Legendary singer-songwriter Bob Dylan has performed twice at Tanglewood first in 1991 and again during the 1997 season. Gates open at 4PM.

UPDATED on 12/15/2016

Patti Smith covers, bungles Bob Dylan’s song upon accepting his Nobel Prize at ceremony in Stockholm, 12/10/2016

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/patti-smith-bungles-bob-dylan-song-nobel-prize-ceremony-article-1.2906315

 

Bob Dylan Awarded Nobel Prize in Literature

BMJ 2015; 351 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h6505 (Published 14 December 2015)Cite this as: BMJ 2015;351:h6505

  1. Carl Gornitzki, librarian1,
  2. Agne Larsson, statistician1,
  3. Bengt Fadeel, professor2

Author affiliations

  1. Correspondence to: C Gornitzki carl.gornitzki@ki.se

Carl Gornitzki and colleagues examine how far medical scientists are under his spell

In September 2014 it emerged that a group of scientists at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden had been sneaking the lyrics of Bob Dylan into their papers as part of a long running bet. The story, originally published in the house magazine KI-Bladet, quickly went viral—spreading from the local Swedish press to international media such as theGuardian and Washington Post.1 2 It all started in 1997 with a review in Nature Medicine entitled “Nitric oxide and inflammation: the answer is blowing in the wind.”3 A local phenomenon was thus revealed, but was this Dylan citing unique to the Karolinska Institute? We decided to investigate how Dylan’s lyrics are cited in the biomedical literature.

Knockin’ on pollen’s door

We used a list of all Dylan’s song and album titles downloaded from bobdylan.com to do a search using Medline in May 2015. In addition, we searched for truncated versions of a selection of the most popular Dylan songs to find modified titles,4 such as “Knockin’ on pollen’s door: live cell …

 

Citing Dylan. Bob Dylan has won this year’s Nobel Prize for Literature. In 2015, inspired by researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden who had been sneaking Dylan lyrics into their papers, a team writing in the BMJ reported that Dylan citations were “uncommon before 1990 but [have] increased exponentially since then”. They note: “Some journals have more Dylan citing articles than others; for instance, we found six articles citing Dylan songs in Nature.”

For more daily science news, check in at www.nature.com/news; @NatureNews on Twitter; or on our Facebook page.

This newsletter is new and evolving — tell us what you think! Please send feedback to daily@nature.com.

 

 

 

Editorial Reactions to Bob Dylan’s Nobel Prize in Literature

 

How Dylan Became Dylan

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD OCT. 13, 2016, New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/opinion/bob-dylan-the-poet-sponge.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_ty_20161014&nl=opinion-today&nl_art=3&nlid=65713389&ref=headline&te=1

 

Why Bob Dylan Shouldn’t Have Gotten a Nobel

By ANNA NORTH OCT. 13, 2016, New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/opinion/why-bob-dylan-shouldnt-have-gotten-a-nobel.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_ty_20161014&nl=opinion-today&nl_art=4&nlid=65713389&ref=headline&te=1

 

Bob Dylan, Master of Change

By GREIL MARCUS OCT. 13, 2016, New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/opinion/bob-dylan-master-of-change.html?em_pos=large&emc=edit_ty_20161014&nl=opinion-today&nlid=65713389&ref=headline&te=1

 

Don’t think twice, it’s all right

Nobel Prize in Literature for Bob Dylan gets no argument from Harvard scholars

October 13, 2016 | Editor’s Pick Popular

By Jill Radsken and Colleen Walsh, Harvard Staff Writers

Harvard Gazette

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/10/dont-think-twice-its-all-right/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=10.14.2016%20%281%29

 

The right and Rightful Choice: The decision to award Bob Dylan the Nobel Prize in Literature was a long time coming

Rachel Shukert in Tablemag

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/215760/the-right-and-rightful-choice?utm_source=tabletmagazinelist&utm_campaign=cec82c70bc-October_16_201610_16_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c308bf8edb-cec82c70bc-207349497

Bob Dylan, the Musician: America’s Great One-Man Songbook

By JON PARELES OCT. 13, 2016 in New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/arts/music/bob-dylan-nobel-prize.html

 

Expanding the Nobel Pantheon to Include Bob Dylan

OCT. 14, 2016

CHARLES KAISER

New York

The writer is the author of “1968 in America.”

CHRISTOPHER THORPE

San Francisco

The writer is a poet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/15/opinion/expanding-the-nobel-pantheon-to-include-bob-dylan.html?nlid=65713389&src=recpb

 

 

Read Full Post »


2016 Nobel Prize in Chemistry awarded for development of molecular machines, the world’s smallest mechanical devices, the winners: Jean-Pierre Sauvage, J. Fraser Stoddart and Bernard L. Feringa

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

3 Makers of World’s Smallest Machines Awarded Nobel Prize in Chemistry

By KENNETH CHANG and SEWELL CHAN OCT. 5, 2016

 

■ Jean-Pierre Sauvage, J. Fraser Stoddart and Bernard L. Feringa shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry on Wednesday for development of molecular machines, the world’s smallest mechanical devices.

Who are the winners?

Dr. Sauvage, 71, was born in Paris and received his Ph.D. in 1971 from the University of Strasbourg in France, where he is a professor emeritus. He is also director of research emeritus at the National Center for Scientific Research in France.

Dr. Stoddart, 74, was born in Edinburgh, received his Ph.D. in 1966 from Edinburgh University, and is a professor of chemistry at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill. He previously taught at U.C.L.A. and was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II for his services to science.

Dr. Feringa, 64, was born in Barger-Compascuum, the Netherlands, and received his Ph.D. in 1978 from the University of Groningen, where he is a professor of organic chemistry.

 

Three pioneers in the development of nanomachines, made of moving molecules, were awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry on Wednesday.

Molecular machines, the world’s smallest mechanical devices, may eventually be used to create new materials, sensors and energy storage systems, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said in announcing the prize.

“In terms of development, the molecular motor is at the same stage as the electric motor was in the 1830s, when scientists displayed various spinning cranks and wheels, unaware that they would lead to electric trains, washing machines, fans and food processors,” the academy said.

The three scientists — Jean-Pierre Sauvage, J. Fraser Stoddart and Bernard L. Feringa — will share equally in the prize of 8 million Swedish kronor, or about $930,000.

Why did they win?

Nanotechnology — the creation of structures on the scale of a nanometer, or a billionth of a meter — has been a field of fruitful research for a couple of decades. Now, scientists are learning how to construct tiny moving machines about one-thousandth the width of a strand of human hair.

Why is the work important?

The three men invigorated the field of topological chemistry, the academy said on Wednesday. They were pioneers in the second wave of nanotechnology, a field that the physicist Richard P. Feynman, also a Nobel laureate, foresaw as early as 1959. He gave a seminal lecture in 1984, toward the end of his life, on design and engineering at the molecular scale.

In living organisms, nature has produced a slew of molecular machines that ferry materials around cells, construct proteins and divide cells. Artificial molecular machines are still primitive by comparison, but scientists can already envision applications in the future.

“Think about nanomachines, microrobots,” said Dr. Feringa, who spoke by telephone with journalists assembled in Stockholm at the prize announcement. “Think about tiny robots that the doctor in the future will inject in your blood veins, and they go search for cancer cells or going to deliver drugs, for instance.”

The technology could also lead to the creation of “smart materials” that change properties based on external signals, Dr. Feringa said.

SOURCE

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/science/nobel-prize-chemistry.html

Read Full Post »


2016 Nobel Prize in Physics for their research into the bizarre properties of matter in extreme states, the winners: David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane and J. Michael Kosterlitz

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

3 Who Studied Unusual States of Matter Win 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics

 

David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane and J. Michael Kosterlitz shared the Nobel Prize in Physics last Tuesday for their research into the bizarre properties of matter in extreme states.

Who are the winners?

Dr. Thouless, 82, was born in Bearsden, Scotland, was an undergraduate at Cambridge University and received a Ph.D. in 1958 from Cornell. From 1965 to 1978, he taught mathematical physics at the University of Birmingham in England, where he collaborated with Dr. Kosterlitz. In 1980, he joined the University of Washington in Seattle, where he is now an emeritus professor.

Dr. Haldane, 65, was born in London. He received his Ph.D. from Cambridge, where he was also an undergraduate, in 1978. He worked at the Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble, France; the University of Southern California; Bell Laboratories; and the University of California, San Diego, before joining the Princeton faculty in 1990.

Dr. Kosterlitz, 73, was born in Aberdeen, Scotland, and received his doctorate in high-energy physics from Oxford University in 1969. He has worked at the University of Birmingham; the Institute of Theoretical Physics in Turin, Italy; and Cornell, Princeton, Bell Laboratories and Harvard.

Three physicists born in Britain but now working in the United States were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics on Tuesday for research into the bizarre properties of matter in extreme states, including superconductors, superfluids and thin magnetic films.

David J. Thouless of the University of Washington was awarded half of the prize of 8 million Swedish kronor, or about $930,000, while F. Duncan M. Haldane of Princeton University and J. Michael Kosterlitz of Brown University shared the other half.

The scientists relied on advanced mathematical models to study “theoretical discoveries of topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter,” in the words of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm.

Their studies may have major applications in electronics, materials science and computing. In an email, Michael S. Turner, a physicist at the University of Chicago, described the work as “truly transformational, with long-term consequences both practical and fundamental.”

Why did they win?

The three laureates sought to understand matter that is so cold or so thin that weird quantum effects overpower the random atomic jostling that dominates ordinary existence. Superconductivity, in which all electrical resistance vanishes in matter, is one example of such an effect.

Dr. Thouless and Dr. Kosterlitz worked together at the University of Birmingham in the 1970s to investigate what happens when two-dimensional films of matter shift from one exotic phase, like superconductivity, to another.

SOURCE

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/science/nobel-prize-physics-topology.html?_r=0

 

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »