Dear Axel, Quite so, absolutely. Theoretical physics and theoretical chemistry sweeped the awards at the Nobels this week. As I remarked on that other medium yesterday (twitter):- I confess to preferring a joint theory and experiment approach, but the Nobel Committee didn't ie I think 'that boson' is only real because of the two experiments at LHC, but no formal recognition for CERN. So, to paraphrase and expand your excellent reprimand of my posting:- I surely hope that the recent Nobel Prizes will encourage young (and young at heart) into the fields of theory, computing and experiment across all our sciences. Greetings, John
Prof John R Helliwell DSc FInstP CPhys FRSC CChem F Soc Biol. Chair School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Athena Swan Team. http://www.chemistry.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/athena/index.html On 11 Oct 2013, at 00:34, Axel Brunger <brun...@stanford.edu> wrote: > Dear John, > > I surely hope that the recent Nobel Prize will encourage young people > to get into into the fields of computational biology and chemistry. > > Moreover, X-ray sources are undergoing new exciting developments > (e.g., XFELs) that require new computational approaches, as does > cryo-EM. > > Cheers, > Axel > > On Oct 10, 2013, at 11:05 AM, Jrh <jrhelliw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear Sacha, Dear Colleagues, >> I also offer my congratulations to the Chemistry Nobellists of yesterday. A >> very exciting and significant event, which I enjoyed. I recall when my PhD >> student, Gail Bradbrook, spoke about our harnessing these exciting methods >> in our crystallographic and structural chemistry concanavalin A saccharide >> studies, to crystallographers, there was a wide spread of reactions. Ie from >> scepticism to shared excitement. As an example of Gail's work see eg >> http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/1998/ft/a800429c/unauth#!divAbstract >> It is sometimes said that a Nobel Prize kills a field. I think we can say >> instead that it is mature. But, to couple with the discussion on peer >> review; there are weaknesses in conventional ie the usual peer review; it >> does not cope well with 'risk and adventure' results. post publication peer >> review is an interesting solution, which in my view should be tried. This >> bulletin board itself in fact is a great initiative, institution actually, >> which helps develops community views of results and trends. >> Just my two pennies worth, >> Greetings, >> John >> >> Prof John R Helliwell DSc FInstP CPhys FRSC CChem F Soc Biol. >> Chair School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Athena Swan Team. >> http://www.chemistry.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/athena/index.html >> >> >> >> On 10 Oct 2013, at 09:26, Alexandre OURJOUMTSEV <sa...@igbmc.fr> wrote: >> >>> Hello to everybody, >>> >>> Alex, it was a great idea to initiate the conversation sending >>> congratulations to our colleagues ! >>> Bob, it was another great idea, when congratulating the Winners, to remind >>> us of the framework. >>> >>> As one of my colleagues pointed out, we shall also give a lot of credits to >>> Shneior Lifson who was in the very origins of these works, ideas and >>> programs (see the paper by M.Levitt "The birth of computational structural >>> biology", Nature Structural & Molecuar Biology, 8, 392-393 (2001); >>> http://www.nature.com/nsmb/journal/v8/n5/full/nsb0501_392.html ). >>> >>> Older crystallographers may remember a fundamental paper by Levitt & Lifson >>> (1969). >>> >>> With best wishes, >>> >>> Sacha Urzhumtsev >>> >>> >>> -----Message d'origine----- >>> De : CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] De la part de >>> Sweet, Robert >>> Envoyé : mercredi 9 octobre 2013 23:52 >>> À : CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK >>> Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] השב: [ccp4bb] Why nobody comments about the Nobel >>> committee decision? >>> >>> It deserves comment!! I've been too busy talking with my friends about it >>> to think of CCP4. >>> >>> This morning on NPR I heard Karplus's name and started to whoop and holler, >>> and by the time they got to Arieh I realized they had a Hat Trick!! It's a >>> spectacular thing that this field should get recognition! >>> >>> An interesting feature to me is that, at least when I was following the >>> field, these three use physics to do their work, modeling with carefully >>> estimated spring constants, etc., and eventually QM results. Those who use >>> phenomenology -- hydrophobic volumes, who likes to lie next to whom, etc. >>> -- are extremely effective (you know who they are), and they deserve >>> credit. But they (we, some years ago) stand on the shoulders of the >>> achievements of these three. >>> >>> It's good to remember the late, great, Tony Jack, cut down before reaching >>> his prime. >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: CCP4 bulletin board [CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] on behalf of Nat Echols >>> [nathaniel.ech...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 5:31 PM >>> To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK >>> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] השב: [ccp4bb] Why nobody comments about the Nobel >>> committee decision? >>> >>> Levitt also contributed to DEN refinement (Schroder et al. 2007, 2010). >>> >>> -Nat >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Boaz Shaanan >>> <bshaa...@bgu.ac.il<mailto:bshaa...@bgu.ac.il>> wrote: >>> Good point. Now since you mentioned contributions of the recent Nobel >>> laureates to crystallography Mike Levitt also had a significant >>> contribution through the by now forgotten Jack-Levitt refinement which to >>> the best of my knowledge was the first time that x-ray term was added to >>> the energy minimization algorithm. I think I'm right about this. This was >>> later adapted by Axel Brunger in Xplor and other progrmas followed. >>> Cheers, Boaz >>> >>> >>> >>> -------- הודעה מקורית -------- >>> מאת Alexander Aleshin >>> <aales...@sanfordburnham.org<mailto:aales...@sanfordburnham.org>> >>> תאריך: 10/10/2013 0:07 (GMT+02:00) >>> אל CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> >>> נושא [ccp4bb] Why nobody comments about the Nobel committee decision? >>> >>> >>> Sorry for a provocative question, but I am surprised why nobody >>> comments/congratulations laureates with regard to recently awarded Nobel >>> prizes? However, one of laureates in chemistry contributed to a popular >>> method in computational crystallography. >>> CHARMM -> XPLOR -> CNS -> PHENIX->… >>> >>> Alex Aleshin >>> <Levitt_2001_NatureStrBiol_8_392-393.pdf> >
