One of the interesting aspects of the Nobel Prize in Sciences this time is that all the 8 laureates are experimentalists. This is not to underplay the contribution of theoreticians but to emphasize the point that experimental observations are central to the progress of sciences and follow-up technology. Also note that many of these laureates were equally well-versed in theoretical ideas, and hence were able to connect the abstract to the real. An effective way to do science.
Another aspect is that all the experimentalists are strongly anchored in the West. They have performed all their work in an ecosystem that has supported their efforts, even when their ideas were not well known. A case in point is Katalin Karikó (one of the medicine/physiology laureates). Although U Penn treated her badly, she was still able to sustain her research thanks to the research-driven business ecosystem in the West, including the USA and Germany, where she could establish herself in the biotech research industry. This means the Western research ecosystem, including its businesses, was open enough to allow someone who was almost discarded by the US academic system. Karikó’s is a great story, but we must not forget that eventually, the system in which she worked recognized her contribution.
Now, some things to ponder – what if Karikó had moved to a place such as India? Could she have survived and thrived in our research ecosystem? If she had moved, was our academic and market ecosystem open to welcome her, take her expertise, and utilize it effectively? Answers to these questions are not straightforward but may indicate where we are as a research ecosystem.
I remember reading this post somewhere else a very long time ago and was quite impressed with Kariko’s story. Glad to have re-discovered this post!
LikeLike
thanks..glad you liked it…Kariko is an inspiration
LikeLiked by 1 person