[Music]
hello and welcome to technically speaking where scientists engineers come together to chat about common interests share knowledge and satisfy some curiosity I'm Ellie and in this episode I'm joined by Laura, Emma and Antonia to talk about the Nobel prizes what it takes to win one and some of our favorite bits of science that have managed to achieve that goal so to start off Laura what do you know about the Nobel prizes the thing that gets me about the Nobel prizes is that a lot of
them were awarded for really fundamental science generally back when the Nobel prizes first started being awarded sort of um in the early 1900s yeah and this is a sort of stuff that you get taught about in school now I also noticed when I was looking through the list that someone has been made for General contributions I think Albert Einstein just had a generally for being really good at doing science which I liked um I mean it's not like Einstein didn't make significant discoveries but they
just decided an all-encompassing award was good enough yeah he's like we don't know you're just really good at doing stuff do you contribute quite a lot I have a prize that's nice that seems kind yeah so I quite like that idea you can get a general nomination just for being a good scientist rather than doing yeah why not yeah you don't have to do one really specific thing you can just be a general scientist so I've been exploring how you get one and it's pretty Cloak
and Dagger from what I can work out so basically you have to be nominated by the nominator and that person has to be relatively high up in like a university institution or a research group or something like that but what is really sneaky about it is they're not allowed to tell the person presumably or anyone else who they've nominated for 50 years and then after 50 years that list gets published on the website and you can see like people have been nominated for like
consecutive years like sometimes as much as like 25 or 40 times over different years and they would never know if they didn't win that they were on the list which I think is fascinating and very like mysterious what do you reckon Antonio I mean so many things just 50 years not knowing I mean you could almost throw in wait did they do they say who nominated them as well not just these people were nominated I don't because otherwise imagine doing that for a laugh and like no one would know for
50 years who who it was you wouldn't necessarily think to check either you wouldn't be like oh I'll just look at the list this year and see if anyone nominated me yeah and it's also like the thing like like sporting Awards or like the Oscars is like oh it's just an honor to be nominated I'm just happy to be on the list with all yeah famous people but this one it's like you don't know you might think you're on the list but you aren't you give yourself a inflated
sense of ego for 50 years but then never actually win so not so exciting I feel like it'd have the opposite effect like you'd actually have a deflated ego because you're like you you it's all it's all or nothing you either win or or you're just like everyone else without a Nobel Prize yeah I think that was quite sad there are lots of other prizes though I don't think a Nobel Prize is to be all that end-all if doesn't mean you're the most amazing scientist ever you could be brilliant in
your Fields but the people nominating Nobel prizes just don't really know about it aren't that interested oh that's even sadder Laura never get any recognition Emma what do you think I hope that's not the case because I like to think that if you do discover something extraordinary you get The Nobel Prize but then you also win all the other medals I feel like there's got to be some kind of overlap um you know with how good your Discovery is um but also it's strange because I don't
know why um people hold the Nobel Prize in so much higher regard than you know some other medals and stuff which perhaps you know you get more money for um but everyone seems to have like a little bit of a buzz over the Nobel Prize maybe because it has like more history that we all know about but um I don't know I like to think that maybe it's I don't know old-fashioned that anyone can win a Nobel Prize if you do this and you get a discovery and you're happy with and you work on it kind of
thing but I think the whole nomination thing like if you don't know the right people could you even get nominated and then you know you may never get your so deserved Nobel Prize which is quite sad I think I think so this is taking a dark turn already I know but then how important was the discovery yeah yeah pursue I believe it's something really fundamental to so there's crash queries as well that we should probably mention there's peace literature chemistry physics medicine is that right
yeah and Physiology medicine and Physiology oh and economics as well sorry economics oh it's got a really long title it's uh very specifically and I'm gonna butcher this name thus Faris Rick's Bank prize in economic Sciences in memory of Alfred Nobel oh so is that like uh I'm gonna be a bit harsh a worse one did they come up with that later
it didn't start right in 1901. maybe it's because we didn't know how important economic Sciences would be yeah that makes sense if you think about like Global growth since 1901 to now like a lot more has happened and like internet invention and stock markets and all that sort of thing so yeah maybe we didn't know we needed one until more recently does that mean they sort of back fit a load of awards to early economic principles in that case or did they sort
of start from that point saying you know what guys economics we need Nobel Prize for it oh Mom well they've given prizes in science to things that were discovered in the past so I don't see why they wouldn't do it but I guess it does feel a bit weird to like back date the prize yeah I don't feel like they do that because they're quite strict on who can win and they don't like giving it to um they don't give it posthumously as well so if you do make a really cool
Discovery but then die you you can't get it after your death I didn't know that good because it is like just yours isn't it it's not to your institution or to some form of research so I don't understand why they can't give it to you if you die because then it's not like you know you you that money was supposed to be for your research it's like that money could go you know somewhere but what's the point in the prize is it to encourage someone to say well don't do more or is it his
recognition so surely you should get that recognition post humorously is it to be like you've done well here have a lot of money you can go on holiday or you can keep researching if you feel like it like it's a lot as well it's is it nearly a million it's three million Swedish kroner is that for all the different categories do you get the same for literature as you do for chemistry and physics oh I would hope so otherwise which is going to be really crossed aren't they
well but if you look at science funding versus Humanities funding Sciences generally gets a lot more funding from research councils because there's so much equipment involved yeah that's true extra costs associated with running that whereas Humanities funding is generally for a person to do a thing not for buying millions of pounds of equipment so I just I can see the argument both ways if it's for the person to celebrate their achievements it should be the same
amount but then if it's for the person to continue doing their work and the Sciences tend to cost more should it be more I don't know I feel like I'm saying scientists are all really rich she's awarding the sun just more money already I mean arguably yeah I I don't disagree with what Laura said so how are you gonna discover the Higgs boson without the LHC for example the Large Hadron Collider which would be phenomenally expensive to build and run so expensive compared two writing a book
or some great poetry the prize 22.
Swedish krona per full Nobel Prize so I reckon everyone gets the same oh maybe it's three million pounds then I swear three is in my head from somewhere I don't know the corona to you pound conversion unfortunately but you could be right because um it was originally from like Alfred nobel's um I don't know if it was in his like will or just throughout his life he gave money towards the Nobel prizes but then now I think like the Swedish government actually like subsidizes some of the
money so I don't know if the fund is like the pot has like gone up yeah so he did leave a great deal of money in his world to like the formation of the prizes and then the bank Sweden's bank got involved later on which established the economic one so it's probably some sort of collaboration between the two about where the money comes from because yeah even if he had a lot of money in the will it wouldn't last forever if he's giving 10 million switch Krona to
every Prize winner every year yeah also I was totally wrong about the three million that is just not a thing is like 800k so I just I do not know where I got that from I mean still pretty hefty wouldn't go very far in the Sciences though really wouldn't but if it was just like a bonus on top of you know your regular salary then you know true yeah you don't have to do research with it right like it's a personal yeah personal so it's up to you if you spend it on working at the Large Hadron
Collider or not I guess yeah oh which is actually um okay I realized what I was thinking of the um breakthrough prize in fundamental physics that prize is three million dollars and that was the prize that um Justin L won instead of the Nobel Prize some people say like her um supervisor won the Nobel Prize for the discovery of pulsars and then she much later on won this fundamental prize I remember like the reception people were just kind of like happier because
she actually ended up getting more money than she would have and then she ended up donating It All To The Institute of physics like donate to give different minorities in stem I think like paying for their no research or things which is quite cool that was really nice so crazy like that is that a personal award as well as personal yeah but then why is the Nobel Prize so famous compared to that one when you get so much more yeah and also like the recipients with
this prize like Stephen Hawking received it and he didn't win a Nobel Prize so I'm not sure if it's also like taking into account kind of whether you know the noble maybe um the Nobel Prize committee were like these people don't deserve it because they haven't released you know enough papers or they haven't got enough citations on their papers no matter how kind of how much of a breakthrough it was but then the fundamental um breakthrough prize and fundamental physics is kind of recognizing the
importance of like more maybe individual things I don't know because I don't know how many more papers trust and Bella Bernal released after her like thesis you know at the time she was a PhD student so I don't know if that had a big role in it yeah that's true because you have to be nominated by someone very high up so I suppose very high up people tend to know very famous people in their fields or the latest cutting-ed research and so if she wasn't on the on the paper
necessarily they wouldn't have known her so yeah maybe that played into it whereas later on she would have been more eligible for the prize that she then did win because maybe it doesn't quite work the same way interesting Laura I think you've got some examples of your favorite Nobel Prize winners Through the Ages oh yeah I was looking over the list and there are so many I got so distracted starting at the very bottom of the list the very oldest one for um physics
was awarded to Wilhelm Conrad ronkin for his discovery of x-rays essentially so going back to my radiation Science Background very first Prize in physics was about radiation and that kind of continued up until sort of um 1956 I think it was was the last one that I recognized as being for fundamental discoveries of things to do with radiation being emitted from things and there were quite a few more that were about how radiation interacts with matter then how we can use it to see the
structure of things which I thought was pretty cool that is very cool yeah so I think I saw I'm trying to find my notes and I have way too many notes here this first guy he discovered x-rays in terms of like broken bones sort of situation or was it more fundamental than that uh he was doing an experiment involving electrons and he was he thought things were pretty well shielded and he noticed something shining somewhere in his lab so we thought I need to investigate this this doesn't
seem quite right and it turned out it was something to do with x-rays there's a very famous picture of the very first medical x-ray image taken of his wife's hand wearing a wedding ring and that's one of those things that gets taught in schools when we're talking about radiation and x-rays it's a picture of this woman's hand yeah I think I saw that in school I didn't realize that was like one of the first x-rays or maybe I just forgot school was a long time ago well there
you go on this sort of continued kind of split across the physics and the chemistry um Nobel prizes so uh Marie Curie of course and her husband they won The Prize in physics relating to discovery of spontaneous radioactivity emitting from radioactive particles I think and then Marie Curie won it independently later on in chemistry for her work on specific elements that emit radiation that's pretty cool I think it's pretty impressive that you can win it twice
that feels a little bit like showing off but because it's very curious I'll allow it yeah and in different fields as well oh wow very extra impressive yeah and there are a lot of other names that I recognize sort of um physical constants in radiation Sciences um Henry beckerell Compton have you heard of Compton effect yeah yeah yeah well Emma the business is not enough no idea I feel like one of us has to describe it now I know it's a fairly well-known effect but try and ask me to
describe it on the Vine I'm not sure I could yeah it's um oh if I remember correctly like a relativistic effects of you know when different photons get scattered at different angles and it's all about how they scatter off each other and different objects and Compton scattering that's what it is how is that useful well we did like a lab in it actually in second year and it was useful for us which I'm guessing is also the reason why it was kind of breakthrough Nobel
Prize worthy was because when you accounted for the fact that you have like photons and electrons that are relativistic then the angles that they get scattered off start to actually like match the theory and so it basically is like solid proof of relative relativistic effects and how they actually changed the kinematics of you know different kind of interactions whereas before if you deal with it classically then you get like um that your experiment doesn't
match with your theory whether that was what the Nobel Prize was actually awarded for not sure but that is what my lab was in so I think it's important in understanding because you know like relativity you often hear about it in terms of like the twin paradox or you know moving you're in a spaceship moving closer speed of light but it's not actually got many kind of practical like you can actually see it kind of thing so I think that's why it was really revolutionary if I had to make a guess
I'll give you that I'll give you that we're explaining that on the Fly yeah yeah I was like wait can I remember this lap yes I can this reminds me of when you did the Multiverse episode and I was listening to that earlier today and I and I felt like oh my god there was so much science so much physics I felt like I never knew physics before yeah that was like a lot of research going into that before because I was like I want to make sure I re-remember my quantum mechanics courses
and it paid off I think I'm going to continue with my sort of radiation science theme because from about 1938 to 1958 they started to get into particle accelerators and doing things with neutrons to make new elements so Enrico ferme Fermi even um in 1938 used neutrons to make new radioactive elements so you want to prize that's pretty cool yeah and there was something in here about cyclotrons that I now can't find basically using particle accelerate is to do things it's
also interesting to note that it was awarded in 1938 because there was no Nobel Prize awards for his reasons the world war going on so to sneak it in before they took a break for a while I think it's pretty good going yeah also cool facts about Enrico Fermi is like later on when people obviously discovered like well the group fermions and bosons they named fermions after him which is quite cool I mean his research wasn't explicitly in that but is that cooler than the Nobel Prize maybe I'd
argue that having people saying your name any understanding why because you've got something named after you yeah yeah most people get it after like a unit or constant he gets it after uh is an exotic particle or just a regular particle this is a regular old particle like fermions boson so like fermions being electrons protons neutrons anything with like half into the spin is a fermion cool stuff that's a flex isn't like a science Flex if you've got something named after you
even if you haven't got a Nobel Prize you're doing quite well yeah I always think I want to discover like a new animal species but you can't name it after yourself because that's like visually offie but you need someone to be like oh I'll name it after you on your behalf so again you just need to know some geeky people who discover animals and then like you could trade yeah exactly you need like a little like round robin going on of like oh if I discover one I'll Never After you and
keep going but then knowing my luck I'll probably get something not very exciting like a worm true I'm sure worms are exciting to some people but you know I want something cool I don't know you discovered like I don't know an animal that everyone thought previously had been extinct and you're like you've got the coolest one and then you don't even get it named after yourself oh that's true you know what I mean there's a bit of like attention if you know was the worm and you've got this really
cool like it's from like the Jurassic period or something survived like millions of years yeah that's a tough one okay some more examples of funky Nobel prize-winning discoveries or useful things I do I've got what I think is really cool actually maybe because I'm like more into the biophysics but um I thought it was interesting Laura when you brought up the first Nobel Prize because it's like groundbreaking at the time but I feel like as time has progressed the threshold for what makes
kind of an amazing Discovery has just like increased massively and so I think you actually get a lot more cooler things in my opinion I'm like in my opinion in my opinion when you go to like the later Noble prizes so I was having a look at some of the most recent ones and um I really like the 2018 Nobel Prize in physics on um Optical tweezers um because uh it's essentially like a high focused laser beam that makes this like Optical trap um which you can use to measure sub
nanometer displacements and also really tiny forces so um they actually ended up using like this technology to look at DNA and like the different enzymes that um work in DNA replication and how they work and what forces they exert you know to like split the DNA and things but also like you can use it to apply a tiny Force to different molecules and like isolate them and move them around and there was also something um where you actually could like build things up sell by cell and I just think
that's really cool that you can do that without destroying the cell that you can just move around and it's literally just a laser it's like a laser that works from momentum just picking things up moving about looking at DNA I just think that's cool I like to say it's just a laser like a laser pointer you can buy in the pound I feel like it's got to be more sophisticated than that maybe it's a little bit more high-tech wait have you played Legend of Zelda the um breath of
the wild I haven't oh well the in in game you get a gadget where you can mag like to be fair it's based on magnets but you can pick stuff up and move it around that's what I'm picturing but on like the Nano scale instead of just like this this thing where you're just kind of like because it also has a glowy effect because obviously it's a video game it has to be visual and I'm just imagining you just like picking up these little atoms and nudging it along and then forcing things to move around
um just like in a video game it probably is like that to be fair I mean I'd something probably like that but um I was looking into how it works and it was essentially saying that the optical trap that gets created by the beam is in August to a spring that obeys Hawk's law so like you get the force applied which relates to obviously proportional to the distance in the same direction so you can use like one to measure the other and move things about to get a force and
I think it kind of works and um that kind of way which I think is really funny as well because if you do an undergraduate Physics degree you get told absolutely everything is a spring or a pendulum so I remember those days absolutely everything is so Hawke's law doesn't just apply to gravity it applies to other forces yeah yeah like um as long as you have well I think there's got to be something there to you know expand or contract or Etc but essentially Hawks will always
just force being proportional to displacement so I think when you get to really small distances it just you know the force is always linear with the displacement which is quite cool and you use it for anything like like I like the idea of moving moving to any things around but like what can I do with it like how is it good for my life in terms of like actual like a useful application of it because you mentioned DNA so is it useful in like Gene editing at all or is
it not quite the right thing it was really useful in understanding how like the different enzyme works you know like DNA like helicase or something that unzips the DNA like where does it apply the forces and how strong is the force because when you know how strong the force is you can get information about how strong the bonds are and um so I imagine it's been quite useful in you know I guess maybe even with developing different enzymes okay this is me just like going off my own
little brain movement now but um I don't know if it's completely true but I feel like it'd be useful if you you know this design of enzymes to do a specific thing if you know you knew what type of force you wanted to exert on something then you could be like well DNA helicase exerts this type of force and this amount of force so if we aim to replicate this because we know that amino acid structure then we could probably get a similar Force I don't know you know like a I feel like it
helps you understand the how the different enzymes interact with the DNA and maybe that also helps with like Gene editing if you need to like take out a gene what the best thing best way to break the bonds out sort of thing maybe that's cool I I could see that working I like I like the idea of just playing with a laser to be honest and moving different particles around seeing what happens yeah you don't like it it's just picking things up it's just like you
don't think you can pick things up with a laser but you can but you can it's wild doesn't it so they're literally just using light that's controlled in a particular way to move matter around yeah yeah in theory when you break it down you're like oh well light does carry momentum which a change in momentum does exert a force so it's kind of like a bit derivative but it just feels like it feels like a nice little oh I don't know why we didn't think of that before but in like I wasn't going
to think about it before like I feel like I never would have thought of that in a million years and then you you see how like it's quite doesn't it feels like quite like a natural progression of what we already know yeah I definitely would never have thought of being like Oh yeah I can just pick something up with this laser yeah like that's so cool it seems like like a tractor beam in Star Wars that's what I'm thinking of the Star Trek Star Trek yeah they do
um I was thinking when you saw they're using the force I thought someone's going to make a Star Wars joke then and no one did oh that's so close and I missed it we got two into a Miss physics world that's why yeah yeah I like how you were saying that the bar has been raised higher in terms of discoveries they're more complicated and I think this explains it quite well so um you touched on maybe sort of 20 different Nobel prize winning aspects in this one because you're talking about the
structure of enzymes structure of molecules use of radiation and light how radiation interacts with matter and they're all previous Nobel Prize winners oh wow yeah that's so interesting do you reckon it's harder now to win one or is it easier because we've discovered so much that it like builds or is it like before we haven't discovered anything so your chances were better I think that's definitely the case there was a lot more unknowns and now I think maybe we're
kind of at the point where it's turning to application more than General Discovery so like some of the interesting stories that I found were really fundamental Technologies but they didn't get awarded for so long like 50 years after they first started working on it and I think it's just because people found it and went huh cool and not realizing make any significance so that's my take on it do you have any examples you could share of ones that are awarded with a huge time lag oh yeah
so one was blue light emitting diodes why it's specifically blue is because it enabled us to have white light but before that this is where we started going into physics about you know the the band Gap and releasing a photo of in a specific wavelength back to radiation science again as well hey that scared me a little bit it scares you as a physicist it scares me as a as an engineer so they won the prize for discovering blue LEDs or making blue LEDs because it could lead
to energy efficient lighting whereas before we had red and green they were kind of inverted comments easy to get and then they spend ages trying different um don't know if the words compounds or elements and combining them and they just kind of kept kept seeing what different colors they got this one's quite nice for me it sounds like they're just they're just trying different things until eventually you know like this is actually kind of useful so the is the idea there that um
what you pass a electron through a substance material an electrons sort of jump up into that valence band and then fall back down to their normal energy State and that releases energy and it's the distance in that band Gap that dictates how much energy is given off and therefore what color of light there is I'm going to answer yes but um they get excited from the valence to the conductance band yes you're right thank you I'm going to agree knowing nothing about it it's not even knowing what a
valence band is so that sounds good to me I'll Trust this baby there are diagrams it's probably easy to look at a diagram then ask us to describe it yeah the diagrams there is a diagram here and actually in the diagram there is a Fermi level between a valence band and conduction band so there we are again ah perfect Fermi comes off again so why do you reckon it took so long because you said there was quite a big gap between them finding this out and then getting
the Nobel Prize so what do you think was the contributing factor do people just not realize that it was helpful hello so yeah just to just go back into a bit of History the first LEDs were made in the 1950s and 1960s the blue LED was achieved at the end of 1980s that's that's a long time of sort of guessing different different elements together and yeah why why did it take so long um I've just looked at the full description of the prize and it was specifically about Energy Efficiency
wasn't it and yes how much of an effect this would have to things like home lighting and reducing energy bills and therefore emissions from the energy sector that's so interesting it's interesting to think as well like how much science has changed and how much we've discovered and like they created the economic prize but you think like in the future they'll create different prizes for like different topics that are more like relevant to today rather than like we've obviously covered the
fundamentals but like would there be a scope for a new prize to come in influential prize oh I can imagine that there could be something around sustainability in climate change in I don't have business practice the right word but sustainability doesn't disrupt climate change is it's about the communities around a particular business and how they're helped so maybe there could be a Nobel Prize around that I know there are obviously prizes from other communities and societies about those but maybe
something as prestigious as a Nobel Prize would sort of elevate all of that and make people more aware of it than they already are do you reckon people would try harder if they thought it was a Nobel Prize like at stake or would that just be encompassed in like the prizes that we have at the moment but just you know if you found like a great idea for capturing carbon out of the atmosphere or putting something on cars like an engineering thing that would completely
take out all their carbon emissions would that go under like a chemistry Prize or do you think they'd like come up with a Nobel Prize for engineering just for that oh see you're looking at the number of chemistry prizes that have been awarded for radiation science which could also fall into the physics category I wouldn't be surprised if they do make an extra category so that it can award more prizes essentially in one year just to go back to is a sustainability prize
there was um a winner for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize which was related to climate change and that was the intergovernmental panel on climate change and Al Gore oh yeah so he won for something in specific but like a sustainability practice it was for efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change so I think that might have been when Al Gore released that uh what was that program he made the Inconvenient Truth An Inconvenient Truth so I think it was that yeah
so does that mean you could be an engineer or a business person championing sustainability and get a Nobel Peace Prize yeah it sounds like it that's also a very quick turnaround the same year no sorry I'm I got it wrong it was 2006 the documentary was released so following year do you reckon there's anyone out there that like deserves one that hasn't got one we mentioned um Jocelyn Bell but I reckon there's probably a few more people that potentially deserving if you
could give one to someone or and you had the power of many Swedish scientists is there anyone you would pick I say the only like one of the main things that stands out is like I feel like Greta Thornburg is Maybe Juan at some point because she's done a lot she I would put in the same category as someone like Malala Yusuf who did win in like terms of like being quite young like activism I would say yeah yeah yeah yeah definitely because I feel like she has been one of the leading figures in
climate change and is also has been doing it for ages since she was like 15.
um so that's the only person that like stands out to me honest science like point of view like I don't even know I feel like I'm not even like clued up to like the high-tech research she even say anything Laura's anyone you would pick who's the latest in the radiation field there are quite a lot of people doing some interesting discoveries in radiation um I feel like it's become a bit more Niche since about the 1950s though when like the big excitement around radiation
science died off and now it's just lots of people kind of put ring away um talking to each other across this International very small community so there's no one I can think of but there I think there is so many more people doing science now and collaborating with other groups that it would be quite difficult to pick out anyone that's really pushing boundaries I know there's talk in the radiation science community of trying to figure out like the origins of Life which might relate to radiation
so that could be something but I don't know how likely that is or how feasible that is that they can make that Discovery yeah I mean that would be pretty incredible Discovery new sort of way research works is you might end up not dedicating your whole life to a specific field or or topic so it might mean that you just wouldn't kind of gain that that kind of momentum that people used to on in that got them the Nobel Prize like you know people kind of jump through fields and there's almost the oh
what's the you know when you have a research impact score and that kind of thing you kind of almost have to Chase certain aspects of research and it might not lead down the path of one single-minded Discovery or breakthrough that is true so I guess sort of the way that science funding works and institutions are built up it kind of might make it a little bit more difficult to do that I'm not sure how much age is a factor necessarily although again this is quite a historic
one so in 1915 brag and brag won a Nobel Prize in physics I think for their services and Analysis for crystal structure by means of x-rays so that was father and son and I think William Lawrence Bragg was in his 20s at that point but I assume he was working with his father and again this is very different time that they just kind of worked on it in their own private lab somewhere and they were sort of I imagine they were rich gentried people it was Sir William Henry Bragg was his father
they had the time the means and the luxury to do this whereas I suspect that's not quite so true now yes I think you're right though I think it probably hit sort of quite an important point is that in the past it was different to how International research and grants and all that sort of thing work now is quite different to being a fairly wealthy interested party that has money and the means to explore their own interest as well and spend their lifetime on it if
they want to rather than someone that's trying to get funding for a university to do a particular research project and not necessarily chasing chasing a prize perhaps but no it's quite it's interesting to see how far it's come and like to think about like where it will go in the future like will people still be winning prizes in another what is it 120 years something like that and what will they be for hmm cool so I think we've probably covered just about everything
there if anyone has any more comments on the Nobel prizes let us know get involved on Twitter and we will see you for the next episode the views expressed in this podcast belong entirely to the person that said them they do not represent any industry or organization if you enjoyed listening to these views it would really help us out if you could rate US leave a review and tell a friend this podcast was sponsored by no one but if you're interested in funding us to continue to
have Frank discussions about science and engineering please get in touch [Music]