Abstract:“National Socialists were enthusiastic about technology and the natural sciences. Chemistry was of the highest importance in helping the Third Reich to become independent of imports from foreign countries and was crucial for the preparation of the war. The German chemical societies were of major importance in coordinating the contribution of their members to the war …︁” Read more in the Editorial by Henning Hopf.
“…He was a major reason for the delay and almost non-award to Albert Einstein. [33,34] As Friedman commented, biases were prominent in the early decades of the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry: "Arrhenius of course was not alone in pushing biases and partiality among the Academy chemists. The initial biological turn in the committee [8] and overt downplaying of theoretical advances in basic chemistry owes to von Euler and Svedberg, with Arrhenius long opposing any contribution that diluted the value of his theories.…”
Section: Highly Nominated But Unchosenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Arrhenius's influence also extended to the Nobel Prize in Physics. He was a major reason for the delay and almost non‐award to Albert Einstein [33,34] . As Friedman commented, biases were prominent in the early decades of the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry:…”
Section: The Influence Of Nominations On the Selection Of Nobel Laure...mentioning
The solicitation of nominations for the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry (NPch) is and has been the first step in the selection process since the very first awards were made in 1901. The number of nominations solicited by and provided to the Nobel Committee for Chemistry supports the belief by the nominators that their nominations are meaningful. In this publication, we examine data culled from the Nobel Prize Nomination Archives for the period 1901–1970 of the variable role of nominations in the selection process for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. The evidence is overwhelming that nominations, in general, during the 1901–1970 period have not been the deciding, overriding factor in the selection of the recipients of the NPch. Rather, we posit that nominations from the preselected nominator‐pool have been a source of information for the Committee, used to suggest future years’ contenders and possibly served as motivation for the Committee to seek nominations for specific nominees for future years. It is also clear that selections are often influenced by personal prejudices, for example, friendships, rivalries, and nationality.
“…He was a major reason for the delay and almost non-award to Albert Einstein. [33,34] As Friedman commented, biases were prominent in the early decades of the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry: "Arrhenius of course was not alone in pushing biases and partiality among the Academy chemists. The initial biological turn in the committee [8] and overt downplaying of theoretical advances in basic chemistry owes to von Euler and Svedberg, with Arrhenius long opposing any contribution that diluted the value of his theories.…”
Section: Highly Nominated But Unchosenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Arrhenius's influence also extended to the Nobel Prize in Physics. He was a major reason for the delay and almost non‐award to Albert Einstein [33,34] . As Friedman commented, biases were prominent in the early decades of the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry:…”
Section: The Influence Of Nominations On the Selection Of Nobel Laure...mentioning
The solicitation of nominations for the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry (NPch) is and has been the first step in the selection process since the very first awards were made in 1901. The number of nominations solicited by and provided to the Nobel Committee for Chemistry supports the belief by the nominators that their nominations are meaningful. In this publication, we examine data culled from the Nobel Prize Nomination Archives for the period 1901–1970 of the variable role of nominations in the selection process for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. The evidence is overwhelming that nominations, in general, during the 1901–1970 period have not been the deciding, overriding factor in the selection of the recipients of the NPch. Rather, we posit that nominations from the preselected nominator‐pool have been a source of information for the Committee, used to suggest future years’ contenders and possibly served as motivation for the Committee to seek nominations for specific nominees for future years. It is also clear that selections are often influenced by personal prejudices, for example, friendships, rivalries, and nationality.
“…Helmut Maier (RUB) erhielt den Sonderpreis des Fonds der Chemischen Industrie (FCI) für sein Buch Chemiker im “Dritten Reich” , das der Vorstand der GDCh in Auftrag gegeben hatte und das die unrühmliche Rolle der Vorgängerorganisationen der GDCh – die Deutsche Chemische Gesellschaft (DChG) und der Verein Deutscher Chemiker (VDCh) – zwischen 1933 und 1945 beschreibt. Auf das Buch ging Henning Hopf in einem Editorial in der Angewandten Chemie ein, und Florian Schmalz besprach es dort . Maier studierte Elektrotechnik und anschließend Naturwissenschafts‐ und Neuere Geschichte an der Technischen Universität Braunschweig, an der er auch 1990 bei Erika Hickel promovierte.…”
“…Hopf’s research involves the preparation and study of unsaturated compounds such as olefins, allenes, alkynes, cumulenes, aromatic compounds (mostly cyclophanes), and retinoids. He has published an Editorial in Angewandte Chemie on the role of the German chemical societies in the Third Reich 4. Hopf was on the Editorial Board of the European Journal of Organic Chemistry from 1998–2005.…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
