Comments from participants...
One
of our missions in Lindau was to represent the scientific strength o
f
our nation, and that was possible with the assistance and enthusiasms of
Dr. Ray Orbach, DOE, ORISE and NIST officials.
The orientation reaffirmed that US is a leader in the scientific
community in the world, very important in keeping our spirits proud and
high during the meeting. The meeting in DC as a group was very important
and “a must” for the enthusiasm and cohesiveness of the group.
In addition, it could have been very helpful to have a more
detailed orientation on Germany.
Meeting
Nobel Laureates one to one made me realize that we are all capable of
having great success just as them. Nobel
Laureates were students that had the same struggles and doubts during the
course of their career just like me, yet they achieved the highest honor a
scientist can earn. This experience
had encouraged and reassured my career choice as a scientist.
I
attended all lectures from day 1 to day 3 including the afternoon group
sessions, and Dr. Harold Kroto’s lecture: "Nanoscience and
Nanotechnology: The Chemistry of the 21st Century, and roundtable
discussion: "What Comes Next after Sequencing the Human and 2000
Other Genomes? The Role of Chemistry and Biochemistry in the Postgenomic
Scientific World" on day 4.
However,
the lecture that made the greatest impact on me was the roundtable
discussion: "What Can Chemistry and the Scientific Community
contribute in Alfred Nobel's Spirit to the Benefit of Mankind in the 21st
Century?" on day 1. The
lecture was a reflection on the impact of our work on the entire world and
how it essentially steers everybody’s future.
With every new development, science and engineering is constantly
rewriting the answers to what is the life expectancy, how to improve the
quality of life, what kind of world awaits for our grandchildren, etc.
Alfred Nobel was right when he suggest with his award that the
benefit of mankind is or should always be the reason to be for science and
engineering. This lecture addressed some ethical aspects of the scientific
work as well as alternatives to working together (economist, politicians,
educators, scientist, etc.) to preserve and improve what in the beginning
was given to us.
I
attended the group discussions of Dr. Jean-Marie Lehn, Dr. George Olah,
Dr. Rudolf Mössbauer, and Dr. Harold Kroto.
I enjoyed very much the sincere and realistic discussion with Dr.
Olah on global warming and alternatives to energy resources.
Dr. Olah explained that as good as a solution may sound there are
many political, economical and human factors that come into play.
We can offer scientific solutions but we do not have the perfect
solution for the world, it is necessary that the global community work
together. Moreover, an exciting discussion emerged as students challenge Dr.
Mössbauer to explain the true nature of elemental particles.
Some suggested that these particles are an artifact of experimental
conditions. Dr. Mössbauer, wisely
and patiently, opened our minds by simply saying: “when you measure
(see) something again, again and again, I guarantee you it’s there”.
Personally,
this was my first time in Europe and it was an exhilarating cultural
shock/experience. This experience
has opened up the possibilities to pursue a scientific career abroad as
well as collaborations. I realize
that all the students in the meeting are potential national and
international collaborators and perhaps a couple of us could be sharing a
prize. Great friendships emerged and I just wonder how else in the world
could I have met these new friends.
The
entire trip was a memorable experience. The
beauty of Lindau, and Mainau, the challenge of a foreign language, the
tasty food, wine and beer, the cultural exchange between delegations
(India, Singapore, Germany, Poland, Venezuela, Sweden) and citizens of
Lindau are incredible memories. In
particular, I will never forget my one to one discussion on spiritual
matters with Dr. Harold Kroto! Details
available upon request!
In
general, the 52nd Lindau Meeting was an incredible learning experience.
The US delegation was privileged that DOE and ORAU organized
several luncheons and a dinner with Nobel Laureates as special guests.
This provided us with the opportunity to discuss individual matters
with the Laureates that were not topic of discussion during the scientific
program of the meeting. The
Laureates were great mentors! The
experience with international student peers was very rewarding since most
of them revealed an open mind and willingness to experience what the US
delegation had to offer. Thank you.
The
time with the Laureates was a 
defining
moment in my career. Each laureate allowed us to ask questions of them
from any subject that was important to us. By doing this, it allowed for
the meeting to be catered to the individual and not the group. The
Laureates helped us to see the reason that we were in science and the
reason that we should recruit others into science.
I
was fortunate to be able to attend most of the lectures. However, I liked
Professor Zewail’s lecture because it was clear and concise, and often
avoided the technical words and phrases that we often do not understand.
The lecture from Dr. Karle was also a good one for its description of a
very technical science to a very novice audience.
There
was a multitude of ideas and collaborations that I took from this meeting.
The laureates most of all taught me the importance of the question. They
showed that being able to ask the right question and discover its answer
leads to a wealth of understanding. They also shared the importance of
science to the community and to the world and they reinforced the nobility
of scientists. By attending with the students from the U.S. and by
interacting with the students from other countries, I gained a greater
respect for the scientific community as a whole, but most of all, I gained
a greater respect for my role in that community.
The
meeting of the Nobel Laureates in Lindau was really a wonderful chance
to not just hear lectures by top scientists, but also, and more
importantly, to get their ideas about a whole spectrum of topics. Also,
since this was an international meeting, it was invaluable to get the
different student's perspectives, not just through talking with them, but
also through the insightful questions they asked.
The
experience with the Nobel Laureates has given me, and I am sure many
others, a new perspective on doing science, and some areas of life in
general as well. The meeting allowed for interactions on several levels,
from the public lectures, to the informal lunch hosted by our group. On
each of these occasions, it was the most interesting and beneficial to
hear and discuss the road they traveled during their scientific careers.
During
the meeting, I attended all of the lectures by the Laureates. While all of
the lectures were interesting and informative, the ones that I remember
most are where the Laureate told a bit of the story of the discovery. For
example, I remember Professor Boyer's endless enthusiasm, and fascination
with his research. This attitude, for me, and I am sure many others, has
been somewhat contagious.
During
the informal discussions, I valued most the attitude that the Laureates
had. They were open to answer all manner of questions. I am able to read
the scientific papers, so it was this personal interaction that was the
unique element. The sessions weren't limited to scientific or technical
subjects. Many thought provoking questions and discussions were centered
around politics, religion, and the world in general.
During
the meeting, I made many new friends, not just with the American students,
but also with a number of international students. As well as these
friendships, there have been doors opened for collaboration on a range of
exciting research opportunities. The interactions with the Nobelists and
other leading scientists beyond the lectures gave a perspective into each
one's unique personality and experiences. It
was the personal interaction that truly made the difference. I think that
the informal dinner and lunches hosted by the American students were some
of the most interesting and exciting times of the meeting.
I
enjoyed the orientation in DC more than I expected. It was part
icularly
nice of Dr. Orbach to spend as much time with us as he did, and to hear
how a scientist such as himself views working with the government. He said
that he was funded by government grants through his studies, and he
appreciated the chance to give back through his current service.
Dr.
Hirsch gave a very nice review of the Nobel prize and its history, that
helped set the stage for the Lindau trip. Also it was nice to have Mr.
Lucas from the German embassy give us some information on Germany.
During
the Lindau meeting, some speakers were very critical of U.S. policies,
especially regarding the Kyoto convention. This caught a lot of students
by surprise - perhaps it would help to warn students in D.C. that our
government, and our president, are not universally admired in Europe and
the rest of the world.
The
common theme I heard from all Laureates was that a scientist should be
passionate about their work. Not to do the work in hope of recognition or
awards (like a Nobel Prize) but for scientific curiosity, and the love of
finding things out. That's what I will remember from this trip, more than
any specific scientific facts.
I
attended all of the lectures. As an engineer, and one who works with
inorganic chemistry, I got less out of the talks which focused on
biochemistry. I thought Paul Boyer did a very good job of making his
biochemical talk (on the discovery of ATP synthase) accessible to all - it
was a great story, as well as great science. He made me want to start over
and study enzymes.
I
also really liked Harry Kroto's talk. It was very slick, but had a lot of
good points in it. He poked at the U.S., but he was right on, and most
Americans don't have any idea about what our government is doing. I know
that many of the American students didn't realize that the U.S. and
Somalia are the only two countries in the world not to sign the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child! Even though this was not related to
his research, Kroto was able to advocate for more scientific training, and
for scientific input into important cultural and political debates.
I
liked those talks that mixed science with a broader discussion of the role
of scientists in society. Several Laureates (especially Ernst, Kroto,
Crutzer and Boyer) addressed this issue, and argued that scientists have a
responsibility to inform the public and policy makers on technical issues
such as global warming, and energy crisis. It was good for many of the
American students who hadn't had much overseas experience to hear a
critique of our government. I especially liked Paul Boyer's discussion of
genetically modified foods. Several speakers (Kroto, Boyer, Olah) held the
opinion that nuclear power is a necessity in the medium range future. This
is something that I don't agree with, but hearing it from people I respect
so much does make me reconsider, and to examine the science more
thoroughly.
I
really had a good time meeting the other American students. They are doing
really great things in their research, I think it really was a great group
of people, and we had a wonderful time together. It was also fun to meet
students from other countries, especially the UK, Israel, and Denmark. I
had a lot of fun in the afternoons and evenings following Laureate
lectures, talking about them with my new friends.
I
also ran into an old friend, now on a post-doc in Berlin, whom I hadn't
seen for ten years - an unexpected connection! He gave me some ideas about
fellowships available for graduate study in Germany that I may follow up
on.
One
of my thesis committee members is based in Zurich, and I took the
opportunity to visit him after the Lindau meeting. That was a great
experience, I had two days of really interesting discussions with him, his
graduate students, and other researchers at the institute. This was an
opportunity I would not have had without the Lindau trip.
I
was really rejuvenated after talking with the students and the Nobel
Laureates. I think that
I will have a long and useful career in science. I learned a lot about the
nature of the Nobel Laureates -- most notably that they are just normal
people with a lot of determination and a little bit of luck. I was
especially impressed with the multidisciplinary nature of the conference.
I am certain that the future of science will require a strong interaction
between physics, chemistry, biology, computer science, and engineering.
All of the Laureates seemed well rounded and had a fundamental
understanding of all of these domains.
I
was most touched by Dr. Kroto's talk. He is a very effective speaker and
shares many of the concerns that I do on the future education of science
to our youngsters. The story of how the Buckyball was discovered was very
fascinating and really struck home the point that the Nobel Prize is not
something that you get when you seek to achieve it. It is something you
get when you don't (and just do science as you would if it didn't exist).
I
really enjoyed the DOE sponsored lunches where we were able to talk to the
Laureates 1-on-1. I also enjoyed the dance. The U.S. students were a blast
to hang out with, and we also picked up some British students and German
students in our nightly activities.
I
enjoyed learning about the other students’ research areas and think
there can be some collaboration in the future. Specifically, I am
interested in working with Nathan VerBerkmoes from ORNL on mass
spectrometry.
I
have a lot of hope in the future of science. I enjoyed the afternoon
student sessions more than the roundtable discussions because the student
sessions allowed for more student interaction.
It
was very nice to hear from the sponsors of the trip, as I think that this
g
ave me a
better understanding of why we were sent to Lindau, as well as information
about agencies that I may encounter later in my career.
Although he was not in Lindau personally, Dr. Orbach set the tone
of the meeting in advance with his lecture, exuding curiosity and
excitement about future topics in science.
The talk from the German embassy was also quite useful, helping us
to be slightly more knowledgeable travelers.
Interacting
with the Laureates was both encouraging and inspiring, trite as that may
sound. It was particularly
heartening to see people who, after a full career in science, were still
full of curiosity and passion for new projects.
I recall one Laureate reacting to one of the other lecture topics
by musing that it would be a fascinating field to study, if he could only
start from scratch again. I was
also impressed by the sense of responsibility that many of the speakers
expressed. In their talks, many of
them brought up problems of resource use, pollution and disease control.
It was heartening to hear their optimism about how far science may
be able to go towards addressing these issues; they were probably more
optimistic, on average, than I tend to be.
Not infrequently during the talks and discussion, one of the
speakers, when discussing an unresolved issue, would look out at the
audience and say that they were counting on our generation to work it out.
In summary, interacting with the Laureates gave me a chance to step
back and be reminded of some of the best reasons to be involved in
science; curiosity about the world we live in and the chance to try to
solve concrete problems.
I
attended all of the lectures. I
felt that I got the most out of the talks in which the Laureates turned
their attention to future directions in fields of science that they knew
well. In my mind, one of the
characteristics that often propels people to the top of their field is an
excellent sense of which avenues of research will prove interesting in the
future. Thus, despite the fact that I am not in biochemistry, I was most
impressed with the tone of the talks on the fourth day.
Both Professor Deisenhofer's "Back to Proteins" and the
roundtable discussion on the role of biochemistry in the future were very
forward looking. I left them
feeling as if I had been exposed to new ideas.
I
attended discussions with Harold Kroto, Paul Crutzen, and Johann
Deisenhofer as well as briefly visiting talks with Drs. Arber and Boyer.
I most enjoyed Dr. Kroto's and Dr. Crutzen's talks.
The careers of both men have taken them into the public eye and the
realm of public policy. Their
approaches to the question of how scientists should interact with the
public seemed quite different, and were interesting to compare.
On a more general note, I found it interesting to see the amount of
healthy disagreement with each other which the Laureates expressed.
Scientific argument is clearly alive and well, with this group
anyhow. It was an exhilarating experience to find myself in a group of
people from around the world and to have a common starting point for
discussion with all of them. I
spent as much time as I could trying to meet students from other countries
and learning a bit about their life and work.
For
a couple of years now, the idea of doing a post-doc in Germany has been in
the back of my mind; there is excellent research going on at the Max
Planck institutes that is related to my area of interest. One of the more
practical benefits of the conference for me was that I was able to get
information pertaining to this. The
conference organizers took time to inform us about the Humboldt
Fellowships, which are specifically aimed at funding foreign post-docs in
Germany (I had not heard of these before).
In addition, many non-Germans who were in the country for their
post-docs attended the conference and I got to quiz several of them on the
advantages and disadvantages of their choice.
I found the information quite useful and will keep in mind when I
am deciding where to go after graduate school.
The
moderator of the discussion on the first day made mention of Alfred
Nobel's innovation of stabilizing nitroglycerin in diatoms in order to
produce dynamite. He made a point
of then asking the Laureates on the panel to explain the mechanism of
stabilization-and not all of them knew. While
the question may have been a bit embarrassing for the panel at the time, I
thought that he made a very good point and made it well. I think that he was trying to bring home to us the idea that in
science one never stops being a student, and to encourage us to constantly
ask questions, even if we are asking about science that has been around
for over a century.
Listening
to the Laureates and interacting with an international group of peers
added to my confidence that science is an excellent career choice for me.
I was reminded of the many problems that my generation may
hopefully be able to chip away at, as well as the fact that science is a
passion that can last a lifetime. It
was inspiring and exciting; thanks for giving me the opportunity to
attend!
The
chance to meet and interact with Nobel Laureates was bo
th
an honor and an experience I will never forget, however, I really can't
say that it will have a great impact on my scientific career.
If anything it helped me see that they are people too, so with some
hard work and a little bit of luck anyone of us could get that early
morning phone call!!
Harold
Kroto's lecture had the most value to me due to the similarities in our
research and also the over all entertainment factor of his talk.
While
having the chance to converse with Nobel Laureates was a great experience,
I think the interaction among students from around the world was far more
rewarding. Being able to sit down
at a pub with someone from the other side of the world or even from two
states over, have a beer and talk about science, politics, the weather, or
what have you is what I will remember most.
At
the orientation, Ray Orbach's and the DOE's vision of the future of
science was both 
informative
and inspiring. I really appreciated Orbach's courage to voice support for
keeping our doors open to international students despite public paranoia
after September 11th.
Meeting
the Americans first in Washington D.C. was instrumental for developing
fellowship. I never felt that I was among strangers. Traveling with the
group also evaporated any stress I would have felt about traveling in a
new country.
I
enjoyed the scientific lectures more than any other event. It was a great
opportunity to learn about various fields. I particularly enjoyed Zewail's
lecture because I was utterly amazed by the ability to "see"
along the reaction coordinate. I was also impressed by his application of
studying water molecules to understand protein folding.
I attended informal
discussions led by Mossbauer, Olah, Fischer, and Boyer. The most memorable
discussion was led by Fischer. (Although he refused to speak in English, I
managed to get by with the translations of a kind German student.) First,
I was excited to meet one of the pioneers of organometallic chemistry, a
field where creativity continues to push on the boundaries of what bonds
transition metals can form. Fischer's description of ferrocene was an
early but apt example. Second, I had failed to recognize how much we as
American scientists take for granted the chemicals, facilities, and
financial support available to us. Finally, I truly felt immersed in the
German scientific community, witnessing their argumentative spirit and
hearing their heartfelt concerns for the future of science in Germany.
Exchanging
cultural idiosyncrasies with the Israelis and Germans was an unexpected
highlight. Though I only managed to find a handful of students studying
related chemistry, I remember fondly talking an entire night away about
science.
In summary, the Lindau meeting brought a diverse, international group of scientists together for free-flowing exchange of ideas and hopes. The experience was so incredible that it was almost possible to thrive on words alone!
The
Lindau Meeting has broadened my scientific view and has incr
eased
my interest in the role that science plays in policy making and in
everyday life. The Nobel Laureates had such an impressive enthusiasm for
science. I hope to continue in science with as much satisfaction as they
have.
The
orientation session in Washington, DC introduced the students to the responsibilities
and goals of the DOE, NIST, and ORAU. Since many areas of science are
covered by these institutions, I was able to hear about a wide variety of
science topics and see how interdisciplinary chemistry could be.
The
orientation was also a great opportunity to meet the other members of the
U.S. delegation to Lindau. It was very interesting to hear about other
research being done across the country and to compare our graduate student
experiences.
I
attended all the lectures during the meeting. Since most of my research
involves structure- property relationships, I especially enjoyed listening
to Jerome Karle talk about how he solved the infamous "phase
problem" in crystallography. I am not much of a mathematician, but I
now have a much greater appreciation for mathematics and quantum
mechanics. Jerome Karle was also an inspiration because he made sure to
give credit to his wife, Isabelle Karle for being one of the first to
routinely solve chiral structures.
I
attended the roundtable discussions of J. M.-Lehn, Kroto, Olah, Ernst,
Crutzen, and Karle. I enjoyed listening to George Olah who had very
realistic views on the energy crisis. During the discussion with Karle, I
enjoyed hearing about more details from his previous work, his opinions on
the future of crystallography, and his sense of humor.
I
also met with Mossbauer during our 4th of July lunch. Madeleine Jacobs
from Chemical and Engineering News was also present, and I especially
enjoyed talking with both of them. We discussed several topics, including
women in science. An interesting topic!
I
was able to meet many other graduate students and develop new friendships.
I was also able to meet students who are also inorganic chemists and will
most likely see at future meetings.
Overall,
the experiences at the Lindau Meeting were eye-opening. The Laureates were
honest and inspirational. It was interesting to hear about graduate
student research and experiences from other countries. Graduate school
around the world is definitely not the same as in the U.S. I also learned
about the varying opinions on the U.S., our environmental policies,
graduate education, etc.
Before
the meeting, I had never traveled internationally, so this was quite a
unique experience for me!
Outstanding.
I'll never forget it. My
interactions with the laureates reminded me 
that
the most important trait for good science is an eye for detail, and the
ability to boil a problem down to its essential details.
The
lectures that were most informative focused the least on the hard,
technical details of the science and more on the results and the
directions the science could go from there.
I
attended sessions chaired by Harold Kroto, Werner Arber, Johann
Deisenhofer, Paul Boyer, Robert Huber and Jean-Marie Lehn.
I thought they were all valuable in their own special ways. I
realized that a lot of the things I try to accomplish in biological
systems, i.e., controlling the assembly of macromoles, are of great
interest to people outside the biochemistry community.
I
made many friends from around the globe.
I'm sure to encounter some of these people later in my career.
This
is quite simply one of the those life changing experiences. From the
orientation wit
h
Dr. Orbach, to the debates over global warming between Drs. Ernst and Olah,
to getting whipped by the British students in chess (yep, we had to buy
the beer), I will cherish my time in Lindau.
Most importantly, the future seems to hold more possibilities than
I once thought...more international possibilities and more
responsibilities as a scientist.
In
most cases there was a great sense of humility among the laureates.
They felt quite lucky to be there. Hence
they preached individual thought and adherence to scientific principles.
"The discoveries will come," they said, "...often
quite by accident." In
today’s scientific world where so much has already been discovered,
understanding the current state and further pushing that state ahead is a
daunting task in itself. The keys,
said the laureates, are patience and integrity.
My experience at the meeting left me feeling like my field,
scientific computation, is wide open. In
such a field as chemistry, where computation has great promise, this topic
was hardly mentioned. I feel that
this is due to an inability of the computational community to educate
other fields. In this light,
I find it hard to believe we will run out of work any time soon.
Sir
Harold Kroto's lecture was perhaps the most thought provoking.
I appreciated the notion that this meeting was about more than just
science, which we can all study to our hearts content in the libraries
until the wee hours, but it was about the role we as scientists can play
in the world around us.
Our
group: hilarious, intelligent, polite and able to leap grosse
dunkelweissen (large dark beer) in a single bound.
I feel like I developed several life long friendships on this trip.
We are already talking about having a reunion next year...the world
seemed much smaller while in Lindau. During
our reception the first evening we talked with students from Israel, and
got a small sense of the tension they live with daily. We met students from the Czech Republic, Singapore, the U.K.,
Denmark, Sweden, and many from Germany, who were great hosts and
hostesses. And, I can not forget to
mention our favorite bartender, "Joe", who was from Italy.
We even met several other U.S. students that did not come with our
group. In this way I learned of the
opportunities for U.S. scientists to do post-doctoral fellowships in
Europe, which is something I would very much like to do.
We
kicked off the meeting with a bang as Germany played Brazil in the World
Cup final. Most of the American
group ended up at
Ice-cream!
Dinner
with Dr. Jerome Karle...for a young scientist, how can it get any better?
One on one interaction with this genius who is telling stories of
growing up on Long Island in public schools.
You know, you actually start to think you are also capable of doing
great science!
This
trip is something I will remember for the rest of my life. Meeting the l
eaders
of the scientific community and students from around the world made this
trip absolutely fantastic. Speaking with them gave me new insights on
science and other issues in the world today.
I
attended all of the lectures. The
lecture I found the most valuable was that of Prof. Ahmed Zewail.
His description of dynamics being as important as structure was
very enlightening.
I
attended many of the discussions. The
one which stands out the most was Sir Harold Kroto.
He spoke about politics and other things as well as chemistry.
I thought his discussion about the discovery of bucky balls was
very interesting.
I
enjoyed meeting all the other American students and learning about the
different research they are involved in. I
made many new friends, both American and from other countries.
The international travel experience will be of great use in my
future, since my career may take me to other countries in the future.
I
thought the orientation session was worthwhile simply to understand who
are the gov
ernment
organizations that are funding our trip, what kind of research they fund,
and how I fit in. The orientation
was a good use of my time. It was
also nice to be able to meet the group in Washington and fly together to
Europe just to have a chance to meet everyone, start to get to know
people, and spend some time together, before we had to adjust to life in a
foreign country.
My
experience with the Nobel Laureates has reawakened in me broader interests
in science, instead of just the narrow focus of my PhD research.
I attended all of the lectures. I
most appreciated Prof. Huber's lecture on "Molecular Machines for
Protein Degradation", simply because the nature of the work presented
was really quite fascinating and awe-inspiring.
I
attended the informal discussions on all three days, and I spent time with
most of the Laureates. Unfortunately,
many of them spoke very softly and were difficult to hear in the crowded
conference hall. The discussion
with Prof. Boyer was the most valuable to me, because (a) I could hear
him, (b) he answered questions in a direct way, and (c) he answered
equally well questions of science following from his lecture, and
questions of general interest.
Personally,
I found it refreshing to return to Europe, and in particular to spend time
in Germany, just to see a different culture.
I also very much enjoyed the opportunity to watch the World Cup
soccer final in the company of lots of enthusiastic German soccer fans.
It was definitely interesting to meet the American and
international students. I don't
anticipate any collaborations coming out of this experience for me,
although I did get a couple of ideas for my own research based on
discussions with some of the other students.
The lunches and dinners that were organized by the DOE were all excellent, particularly dinner at the Goldenes Lamm.
Overall
this experience gave me a broader perspective on the world of chemistry,
particularly its international scope. Meeting
the Laureates, and seeing their strengths as well as some weaknesses, made
me realize that they are basically ordinary people who just happen to have
done some extraordinary research, and so there is hope for me as well.
Questions and comments on this site? Send an e-mail
Copyright 2001, Oak Ridge Associated Universities
08/13/2002