Comments from participants...

Home     Back

I attended every lecture. The best one was the last one, by the guy who talked about proteomics and its pitfalls. It was a worthwhile, relevant, and very current topic.

I tended to move around from discussion to discussion about every half hour. I wanted to get a flavor of the personalities of each of the laureates and the kind of person that does ground-breaking research, rather than ask them specific technical questions.

I was especially glad to be able to talk with other students from so many different backgrounds. I talked a lot to people about the techniques they use, and I talked in particular with some people about proteomics. I have a more positive attitude about it now.

back to list

This event was a life-changing experience for me! For the first time in my life, I was thinking on a global scale and considering the possibilities of working on projects with a vast reach (not just U.S.A. Research vs. Teaching, as was my previous thought process). I was inspired by the Laureates, topics discussed, and all students to consider how I as a scientist might affect society as a whole. I can't wait to see how my career (and others') progress and will enjoy moving forward and dreaming big with new international and U.S. peers!

My own personal and professional experience took a quantum leap during this trip. I established a group of friends (mainly other U.S. students but including several international students) with whom I truly enjoyed myself. Clearly these are people I will walk along career and life paths with, hopefully establishing collaborations and continuing the strong relationship we began in Lindau. These are all 1st class students with widely varying scientific specialties, allowing us all to benefit from one another's knowledge, especially beyond our own separate university research circles. Obviously, international travel experience this young gives me a better perspective on other international colleagues and makes me an overall more well-rounded, global person.  

Prior to this trip, Laureates seemed larger than life to me and far ahead of my highest career aspirations. With this experience, I found Laureates to be regular people who work hard and have a passion for their work, not that far separated from what I do! I find myself looking at my scientific career as one of unlimited scope-a vision I did not have before meeting the Laureates and one I now treasure. Additionally, I was impressed by their comments to doubt everything, think for myself, and challenge the status quo when necessary to create a new and better future. I feel they gave my career a shot in the arm to think big, tackle seemingly insurmountable problems and not ever limit my own possibilities! Big things can happen to passionate people!

My field of study (analytical chemistry) was not usually directly addressed, but touched upon in many lectures. All of them were mentally challenging, which I enjoyed, and I was caught up by Sir Kroto, Dr. Boyer, and Dr. Olah who were especially engaging speakers.

The round table discussions were for me, much more stimulating than the individual lectures. It was great to introduce our own questions and hear several Laureates debate, each with an excellent point of view to convey.  

For all discussions, it was interesting to discuss amongst students and Laureates, topics ranging from politics, issues in the Middle East, religion, science, and the role of science in society. I learned about many different subjects and points of view on a global level from international students, and heard experienced insight from the Laureate overseeing the group. That was the greatest insight I gained-to think of issues (regardless of topic) on an international/global level, think about it for myself and then decide where I fall on the thought spectrum.

Contact with members of the DOE/ORAU/ORISE, our own government representatives, Nobel committee members, C&E News Editor, etc. were all great additions to the experience. By far, the best aspect of this meeting is this personal and social contact with ALL people involved in a relaxed atmosphere provided for the open exchange of thoughts and ideas unlike anything I have ever experienced before. It felt like everyone was on equal footing-no one, including Laureates, was more intelligent than anyone else (just more experienced!) and it was easy to ask questions and express honest opinions and thoughts without fear. I gained confidence I didn't even realize was missing and felt like a peer to everyone I met-not a trivial thing to achieve. Lindau provides a setting for a very special meeting.

back to list

Meeting and talking with some of the top scientists in the world, I was able to learn a great deal of things that will have a significant impact on my career. Two things come immediately to mind:  

(1) The Laureates each have a diverse set of interests. Science in general has become more specialized as the enormous detail of each field is seen. However, it is still possible to maintain contact to the entire scientific community in a meaningful way even though the rigorous details of each field are impossible to learn for a single individual anymore. This is important and vital for me because I would like to see my work influence scientists outside just my niche field. They showed that this is still possible and frequently necessary. I'm not sure if that is stressed enough in modern education.

(2) It was also good for me to see that important contributions to science can still be made throughout one's entire life. Frequently it is commented that the most productive years of a scientist are very early in their career. From the lectures and discussions with the laureates it was obvious that important contributions to science are not limited to a small age range. From these two things and other experiences I can say that the most benefit I received from the Nobel Laureates was just to see and interact with examples of the top scientists of the century.

The lectures were all interesting and diverse. I attended all of the lectures offered by the laureates. It is hard to say that one specific lecture had the most value for me since they all contributed in roughly equivalent ways. If I had to choose I would say Prof. Olah's presentation was most useful. It was a good talk describing the way his research fit into a larger scheme of energy production and usage. I see this type of connection as being very important in research. It is not always possible to show an immediate benefit from basic research, but it is still important to look for connections to other basic research, more abstracted research and actual industrialized applications.

The informal discussions were interesting. I attended all the small group sessions each day although I only spent my time with a couple of the groups. The discussion which had the most value for me was the one with Prof. Jerome Karle. He described the work he did to be awarded the Nobel Prize, as well as other projects he was involved in that were the most personally rewarding. It was useful for me because I was able to get to know him better as a person and not just learn about the scientific work he did. 

Personally, I had a great experience on the trip. The members of the US delegation were all good people and rising scientists so it was a pleasure to have had the opportunity to get to know them. I made a number of new friends and hope that some of the contacts I've made will result in some scientific collaboration in the future. One of the most important things I gained from the students in the US delegation as well as the other international students was the chance to see what kind of problems and research other people are doing. This comes back to the part about how important it is to look for connections in one's work to other people's research. The aspect of international travel was important for me as well. I had never been outside of the U.S. in a meaningful way before so it was a great chance to see the lives and cultures of other people outside the U.S. That kind of experience gives a new look to one's own way of life.

The best experiences were definitely the DOE/ORAU sponsored lunches and dinners with the Laureates. It was in these settings that serious discussion and learning could take place. That kind of intimate arrangement lets you get to know the Laureates much better and really understand them and their work much better than the informal discussions and lectures would allow. I would highly recommend continuing and extending those types of contacts. They were very good.

The time I spent with the Laureates was really worthwhile. They provide interesting discussion about much more than just their main topic of research. It was a great opportunity to see and talk with people that really push science as far as they can. I think that this will have a lasting effect on all the participants, Laureates included.

The international students that I had the opportunity to talk with were also very interesting. I had a lot of fun talking about the differences between US and other countries cultures and interests. I learned some things also about other countries educational systems and research efforts. These may be of interest later in my career for international collaboration.

back to list

The nice thing about the Nobel Laureates is they tended to know about issues and topics that will be of importance to my career. Through meeting and interacting with the laureates, I gained new perspective on issues I had only thought about briefly before. One example I can easily give is the discussion session with Dr. Olah. Dr. Olah gave a very contrary opinion on the world's future energy needs. Many people disagreed with his opinion, but in listening to him I found some truth in what he was saying. His point was not nuclear fission is the future, but rather right now we have no other option. I began to see the research opportunities and problems in a new light. I think that in hearing and listening to the laureates’ views, it has helped me formulate my own view and form ideas for future research.

Of the discussion sessions, I remember a few more vividly than others. One was the first day by Dr. Lehn. While from a different direction from me, he works in the field of supramolecular assembly. It was a science talk, which was lacking at many of the other discussion groups. That day, many of the laureates were talking politics instead. While I meandered back and forth between talks, I kept finding myself back at Dr. Lehn's enjoying the scientific discussion. I spent another session listening completely to Dr. Olah. It was a lively session where people were attacking his views and he was defending well. What I gained most from this session was a sense of the international view on energy resources. It was a great discussion. The last discussion session I spent most of my time arguing the genetic engineering of food with Dr. Boyer. He is a phenomenal speaker. I only hope I am as sharp as him when I am his age. He also had a good point about examining the product and not criticizing the methods. 

The meeting was a great experience. Hearing ideas from leaders in the field as well as international perspectives on problems was invaluable. Research collaborations are tough to plan as a graduate student, but making international contacts can only help as I proceed in my field. I thoroughly enjoyed meeting and socializing with the international community. Beyond science, I gained a new perspective on many political issues affecting the world. I think that may be one of the strongest merits of a conference like this. One gets to meet and interact with people with very different backgrounds, and if one is open to it cannot help but come away with a new view of the world. One other nice thing about the DOE's travel arrangements was that after the conference I was able to travel and visit the laboratory of a collaborator in Belgium before returning to the U.S. That was a nice bonus to the conference.

Dinner on July 4 (last night in Lindau) with ~45 total attendees from around the world was great. At my table there were people from Sweden, Israel, Germany, and the US. That was an event and a great way to end a great conference. The best part of it was the students organized it on their own. It really showed how much mixing was occurring among nations on a social level.

It was a great experience that I hope continues to be funded. I gained many new insights and made many new friends. I would push anyone I know who is eligible to apply in the future. I would also push other funding agencies to support students to widen the opportunities for American students to attend this conference.

back to list

I attended all lectures and enjoyed George Olah the most. I felt he listened to the students and provided thoughtful answers. I enjoyed the practical relevance of his work.

I met many great people - American as well as international. Hopefully these meetings will provide the opportunity for scientific dialogue in the future.

back to list

The meeting was an amazing opportunity to interact with students from all over the world that one normally does not have an opportunity to interact with. In addition, I was able to talk to people in different fields.

Meeting the Nobel Laureates was an amazing experience, especially the advice that they gave regarding our own research. It was encouraging and really put my research in perspective.

I had a rather lengthy discussion at the opening dinner with Paul Boyer that was an extremely positive experience. We talked about my own research and he gave me feedback that was valuable.

I had a number of discussions with the Israeli students that were really wonderful. The opening mixer hosted by the U.S. where the other delegations were invited was really wonderful. I met a person in my field that put me in contact with someone with whom I am thinking of doing a post-doc.

back to list

The experience with the laureates was valuable, but more valuable was the interaction with other students (from all countries, not just the U.S.) and learning their history and cultures better through interaction. Learning the teaching philosophies of the other students (and to some degree, the laureates) was the most practical thing that I took away from the meeting for my future career in science and academia. Besides forging possible new collaborations, forging friendships within the scientific community which may not be realized for years will also prove to be quite beneficial.

Harry Kroto’s lecture was, first of all, a good presentation, but secondly, he was challenging us to think outside the box, and to ask the right questions (and know what to do when you get the answer)!

Mössbauer was the most interesting/valuable in the discussion sessions, because he did not dwell on highly technical questions, but instead tried to impart basic scientific wisdom upon us, rather than impress us with his knowledge or his stories (or his politics, blah!).

Dinner at the Goldenes Lamm was the highlight of the week as far as social interaction goes!

I am quite privileged to have attended this trip, and I hope that the experiences I have can be passed on to others with whom I will interact in the future. It will be an excellent activity for me to describe to future employers and has provided me with many wonderful stories to pass along to interested parties.

back to list

It was nice to see that the Nobel Laureates are people. Everyday in the hallway outside my lab I see pictures of the Nobel prize winners, but meeting them added a human aspect to those pictures. I think that the main thing I took away from meeting the Laureates was that no matter what prize some one may have won, we are all scientists and we are all people working towards similar goals...the betterment of humankind.

Meeting my peers and colleagues from around the world and especially from the U.S. was wonderful. I made friendships that will last for a lifetime, friendships that will very easily, I believe, turn into very productive collaborations. It was hard to leave my new friends behind. Even though we had only known each other for a week, it felt as if we had been friends forever, all due to the fact that we shared such a wonderful experience together. 

The international travel was also so amazing and wonderful. Coming from a family that does not have very much money, I have never been out of the U.S. So for my first experience abroad to have happened at such an amazing professional career experience made it all the more incredible.

Celebrating the 4th of July with the British delegation was one of the many once-in-a-lifetime experiences in Lindau that I will never forget. It is something that I will tell my grandchildren. 

Meeting the Laureates was a wonderful experience but I most value meeting my colleagues and peers from around the world, for these are the people that I will be working with for the rest of my life. And, most likely, some of the students that were attending this meeting will one day be returning to the Lindau meeting as Laureates themselves, and they will be able to tell the students that way back in 2002 they themselves were sitting in the same seats meeting the Nobel Laureates of their day. That is amazing.

back to list

I think that this conference impacted me in two major ways. First, I was quite impressed with the range of lecturing techniques displayed by the laureates. While the actual science presented was not new to me, the lectures ranged from disorganized to brilliant (though most lectures were very good). I learned a lot about different techniques for making presentations interesting to a diverse audience. Sir Harry Kroto in particular gave outstanding lectures.

Second, I found the conference to be an excellent synthesis of diverse areas of chemistry, science in general, and politics. By getting together such a variety of chemists from diverse personal backgrounds and scientific disciplines, I was able to stand back and look at the "big picture" of science and chemistry, to see where science is headed, and to come up with new ideas for new avenues of research that I would like to pursue.

It is difficult to convey much chemistry during a 30-minute lecture; therefore, the content of all the lectures was necessarily light. However, Sir Kroto in particular had a very dynamic lecture style. In fact, I think that he is probably the best lecturer I have ever seen. By incorporating history, humor, and current events into his lecture he was able to draw the audience to him. Because I am interested in a career as a professor at a research university, I am interested in teaching techniques, and Sir Kroto gave me numerous ideas for how to make science more interesting for my (future) students.

The round table discussions were also to me a very valuable part of the conference. By getting a panel of laureates to discuss current issues, we were able to hear a rapid discussion of opinions, with new ideas formed and passed about, as opposed to the one person/one idea format of the formal lectures. I particularly enjoyed the last discussion, "What comes next after sequencing the human and 2000 other genomes? The role of chemistry and biochemistry in the postgenomic scientific world." This discussion gave me new insights into the possibilities evident even now, as well as new ideas for possible areas of research.

Without a doubt, Prof. Lamb's informal discussion was my favorite. Prof. Lamb is a physicist and had not lectured, so not many people were interested in attending his small group session. He also spoke so quietly that only the first two rows of students could hear, and tended to wander a bit mentally (he is 89). His wife sat with him to help him remember and to help him understand what the students were asking (he is also largely deaf). As a result, the atmosphere at his session was quite different from the other two sessions that I attended. The few students (~20) were clustered together and were absolutely silent so that everyone might hear Prof. Lamb. Everyone was polite; there was no attacking Prof. Lamb's ideas. Politics were never discussed. The entire discussion was about his and his wife's experiences over the last 70 years as scientists. And it was fascinating. Between the two of them they have met most of the greats: Born, Oppenheimer, Milliken, Onsager, Bloch, Einstein, Heisenberg, Pauling, etc. Prof. Lamb also spoke of WWII, the Manhattan Project, and other events, as well as his own research. This session alone was worth the entire trip.

There were two important things that I took away from this session. First, I got a fascinating look at an entire career in science (two in fact, since he and his wife also spoke some of her career), including scientific politics, serendipity, discovery, decisions, and work. Second, since Prof. Lamb also spoke of the actual content of his work, he gave me a new perspective on quantum mechanics. He told us that quantum mechanics is essentially Newtonian mechanics with statistical modifications added to account for Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. As a physical chemist coming from an undergraduate mathematics background, this statement was of immense importance to me. If it is true, then quantum mechanics suddenly makes intrinsic sense to me; up to now I have seen that it works but have not been able to relate it to basic principles. He gave us a paper reference for this, and I still have to prove to myself that this statement is true, but it has already profoundly changed my view of quantum mechanics.

Aside from the lectures, I think that the biggest benefit I got from this meeting lay in talking with other students from our group and from around the world about their experiences in grad school and in life. For example, during the get-together with international students that we hosted, I had a fascinating discussion with some Israeli students on the current Israeli/Palestinian conflicts.

One unanticipated benefit was that upon coming back to the United States I was able to approach my own research from a new perspective. Both because of the break from daily research and because of what I learned at the conference, I have come back with new ideas and feel that I am able to more clearly analyze my data and plan future research.

back to list

I enjoyed comments from many of the Laureates concerning doing research for the sake of research and not for recognition from outside sources. Many of them are well rounded and have balanced ideas concerning science, religion and politics. I really gained from those views and it inspired a desire to learn more about world politics, and other broad topics that I'd previously neglected.

I enjoyed hearing Lehn, Zewail, Boyer and Olah for the following reasons ...

Lehn - strictly technical content.  "If you get what you expected, you've made a measurement.  If you get something else, you've made a discovery."

Zewail - "Don't take yourself too seriously."  "Remember the thrill of discovery."  good technical content.

Boyer - still thrilled by discovery (ATP structure and function), well balanced ideas concerning main topics (hydrocarbon chemistry, environmental regulation, etc.), very practical. "Get into science for the science.  You'll get more returns from that than waiting for a Nobel prize."

Olah - "Scientists should find solutions, not point fingers at politicians."

I gained the most value from discussions that emphasized science and the reasons to do it. Those sessions redirected my focus to science, which is not only what I'm trained and educated to do and but what I enjoy.

The aspect that balanced the technical content was hearing about the life experiences of the Laureates and the humility that some of them displayed. I also enjoyed hearing the reasons they enjoyed doing research. The things that gave them thrills were interesting and also gave me opportunity to reconsider and renew my scientific interests and goals.

The Lindau Nobel Laureates meeting was a unique opportunity to meet both international students and Nobel Laureates with an enthusiasm for chemistry and science in general. The experience provided exposure to other cultures and perspectives and inspired a humanistic approach to issues in science that have global implications. The technical discussions renewed my particular research interests while the one-on-one interaction with international counterparts personalized the overall experience.

back to list

I found the experience in Lindau and the experience with the Nobel Laureates to be very rewarding and enjoyable. I believe the overall experience with be very beneficial for my future career in science in that it illustrated to me the need for scientists in today’s world to be involved in more than just laboratory work. The Nobel Laureates discussed in great detail the need for scientists to become more involved in political life and in society as a whole. If we can’t bring our understanding of nature to the populace as a whole, then we really aren’t accomplishing anything at all. I believe that learning this concept was probably the most beneficial experience I took with me. 

I found Dr. Richard Ernst’s presentation, "Fourier Transform Methods in Spectroscopy, A Key Towards Insight and Comprehension," to be very interesting and exciting. He gave a great history of Fourier Transform methods in the chemical and biological sciences. I have great interest in this subject since I am just beginning to learn Fourier Transform Ion-Cyclotron Resonance Mass Spectrometry, a fairly new type of MS technique that shows great promise in many MS fields but especially our attempts to analyze the complexities of proteomes.

Dr. Johann Deisenhofer’s presentation, "Back to Proteins" was a very good talk on the new age of biology, specifically structural genomics and factory scale biology. The field of biology is rapidly changing in many ways to resemble the field of high-energy physics. While the old school of biology used to be single labs working on a given enzyme or a given pathway, this is now changing to global analysis of biological systems or the so-called systems biology approach. This talk highlighted some of the concepts of systems biology and the need for massive endeavors of biologists working in tandem to analyze a system with many different experimental approaches, and then the use of supercomputers and high-level mathematics to integrate the information into a cohesive theory. 

I found the final roundtable discussion to be the most useful - “What Comes Next after Sequencing the Human and 2000 Other Genomes? The Role of Chemistry and Biochemistry in the Postgenomic Scientific World.” The reason why I found this the most useful is that this is the question that I work on in my graduate work. I am currently working on the interface of biology and chemistry in an interdisciplinary systems biology graduate program. And with the recent funding to Oak Ridge National Laboratory and other national labs and universities for the Genomes to Life project, this will be the core question a large number of us will be working on. How do we take the sequenced genomes of microbes and man and use this to build, through large-scale biology experiments, an integrated systems biology understanding of life. The age old question of how life really works can now start to be answered by real experiments and real holistic theories that not only explain how a given enzyme or pathway works but how these pathways and molecular machines all work together in a cell and how communities of cells or communities of organisms function at chemical level. This roundtable discussion brought up many of the difficulties and challenges in this landscape of biology and chemistry as we enter the new age of science in this exciting field.

I found that the most useful experience was meeting all the students involved in research so different than mine. While I work in a national lab I spend all my time interacting with chemists that work on biology or biologists. So it was very nice to meet chemists that work in pure chemistry and physicists that work in chemistry and physics. It is always refreshing to spend time with scientists that work on things completely different that what you do. From the whole meeting I only ran in to one person that works on somewhat the same thing I work on and he was from Denmark. So to meet such a diversity of students was a real great experience.

back to list

This experience was invaluable to me in many respects. I think it is quite important for scientists to get together and discuss their role in society, and the impacts of science on society and the planet. Our role extends beyond the lab, and I think we must keep that fact in the forefront of our work and our thoughts. 

All the laureates had hobbies and interests outside of their fields. Most of them stressed the importance of relaxing and taking time away from their work to decompress and enjoy life. I think having some time away from work to let one's brain mull things over at a leisurely pace will do wonders to one's productivity, understanding, and creativity. Also, they stressed the fact that scientists have a role in society and government, too. We have the critical thinking skills to really help out our fellow humans, and we should not squander the opportunity to make the world a better place.

Kroto said some very pertinent things every time he opened his mouth (which was a good bit). His mantra is all about doubt and seeking out the facts, and I could not agree more with that. When I am an old scientist, I want to be like Kroto. I will say exactly what I think, and let folks decide for themselves whether or not I speak the truth. 

I really enjoyed the other American folks. We had a lot of different people in our group. Also, I really enjoyed talking with the Israelis, the Germans, and the Swedes. The list of countries I want to visit has grown a lot due to this trip.

back to list

I enjoyed the orientation presentation by the Director of the Office of Science (Ray Orbach). Seeing the scope and future of science in that setting was very useful, and it set the tone for the meeting.

As the experience was quite mind-opening, there are numerous ways in which my career will benefit. With respect to political issues, I see more clearly that scientists need to be socially aware and use their "fame" to advance issues that may affect popular thought (as long as it is a field in which they have some expertise!).

I attended all the lectures and panel discussions, and found that there was definitely a range of types of lectures. The one that had the most value for me was Jerome Karle's lecture. He simply explained how in the world the early electron diffractometrists decided to interpret their raw data. I haven't worked in this field previously, but as a result of this meeting I have a growing interest...

I attended all three afternoons, and listened to Harry Kroto, George Olah, Paul Crutzen, and Willis Lamb. While Kroto's discussion was definitely the most lively, the discussion with Lamb was the most valuable. It was amazing to see how all the students at his discussion were holding onto every word that he said. We held our breaths just to absorb as much of him as possible. We were truly listening to a legend.

The bonds made with the American group were great personally, but also, in a few cases very important professional ties have been made. While I didn't meet any international students with whom I may collaborate, it was still very valuable to have the opportunity to meet people from other cultures. This was my first time traveling internationally for science and so in contrast to all that I had expected: the look of the meeting hall, professionalism of the staff, etc. I was shocked to see the US put on the spot by a number of people who don't appreciate our policies. I really appreciate that opportunity to be out of my "bubble" for a while!

This very exciting opportunity has now become a set of fulfilling memories. As I look back on the experience I feel increasingly privileged, but at the same time, responsible. I now intimately know my peers and together we have the future on our shoulders.

 back to list

 Home     Back

Questions and comments on this site? Send an e-mail

Copyright 2001, Oak Ridge Associated Universities

08/08/2002