Tough question. I’ve always admired Linus Pauling, who was a biochemist in America starting in the 1920s. He was very politically active, and won a Nobel Peace prize in addition to the Nobel he won for Chemistry. He was a pioneer in the study of molecules, especially proteins, in medical research, and was among the first to understand the way that proteins “fold” into their final structures. He won his Peace prize for anti-nuclear weapon advocacy, which made him avery controversial figure and got him in trouble with his university, but he always stuck to his beliefs and stood by his evidence. He was also wrong sometimes – he thought that DNA molecules formed a triple helix, but we know now that it is a double helix – but that’s science, coming up with theories and having them challenged. He died when I was at university, and my Biochemistry class had a moment’s silence for him, which I have never forgotten.
I would say Galileo. Despite risking persecution and dis-communication from the Catholic Church, he perceived and sought to discover the mysteries of the Universe.
There are so many famous scientists to choose from but I would say Leonardo da Vinci. He has deep insights into how things work and documented them in great detail. He is known for his sketches/drawings and I find myself drawing things to explain concepts to people but my drawings are more scrawl than anything.
Closely following Leonardo da Vinci would be George Washington Carver as he developed so many products from the same source (peanuts, soy and sweet potatoes). He really understood those plants to know, for example, how to convert peanuts into soap/shampoo, plastic and shoe polish.
I’m going with someone more current. I am a big fan of Mina Bissell. She is a scientist at Berkeley Labs in California. I admire her for a few reasons–first, her science is really interesting (she studies breast cancer in a model that’s very similar to what happens in humans); second, she is an excellent presenter–she manages to hold everyone’s attention for a long time and is great and cracking jokes and keeping a sense of humour and third, it’s always aspiring to see female scientists succeed, especially those from countries where science isn’t the strongest and women aren’t given equal chances.
Marie Skłodowska-Curie better know as Madam Curie because she did great research and was first at so many things. She was the first female professor at the University of Paris, the first women to win a Nobel Prize and the only women to win in two fields.
She isolated radioactive isotopes which I use to date fossils. She also pioneered the use of radio isotopes to treat cancers
Most of all I liked the fact that she started doing pure research. She didn’t know what she’d find and her research ended up having many practical applications. I think today we concentrate to much on applied research and forget that many answers and applications can come from pure research as well
Tough question. I’ve always admired Linus Pauling, who was a biochemist in America starting in the 1920s. He was very politically active, and won a Nobel Peace prize in addition to the Nobel he won for Chemistry. He was a pioneer in the study of molecules, especially proteins, in medical research, and was among the first to understand the way that proteins “fold” into their final structures. He won his Peace prize for anti-nuclear weapon advocacy, which made him avery controversial figure and got him in trouble with his university, but he always stuck to his beliefs and stood by his evidence. He was also wrong sometimes – he thought that DNA molecules formed a triple helix, but we know now that it is a double helix – but that’s science, coming up with theories and having them challenged. He died when I was at university, and my Biochemistry class had a moment’s silence for him, which I have never forgotten.
0
I would say Galileo. Despite risking persecution and dis-communication from the Catholic Church, he perceived and sought to discover the mysteries of the Universe.
0
There are so many famous scientists to choose from but I would say Leonardo da Vinci. He has deep insights into how things work and documented them in great detail. He is known for his sketches/drawings and I find myself drawing things to explain concepts to people but my drawings are more scrawl than anything.
Closely following Leonardo da Vinci would be George Washington Carver as he developed so many products from the same source (peanuts, soy and sweet potatoes). He really understood those plants to know, for example, how to convert peanuts into soap/shampoo, plastic and shoe polish.
0
I’m going with someone more current. I am a big fan of Mina Bissell. She is a scientist at Berkeley Labs in California. I admire her for a few reasons–first, her science is really interesting (she studies breast cancer in a model that’s very similar to what happens in humans); second, she is an excellent presenter–she manages to hold everyone’s attention for a long time and is great and cracking jokes and keeping a sense of humour and third, it’s always aspiring to see female scientists succeed, especially those from countries where science isn’t the strongest and women aren’t given equal chances.
0
Marie Skłodowska-Curie better know as Madam Curie because she did great research and was first at so many things. She was the first female professor at the University of Paris, the first women to win a Nobel Prize and the only women to win in two fields.
She isolated radioactive isotopes which I use to date fossils. She also pioneered the use of radio isotopes to treat cancers
Most of all I liked the fact that she started doing pure research. She didn’t know what she’d find and her research ended up having many practical applications. I think today we concentrate to much on applied research and forget that many answers and applications can come from pure research as well
0