2000 Nobel Chemistry Prize Missed Earlier Work, Says Doctor Peter H. Proctor.

Business Editors

HOUSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 13, 2001

Peter H. Proctor, PhD, MD, of Houston claims that the 2000 Nobel Prize in Chemistry missed earlier, more advanced, research done at The University of Texas MD Anderson Hospital and Tumor Institute in the early 1970's.

While studying melanoma, Dr. Proctor and fellow researchers John McGinness and Peter Corry discovered that the skin pigment melanin, a "polyacetylene", becomes highly electrically-conductive in an electric field. The Anderson researchers reported this discovery in the journal Science in March of 1974. At the time, melanin was unique -- most organic polymers don't conduct electricity at all.

(This paper is posted online at http://www.general.info/nobel/polymer.htm .)

Three years later, chemists Alan J. Heeger, Alan G. MacDiarmid, and Hideki Shirakawa made another polyacetylene highly electrically-conductive, but by chemical means. The Nobel Chemistry committee awarded the 2000 Prize for chemistry to Dr. Heeger and his fellow researchers for this discovery. Apparently, they mistakenly believed that these were the first to discover a high-conductivity organic polymer or "organic metal".

"Fundamental discoveries in physics usually don't come from a cancer hospital, but MD Anderson is a special place." Dr Proctor says, "I was astounded by the Nobel Committee's discussion of this award. Clearly, they did not know of our prior discovery at all, if only to dismiss it. In fact, we had reported a similar thing with the same class of compound. The difference was that we did it three years before the eventual winners and in a much more advanced way."

"For example, we reversibly changed melanin's electrical conductivity with an electric field. This made a transistor-like gadget called a bistable switch. A computer is just a bunch of bistable switches. The next such device using an organic polymer was nearly a decade away. We also made a battery," says Dr. Proctor.

Ironically, the Nobel committee used the promise of such electrical devices as the primary justification for the 2000 award. Dr. Proctor says, "Potentially, organic polymer switches, transistors and the like are as important as those made from inorganic semiconductors like silicon. We not only discovered the material, we also clearly made the first such devices."

"At the time, our discovery was appreciated for what it is. E.g., a contemporary news article in the journal Nature describes our work in roughly the same terms as the 2000 Nobel Chemistry Prize. Unfortunately, we went uncited by later authors. So the Nobel committee likely did not know of our earlier work."

(An excerpt from the Nature article is posted online at http://www.general.info/nobel/naturea.htm )

"We have repeatedly asked the Nobel Foundation to merely acknowledge our previous discovery. This way, at least it doesn't get lost again. We have not asked them to admit a mistake, much less change the Prize. As usual, they have stonewalled. This is like inventing the transistor and not getting credit for it. Otherwise, we would not make such a fuss about a decades-old scientific paper."

Dr. Proctor continues, "The Nobel prize is an important part of the reward system of science. But its very prestige causes problems. This year, the Nobel Foundation celebrates its 100th anniversary. By a century-old charter, the foundation awards the Prizes in secret and never comments on disputed awards. This means 'The Prize' may potentially do actual harm, by distorting the history of discovery."

http://www.general.info/nobel for more information