Over at the Curious Wavefunction, a recent post touched upon the idea of "pure" chemistry not being well-recognized as of late by the Nobel Committee. I of course find the entire notion to be rather silly - if one can't see the chemistry in those Prizes, then you have my condolences - but I thought it would be interesting to do the following exercise.
The American Chemical Society has a yearly "Award in Pure Chemistry" that is intended to recognize fundamental research in chemistry by a young researcher. Just to see what the ACS has considered "pure chemistry" since the 1990s, shall we?
Hmmm. This is a bit unusual. It seems that amongst the fairly obvious "traditional" chemistry researchers that are being recognized, there are a bunch of interdisciplinary scientists who are undermining the sanctity of chemistry! And some of them - dear Odin! - even have biological interests. Even if you go further back, I recognize a number of names who have become rather renowned for their interdisciplinary research.
Clearly, there is a mismatch between what the chemical community officially considers "pure" chemistry versus what the unofficial position tends to be, if one considers the chemical blogosphere to be representative. Hmmmm.
1 day ago