Karlsruhe and at the beginning in Zu ¨rich. Nevertheless, it was in these days that
Hermann Staudinger started to complain that “Kautschuk” from BASF, as well as
his own “polyisoprene”, were not identical with natural rubber.
In Zu ¨rich, Staudinger taught analytical chemistry and compound characterization
as intensively as organic chemistry. As a consequence of this, he published in 1923
the first edition of his long-lasting series of books Anleitung zur organischen
qualitativen Analyse [16]. The book was translated into Japanese, French, English
and Italian. Hermann Staudinger had really “cultivated” the scientific necessity to
talk about well-defined compounds only. And where could he “find” badly characterized synthetic compounds? There was nothing less analyzed and less understood
than these already technological important polymeric and/or micellar materials.
Sure, he certainly did not just look around to find “Schmieren-compounds”. But
due to his technologically important isoprene synthesis, he was pulled into this game
– and could not escape anymore!
Staudinger “described this” in his autobiography From organic chemistry to
macromolecules [2, p. 98]. He cites one of his talks (1950) where he tried to convince
his audience that the unity of “believe and proof” is most important in science:
In 1950, when I gave a lecture to cellulose chemists, many participants who had published
works on the micellar structure of cellulose before assured me that they now believed my
theory. I said that it was not a matter of belief and asked them what arguments had
convinced them. The answers were often unsatisfactory. Because of this, I started my
lecture in the following way:
If a student is asked about the formula of indigo during an examination and replies that
he believes that A. von Baeyer’s formula is the right one, this would not be enough to pass
the examination. He surely would be asked how the formula was proved. Similarly, it is
necessary to know exactly the proofs for the macromolecular structure of cellulose and
many other natural products, as well as those of synthetic products, if one intends to work
with them on the basis of this macromolecular concept.
Even during the visit of Hermann and Magda Staudinger to Japan in April 1957 the
characterization and analytical proof of macromolecules played a role when His
Majesty the Emperor of Japan asked: “Professor Staudinger, are macromolecules
merely ideas to help explain many phenomena, or is there strict evidence for their
existence, and if so, by which methods?” The question and Staudinger’s answer are
cited in his Arbeitserinnerungen [2, p. 104]: “It is just this experimental demonstration
of the existence of macromolecules which forms the essential part of my work in the
field of macromolecular science”.
3.4 The Nobel Prize Ceremony in 1953: A Historical Moment
for Science
When at the beginning of the 1930s Staudinger’s political problems in Germany
started, Hans Krebs was one of his colleagues in the Faculty of Medicine. In those
days, he was already internationally accepted in an area that later become known as
biochemistry (urea cycle, protein–enzyme interaction). The lives and research paths
of the biologically interested polymer scientist Hermann Staudinger and the
12
H. Ringsdorf
Hermann Staudinger started to complain that “Kautschuk” from BASF, as well as
his own “polyisoprene”, were not identical with natural rubber.
In Zu ¨rich, Staudinger taught analytical chemistry and compound characterization
as intensively as organic chemistry. As a consequence of this, he published in 1923
the first edition of his long-lasting series of books Anleitung zur organischen
qualitativen Analyse [16]. The book was translated into Japanese, French, English
and Italian. Hermann Staudinger had really “cultivated” the scientific necessity to
talk about well-defined compounds only. And where could he “find” badly characterized synthetic compounds? There was nothing less analyzed and less understood
than these already technological important polymeric and/or micellar materials.
Sure, he certainly did not just look around to find “Schmieren-compounds”. But
due to his technologically important isoprene synthesis, he was pulled into this game
– and could not escape anymore!
Staudinger “described this” in his autobiography From organic chemistry to
macromolecules [2, p. 98]. He cites one of his talks (1950) where he tried to convince
his audience that the unity of “believe and proof” is most important in science:
In 1950, when I gave a lecture to cellulose chemists, many participants who had published
works on the micellar structure of cellulose before assured me that they now believed my
theory. I said that it was not a matter of belief and asked them what arguments had
convinced them. The answers were often unsatisfactory. Because of this, I started my
lecture in the following way:
If a student is asked about the formula of indigo during an examination and replies that
he believes that A. von Baeyer’s formula is the right one, this would not be enough to pass
the examination. He surely would be asked how the formula was proved. Similarly, it is
necessary to know exactly the proofs for the macromolecular structure of cellulose and
many other natural products, as well as those of synthetic products, if one intends to work
with them on the basis of this macromolecular concept.
Even during the visit of Hermann and Magda Staudinger to Japan in April 1957 the
characterization and analytical proof of macromolecules played a role when His
Majesty the Emperor of Japan asked: “Professor Staudinger, are macromolecules
merely ideas to help explain many phenomena, or is there strict evidence for their
existence, and if so, by which methods?” The question and Staudinger’s answer are
cited in his Arbeitserinnerungen [2, p. 104]: “It is just this experimental demonstration
of the existence of macromolecules which forms the essential part of my work in the
field of macromolecular science”.
3.4 The Nobel Prize Ceremony in 1953: A Historical Moment
for Science
When at the beginning of the 1930s Staudinger’s political problems in Germany
started, Hans Krebs was one of his colleagues in the Faculty of Medicine. In those
days, he was already internationally accepted in an area that later become known as
biochemistry (urea cycle, protein–enzyme interaction). The lives and research paths
of the biologically interested polymer scientist Hermann Staudinger and the
12
H. Ringsdorf