Jean Pierre Sauvage is in Stockholm for Nobel Week, where he interacts in an insightful conversation about his scientific journey and achievements. He shares the story behind donating documents to the Nobel Museum, highlighting the evolution of his research projects over the years, particularly his pioneering work with catenanes. He reflects on the pivotal moments that led to the breakthrough of interlocking molecules and their subsequent academic recognition.

Sauvage opens up about his motivations and the path that guided him into the world of science, being particularly drawn to mathematics, chemistry, and later on, photochemistry. He recalls key experiences from his early days as a PhD student in the turbulent 1960s, up to his later professional developments. The conversation touches upon teamwork, the significance of diverse scientific and cultural backgrounds, and the collaborative efforts that drive scientific discovery.

Main takeaways from the video:

Please remember to turn on the CC button to view the subtitles.

Key Vocabularies and Common Phrases:

1. artifact [ˈɑːrtɪˌfækt] - (noun) - An object made by a human being, typically an item of cultural or historical interest. - Synonyms: (relic, antique, heirloom)

All Nobel laureates are asked to bring an artifact to donate to the Nobel Museum here in Stockholm.

2. seminar [ˈsemɪˌnɑːr] - (noun) - A meeting for discussing a particular topic, often in an academic or professional setting. - Synonyms: (conference, workshop, session)

And I was in charge of this type of seminar.

3. publication [ˌpʌblɪˈkeɪʃən] - (noun) - The act of making something publicly known, especially through print media. - Synonyms: (release, publishing, issuance)

It's a publication which appeared in 1983 in Tetrahedron Letters.

4. provoke [prəˈvoʊk] - (verb) - To stimulate a response or reaction, often intentionally. - Synonyms: (incite, arouse, trigger)

And it's kind of a message that you can also consider that there are other languages than English. So it was kind of a statement, yeah, kind of a statement. I mean, it was a bit provocative also.

5. topology [təˈpɒlədʒi] - (noun) - A branch of mathematics concerning the properties preserved through deformations, twistings, and stretchings of objects. - Synonyms: (spatial geometry, form study, shape analysis)

And we have been more, let's say, topology oriented.

6. electrochemical [ɪˌlektrə ˈkɛmɪkəl] - (adjective) - Relating to chemical changes produced by electricity or chemicals which produce electricity. - Synonyms: (ionic, galvanic, voltaic)

In our case, it is triggered by an electrochemical signal, not in this particular molecule, but in a molecule which is very similar.

7. synthetic [sɪnˈθɛtɪk] - (adjective) - Made by chemical processes; not of natural origin. - Synonyms: (artificial, man-made, fabricated)

The idea was good in a way, and the synthetic strategy was good also thanks to her.

8. homage [ˈhɒmɪdʒ] - (noun) - Special honor or respect shown publicly. - Synonyms: (tribute, accolade, respect)

So I would take this opportunity to thank her, to pay homage to her qualities.

9. catenane [ˈkætɪneɪn] - (noun) - A type of molecule where two or more rings or loops are mechanically interlocked. - Synonyms: (molecular ring, interlocked molecule, chemical structure)

This is the very first catenane we made, which is reported in this publication.

10. cryptand [ˈkrɪptænd] - (noun) - A synthetic molecule that can 'trap' metal ions, forming a stable complex. - Synonyms: (binding agent, chemical capture, molecular cage)

Together we made the first cage like molecules, cryptands, and that was published in 1969.

Jean-Pierre Sauvage, Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2016 - Official Interview

Jean Pierre Sauvage. Welcome to Nobel Week in Stockholm. Thank you. All Nobel laureates are asked to bring an artifact to donate to the Nobel Museum here in Stockholm. What did you bring? I brought some documents. Shall I show you the documents?

So there was a tradition in my group, which was at the beginning of the year, of the academic year in October, to have a long, long discussion about the research projects we were going to tackle in the coming year. And also about the research projects which were started before and continued to know how everything was working. I was in charge of this type of seminar. So it says here, research project. I mean, it's a document in French, presentation des fuger de Rochec, I'm pretty sure you can understand. And it was written on October 7, 1982.

And so this is the authentic document. I mean, even written on scratch paper, you see the back of the, of the sheets. So what's in it? What's the content of the document? The content is simply the various projects we were going to start at that time. And in 1982, interlocking molecules like that were basically unknown. And I think one of the main points is that so they appear in this document, you see here. And there is already a strategy for making them, a strategy for making even a slightly more complex catenane. So I believe this is my first written document on catenanes, October 1982.

So nothing was published till one year later. And this is the paper which kind of represents what happened between the project and what was achieved. It's a publication which appeared in 1983 in tetrahedron Letters.

If I may add just one thing, it has something very special. I have published hundreds and hundreds of papers, but there are very, very few papers published in French. Written in French. And this one is written in French. It says, if I translate a new family of molecules, metal containing catenanes, why is it written in French? It was written in French because we didn't know whether it would be exceedingly important. But we knew that the idea was novel.

The strategy was kind of revolutionary in a way. And we knew it was novel. And so we felt we do not take much risk if we write a paper in French. And the people interested in this type of molecule will have to read it anyway. And it's kind of a message that you can also consider that there are other languages than English. So it was kind of a statement. Yeah, kind of a statement. I mean, it was a bit provocative also.

But at that time, you know, I used not to be very serious, but do I understand right that it took only a year for you to actually succeed with your very much. Not for me, for the lady who was doing the work. Misses Dietrich Bischeker. Yeah, it's a german name because she was from Strasbourg and she was an incredibly skillful organic chemist. So she could materialize the project, convert it to a publication to some real results. So I would take this opportunity to thank her, to pay homage to her qualities.

So how long had you been into research in 1982? Well, I started my PhD thesis in 1968, a good year in France. It was the students revolution and I was among them. And in 68, although I think the surroundings were very special, I mean, there were lots of things happening. I was working pretty hard with another friend who was a PhD student with Lane, and together we made the first cage like molecules, cryptids, and that was published in 1969. It was my PhD to this work.

And Jean Marieline won the Nobel Prize in 1987 to a large extent, you know, in relation to this first piece of work. But of course, I mean, he expanded the field, you know, spectacularly. Yes, I understand. And then.

Yeah. What brought you to science in the first place? In the first place, when you are a kid, you try to do what you like. I was good in math. Mathematics was kind of my favorite topic and. Yeah, that was it. And then I was interested in physics and chemistry, but I preferred math. Okay, so it was a natural choice for you? It was kind of a natural choice, yes. And how come you started?

You got interested in just chemistry and maybe even photochemistry? Yeah, chemistry. I mean, I always preferred chemistry versus physics. Why? I don't know. I mean, I used to do experiments when I was 16 or 17 years old. Distillation, separating chlorophylls from plants, things like that. Was this in school? That was at home. That was at home. I liked that. It was not very serious, but I liked to do experiments and physics was okay, but it was not my favorite topic.

Do you remember the moment or the environment where you actually got the idea to lead to this discovery? Yeah, sure. Yeah. I think in some of the recommendations of the Nobel foundation, for the Nobel lecture, they suggest you to explain frankly, honestly, how you came up with the idea. And that's what I'll try to do. I remember very precisely it was coming from photochemistry. We were photochemists. That's chemistry that's triggered by light.

By light, exactly. Chemistry or electron transfer or very much related to photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is very important in nature, and I think the dream of many chemists is to do artificial photosynthesis to convert light energy to chemical energy. Was that your dream, too? That was my dream for many, many years. And, you know, doing that, I mean, we had an idea which was pretty simple, which was to use one of the molecules we were working on, you know, a photo active species, and to make a Catalan out of it.

And it seemed to be very, very easy. And the Catalane that you mentioned, you hold it like that. Sure. So this is the. Yes. What is this? It's moving. This is the very first Catalan we made, which is reported in this publication. The drawings are certainly very naive. You know, here they were handmade, and this is the first Catalan we made in 1983.

And it's a totally new type of chemical bond, if I understand it correctly, it's a new type of chemical bond. Fraser Stoddart calls it the mechanical bond. And we have been more, let's say, topology oriented. So we say that it's a topologically non trivial molecule or topologically non planar molecule. This is how topologists in mathematics would refer to this molecule, non planar.

Non planar, meaning that you cannot draw on a sheet of paper in a two dimensional space without crossings. You have to have crossings, and it's clear here you have two crossings. And how does this discovery take us to the chemical machines? Yeah, that's a very good point.

It's very close in a way, because if you have things like that, two interlocking rings, or a ring threaded by an axis, you can relatively easily figure out that a ring can glide rotate within the other ring, or the ring threaded by an axis can move along the axis on which it has been threaded from a position to another position. And this is the beginning of molecular machines. So the movement.

Yeah, the movement, the controlled movement. You have to be able to trigger the motion. And how is the motion triggered? In our case, it is triggered by an electrochemical signal, not in this particular molecule, but in a molecule which is very similar. And you can abstract an electron or re inject an electron in the molecule, and each time you do that, you set the molecule in motion. You trigger the motion.

Did you have any idea of what the molecule could be used for? Yeah, sure. I mean, we and others. I mean, again, Fraser Stoddard, Ben Ferenga, and nowadays, many other people. I think the work of Fraser Stoddart in particular, and his group is really spectacular, very much in relation to molecular computing, you know, storage of information, processing of information using molecules. And in what time span do you think we will have the molecular.

I mean, it's too risky, too risky to say. I'm not going to bet on that. How many failures were there before you got the right chemical reaction to achieve this? I mean, the first molecule was relatively easy to make. Again, thanks to Christian Dietrich Bouseke, she was a fantastic organic chemist. Yeah. Okay, so you yourself didn't fail a lot?

No, not at all. Has it been very hard work for you in the laboratory? Not at all. The idea was good in a way, and the synthetic strategy was good also thanks to her. I insist on that in chemistry, the work done by the people, it's a teamwork. Each time you have a team of people working together and everybody has a function as a contribution. And her contribution was very important.

So you were in the same team as her. What's important, what different kinds of persons do you need in a team in chemistry to make these big achievements? I think the first characteristic is to work with people you get along well with, preferably with friends. She was a very good friend of mine, and I think the same holds true for the students and the postdocs. You have to have very good relations. And the second point is to have people with various backgrounds also. I mean, if everybody has the same expertise in the same field, in a way, it's not going to be very rich in terms of discussions at group meetings, at coffee or whenever. But if the people have various backgrounds, I mean, it's very enriching.

Do you mean mostly scientific backgrounds, scientific backgrounds, and cultural too? Cultural too, of course, yeah. It adds to the quality of the communication. And how would you describe yourself, your type? Who are you in this team?

I think I may be easy to interact with person, and I like friendly relations. To me, it's absolutely essential. What is needed to get this far. I mean, to be rewarded the Nobel prize. I think you have to be motivated. The first thing is not to think of the Nobel Prize, not to think of any problem. Have you never done that during your years as a scientist? Some people told me, yeah, maybe you could be on a list or whatever. Each time I was just laughing and telling them, don't be silly.

What's needed more than not thinking of? I think you have to be motivated. There are several things. You have to love science. I mean, you have to love the idea of making discoveries. The second thing is you have to pay attention, to be very, very careful to potential research projects. You may think of every day, every hour, and you have to take any opportunity when you discuss with your group. When you start a new project, you may have another idea leading you to a different topic. You shouldn't be scared. I think you should jump and you shouldn't ask yourself the question, will I be able.

Will I be good enough to do that? You have to test yourself. You do it, it fails. It fails. But did you ever have hard times and thinking of just giving up and doing something else? Several times, yeah. What happened then when it was, I mean, several projects, you know, didn't lead to, you know, anything. But you never gave up? No. Well, I mean, some projects, I mean, we gave up, but, you know, if you have ten projects at the same time, then if one or two projects fail, it's not the end of the world.

But you never thought of leaving science? No, never. This is my life. We talked a lot about your research and your career, but what else in life is important for you? My family. So I get along very well with my wife. She a scientist too? No, she's a philosopher. Since the first time we met, which is what, more than 45 years ago.

And my son and also friends are very important to have good friends and to exchange with them. I love gardening. You do? Yeah, I love a big garden or something. We have a very small garden in Strasbourg, but we have a second house on the Mediterranean in the south of France with a nice garden. So I do a bit of gardening.

And do you still hope that you will construct artificial photosynthesis so your flowers can grow? Artificial photosynthesis? It's a bit ambitious, because what I hope is that we can convert light energy into chemical energy, make a fuel from light and water and CO2. Artificial photosynthesis in this way could be realistic, but photosynthesis is much more than that. Do you have time to spend with your friends and family, or is almost all your time devoted to science?

No, I think I have never been completely focused and only focused on science. I had vacation with my family every year. Do you think that's important, to get a lot of other influence? Sure. I think you have to be, if you have to have a. If you want to have a balanced life, you know. Sure. You have to. Are you creative also on your time off from science? Creative?

I don't know. I mean, but I think of science. Yeah, sure. Yeah. So thank you. Thank you very much for the interview, and I hope you enjoy your stay in Stockholm now for the rest of the week. Thank you. So the interview was a great pleasure. I thank you. Now.

Jean Pierre Sauvage, Science, Research, Innovation, Chemistry, Technology, Nobel Prize