Reply #23: I meant no disrespect for Pauling.

[NNadir]

Pauling's second Nobel was for Peace, though, and though it was for an activity that had a direct effect (the banning of open air nuclear testing) on humanity - it was not for an activity that had a direct effect because of the elucidation of chemistry with an immediate technological/industrial application. Even though one can argue that Pauling's work on the chemical bond is essential to all industry, the application was not direct, unlike Haber's work on nitrogen fixation, for instance or Seaborg's discovery of plutonium and his elucidation of its chemistry specifically and the chemistry of actinides in general.

I note that Pauling's work on protein structure though did have more direct effects. The use of proteins in industry is of significant economic importance, and has been so for many, many years. I note he almost beat Watson and Crick to the punch on DNA as well. He could have easily been a man with three Nobels.

Pauling was a very great man, of course and is, I believe, the only person to have won two Nobel Prizes in two different categories.

I have also probably been more than a little amiss in neglecting another double winner, Marie Curie. It is certain that her work did have direct technological and industrial effects as well. Indeed a whole industry, the now maligned radium industry, grew out of her work. Actually it went beyond illuminated watch dials and clock faces, in fact. The use of radioactive materials in tracer work, in manufacturing, and in medicine are all of industrial importance. All of this industry originated from work done in her laboratories. Indeed she lit the way for Seaborg.

Undoubtedly I have overlooked others though. The folks I mentioned just stick in my mind.

If Olah's work creates a whole industry, so much the better. It will and should elevate him even higher in the exclusive pantheon he already occupies.