The winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, Prof. Michael Levitt, in an interview with the Hidaan website: "The Nobel Prize is not only for the three of us, but also recognition of the importance of computers and simulation."

He also said: "Scientists should not wait for the Nobel Prize. It is very sad that scientists expect a prize because for every one who receives the prize there must be a hundred scientists who believed they deserved more. Maybe they're right, but it won't help." On the festival in Israel: "I enter the country with an Israeli passport and live here many months of the year, I am an Israeli in every way, if you take out everyone who was not born in the country, there will be no one left"

Exactly a week ago, last Wednesday, the Nobel Prize Committee for Chemistry surprised when it announced the awarding of the prize to three researchers in a field that no one had considered important in the past - computational biology. Prof. Martin Karpelos from Harvard University, Prof. Michael Levitt from Stanford and Prof. Aryeh Warshel from the University of Southern California.

As we mentioned in the articles from that day, The initial research that led to the award was carried out by Prof. Warshel and Prof. Levitt at the Weizmann Institute in the late sixties.

Tonight (Tuesday) I interviewed Prof. Levitt by phone in his office at Stanford University. I first asked him to refer to the scientific aspects and in particular to the description put forward by the prize committee about the connection between chemistry and quantum physics: "It is more than a connection between chemistry and quantum physics. We demonstrated the use of advanced computational methods on large biological molecules. When the work started in 1967-8 there were already computers but no one had heard of the concept of simulation. Today, when the meteorological service tells you what the weather will be like tomorrow, they do a very complex calculation according to the air pressure, wind directions and temperature, which they put into the equations and solve."
"Every simulation should include equations that describe how the system progresses. Usually the simulations are based on very old equations. What is more difficult is the model. You need to choose a model that fits. If the model is too complicated it is impossible to make calculations. If the model is too simple it has no content. It's a choice between simplifying something and the amount of calculations required to describe the phenomenon."
"The computers were very slow. My contribution was using software to calculate how molecules with a thousand atoms would behave and to do calculations on this molecule. Until then, such data were only calculated for molecules of 20-30 atoms."

"Aryeh Warshel's contribution in the sixties was working with Prof. Schnior Lipson who is the key person to the whole story who passed away 11 years ago. He had the idea that the chemical model of all molecules should be the same model for each molecule and not a separate model for each molecule as was accepted until then. The model should be consistent and balanced. Varshel worked with Shneor Lipson during his Ph.D. I came and used the same software for large molecule calculations. After 5-6 years, Arie and I did something else together: we entered the content into the calculations (referring to dynamism. A.B.). The calculations until then were mechanical when they treated each molecule as balls connected by springs. But molecules do not have the properties of balls with springs. It is impossible to break connections and there is also a change in the chargers, we have included this content as well. What is interesting is that the models we chose then many, many years ago are still in use today, which is quite strange because the calculation power has increased in a way that is difficult to describe."

"I was 20 years old and Aryeh Warshel was 27 years old. Professor Karpelos at Harvard was already famous when Aryeh Warshel came to him. He entered the field in 1977 and used our software for calculations of more complex molecules. It should be noted that computers have improved in the meantime. Since then, the field of computational biology has developed by leaps and bounds.” "

"Of course, this was at the same time as the development of computing. To understand what it means to multiply 10,000 times in speed, in capacity at the same time as a similar reduction in price. If computers were like a car, in 65 a Cadillac cost $6,000 then, about $40 today. If the prices of the cars were to drop like the prices of computers then the same Cadillac of 65 would cost four dollars, in addition, instead of five people it could hold 50 thousand people and its speed was 600 thousand kilometers per hour. It gives an idea about the calculations we did back then on such a primitive computer compared to today."

And you still haven't solved the protein folding problem with this tremendous progress in computing?

"Indeed, it is still not enough. The power of computers continues to increase but what is more important is that the award is not only for the three of us but also recognition of the importance of computers and simulation. The biologists love computers because of the analysis but did not really understand the simulation. I guess even for those who built airplanes it was difficult to leave the old methods and switch to computers. It will take another ten years or forty years, but these problems will be solved. It's just a matter of understanding what size of models you need. We are starting to understand the system, many people are working on it. We'll get to it eventually."

Did you believe you would receive this recognition?

"The big question was whether they would even decide to give a Nobel Prize in Chemistry to biologists and in the field of computing. There are all kinds of grid lists that have tried to predict the winners. Both me and Rashel were not on these lists. What is clear here is that no smart scientist works for a Nobel Prize. The point is the science and not the prize. It's very sad that scientists expect a prize because everyone who receives the prize must have another hundred who believed they deserved more. Maybe they are right but it won't help. I know probably 30-40 Nobel laureates. I was lucky to start working with the biggest ones at the beginning. After all, they are people. But then I felt they were gods. There is no basis for this."

What do you say about the festival in Israel regarding the question of whether the winners are Israeli or not and regarding the brain drain?

"I am Israeli and I have sons who were in the army. I have an apartment in Israel. I have no idea. If the IRS comes to me, I'd rather be Israeli. I pay 40% tax. And seriously. Good to talk about this topic. I feel that there is no doubt that Israel has received Nobel Prizes. This is good for encouraging support for science and scientists. Science is a very good thing for the economy. You can see it at Stanford, that the entire Silicon Valley came out of Stanford, and that caused the turnover of billions from companies like Intel and Apple. Except for Microsoft and Amazon, they are all here by me. In Israel they like to talk a lot. President Peres and the Prime Minister also called me, but they didn't catch me that much. I manage everything by myself. After it happened I was on the phone for long hours and they couldn't reach me. Then I got emails from both of them and talked to them. I also received a nice letter from the Weizmann Institute."

"There is too much media in Israel and everyone wants to jump on each other. I treat everyone with a lot of respect and it doesn't matter if it's the president or someone who picks up my trash. Now that I'm suddenly on a ladder as high as the Nobel Prize, I've received letters from people who are just happy. I want to continue my work. We might use the fame to meet some rock groups and visit some places I wanted to visit."

Are you coming to Israel?

"I will be in Israel in two weeks. I live in the country. is in Israel several months a year. I have two sons and grandchildren in Israel. I am in it for a large part of the year. If you took out of Israel everyone who was not born in Israel, there wouldn't be many left. me too. Both Aryeh Warshel and Martin Karpelos were not born in the USA. No one brings it up - everyone is happy. I am also Israeli, British, and American. I enter each of the countries with its passport."

More on the subject of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry on the science website:

• Transferring the experiments to the computerized space - a popular explanation of the science of the 2013 Nobel laureates in chemistry
• Exclusive: The work of Nobel Prize winners in chemistry is closely related to the Weizmann Institute
• Prof. Aryeh Warshel, a graduate of the Technion and the Weizmann Institute and currently in California, and Prof. Michael Levitt, a visiting researcher at the institute, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry together with Martin Karpelos
• We have a pupa in a test tube