And here is my speech :
Address for the Sonning Prize Ceremony
Hervé This
Copenhagen, 9 April 2025
Dear Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen
It goes without saying that I am deeply honoured to receive the Sonning Prize 2025.
The legacy of past recipients of the Prize is truly outstanding: Sir Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Karl Popper, Ingmar Bergman, Günter Grass, the Danish icons Jørn Utzon and Lars von Trier... I am proud to be the third French recipient, after the Nobel laureate Albert Schweitzer, also an Alsatian, and Simone de Beauvoir.
In the spirit of acknowledging our shared heritage, I intentionally left out the remarkable Niels Bohr from the list of distinguished Danes, because he and I share something special: we are scientists—Bohr, a physicist, and I, a chemist.
One might ask: what is the relationship between molecular and physical gastronomy, which is a part of chemistry, and culture? The answer is simple: molecular and physical gastronomy bridges science, which is culture, and cooking, which is also culture.
I repeat that I am deeply honoured, but I am also greatly concerned about food security. By 2050, the global population may exceed 10 billion, raising a crucial question: What will they have to eat? This issue extends beyond food security and food safety. We must nourish both the body and the mind, for humans are not merely stomachs—we are cultural beings.
Exactly two centuries ago, the French lawyer Jean-Anthelme Brillat-Savarin became renowned for his reflections on the art of eating. In his book The Physiology of Taste, he wrote, that while animals feed, only humans know how to eat, meaning that they are able to appreciate the cultural signification of food. I would argue that this is not an inherent truth, but rather an aspiration. Whether young and old, we must learn how to eat.
To become truly humans, we must elevate food from the stomach to the mind. Achieving this requires the contributions of all disciplines. Indeed gastronomy encompasses history, geography, philosophy, economics, literature, and, of course, the culinary art. It also draws from the natural sciences—biology, physics, and, notably, chemistry.
Another famous gastronome, Alexandre Balthazar Grimod de la Reynière, rightly observed that “the cackled pieces seem better”. Eating culturally means discussing what we eat, celebrating the culinary artistry of the cook, and appreciating the time, intelligence and effort devoted to preparing dishes.
Culture, language, words… The importance of words was well recognized by the French chemist Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier, who revolutionized chemistry with a new nomenclature: one cannot improve science without improving language, and vice versa.
It is not widely known, but Lavoisier studied meat broth, anticipating the field of molecular and physical gastronomy. He wrote: ‘We cannot help but be surprised, whenever we ask ourselves questions about the objects we are most familiar with, to see how vague and uncertain our ideas often are, and how important it is, therefore, to fix them with experiments and facts”. And what could be more familiar than the culinary activity, which sustains us several times a day?”
So let us now turn to cooking. It has certainly a technical component, but what’s the point of performing tasks like peeling carrots or whipping eggs, which can be done by machines? The true interest of cooking lies not in mere technique, but in its artistic nature: cooks, at home, in restaurants or in industrial food companies, are expected to create food that has to be good, that is to say beautiful to eat. As there is still resistance to this idea, I insist: the goal is not only to make food visually appealing. Rather it is to make it beautiful in taste and in thought.
Yet even this does not fully capture the essence of cooking. The most technically and artistically accomplished dish is worth nothing if it is thrown in the face of the guests. The dishes should say "I love you"—intrinsically, through their construction, through their flavor. This is the true culinary challenge: to create dishes that express "I love you". A high level of culture!
At first glance, natural sciences may seem distant from this discussion. However, why should not they contribute to other fields, spark new questions, and collaborate with other disciplines to explore this fundamental notion of "I love you"?
Now, moving from sciences in general to molecular and physical gastronomy in particular, it is a science that holds intrinsic value, independent of its applications. This value is evident in the fundamental, and mechanistic questions it raises. Consider for instance the vast literature on tea or coffee, comprising millions of scientific studies. Yet not a single article examines the mechanisms by which compounds in tea leaves or in coffee grounds transfer into water. Similarly, 47% of classic French sauces involve wine in the cooking process, yet no scientific study has explored the chemical reactions that occur when wine is thermally processed in the presence of other compounds, such as those found in meat broths.
It was precisely to address such gaps in scientific knowledge that the English physicist Nicholas Kurti and I created molecular and physical gastronomy in 1988.
The objective was and remains to investigate the mechanisms underlying the phenomena that occur during cooking, employing the same method used by all natural sciences: experiments and mathematical analysis.
At the time, knowledge in this field was rudimentary. One need only recall that it was once believed that soufflés and similar dishes swelled due to the expansion of air bubbles. One of my earliest discoveries demonstrated that the swelling was actually caused by the evaporation of water. This realization made it possible for soufflés to rise without even beating the egg whites. I will never forget a seminar I gave decades ago, where I presented a soufflé that puffed up despite the egg whites remaining unwhipped. Behind me, a chef and a culinary instructor watched the oven in disbelief, muttering, “But it’s not possible, it’s not possible!” What once seemed impossible is now evident: thanks to molecular and physical gastronomy, culinary techniques have evolved, and so has the way they are taught. The scientific approach has not only helped innovative chefs worldwide to elevate the pleasure of eating to a new level—where creativity and art intertwine—but has also sparked innovation in laboratories around the globe, profoundly influencing food culture.
This brings us to the invaluable act of teaching—the transmission of culture to younger generations. In the past, cooking was learned through repetition. Today, technical aspects are taught in technology classes, grounded in the analysis of molecular and physical gastronomy. Even in primary schools, scientific activities around cooking have reached millions of children in France, and have even extended to the favelas of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil—what a joy!
Of course, there are also technical applications, as we recognized that cooking could not remain in the outdated state we observed in the 80’s. What I have termed ‘molecular cooking’ refers to the modernization of culinary techniques, using tools from chemistry, physics, and biology laboratories. While this renovation is ongoing, significant progress has been made. Today, alternative gelling agents, new cooking methods at low temperature, are widespread across the world. However I will not be satisfied until chefs can work seated, in a quiet environment, free from excessive heat or stress.
This is why we must move to the next step, one that is even more fruitful: synthetic cooking, whose artistic form is known as note by note cuisine. Rather than relying on traditional ingredients like fruits, vegetables, meat, fish or eggs, this approach focuses on the individuals compounds or fractions of these ingredients: water, cellulose, pectins, lipids, and so on.
Just as synthetic music creates sounds beyond the reach of classical instruments, synthetic cooking allows for the creation of new textures and flavours—unimaginable and unprecedented. 3D food printers will play a key role in advancing this culinary frontier.
Just like molecular cooking, note by note cuisine is not about catering to the wealthy. Our goal is to nourish everyone, enabling people to eat with a clear conscience while making the most of the available resources. As we strive to reduce food waste and losses in the effort to feed humanity by 2050, note by note cuisine becomes increasingly vital, posing new scientific challenges for molecular and physical gastronomy and other sciences.
Finally, I reiterate that, of course I am deeply honoured to receive the Sonning Prize, and I must express my heartfelt gratitude to everyone who played a role in the decision made by the Sonning Committee. I am particularly grateful to my colleague Karl Anker Jørgensen, a chemist at Aarhus University, as well as to Professor Marie-Louise Nosch of the University of Copenhagen, Steffen Brandt, Erik Frandsen, and Birgitte Nauntofte, chair of the Aarhus University Board.
I view awards, decorations, and other public recognition as opportunities to make a further meaningful impact. I hope the Sonning Prize will encourage my colleagues worldwide to explore the many fascinating phenomena that can be observed in kitchens. I also hope it will help the public understand that food must evolve, not only because our lifestyles have changed, but also due to the growing concerns around food security, food safety, sustainability and climate change.
All of society is involved, and it is necessary to change mentalities and ideas, from primary schools to professional bodies.
It is not only sound knowledge that should be shared, but also methods, an important word, particularly close to my heart as it refers to a famous discourse by René Descartes, who contributed to the creation of modern science and thought.
Whether we speak of technique, of technology, of teaching or of science, we have to discuss first the goal, then the method, as in Greek methodon means “choosing the way”.
For food, the ultimate goal is Culture. And we need to continue the work of the Enlightenment, which did not conclude with the publication of Diderot and D'Alembert's Encyclopédie. The Age of Enlightenment is far from over. Like the thinkers of the 18th century, we must step out our laboratories to combat magical thinking, disseminate knowledge and skill, and resist ignorance, dogma and tyranny.
Of course, in order to transmit a clearer picture of the world, we need to expand the kingdom of knowledge, through sciences. In this quest, in the laboratory or elsewhere, I have for myself this question that I don't dare ask others: since we are what we do, what is my agenda?
Celebrate Chemistry, Celebrate Culture, and thank you very much for your attention
