“Do you lot promise to win a Nobel Prize?” asked an elderly homo who had come upward to milk shiver my mitt afterward the lecture. I laughed, but he was serious. Maybe I had been a fiddling likewise successful explaining how of import quantum gravity is.
No, I don’t promise to win a Nobel Prize. If that’s what I’d been after, I surely would bring chosen a dissimilar field. Condensed thing physics, say, or quantum things. At to the lowest degree cosmology. But surely non quantum gravity.
But the Nobel Prize is of import for science. It’s of import non because it singles out a few winners but because inwards scientific discipline it’s the i annual final result that catches everybody’s attention. On which other twenty-four hr menstruation does physics brand headlines?
In recent years I heard increasingly louder calls that the Prize-criteria should live amended as well as then that to a greater extent than than iii people tin forcefulness out win. I am non inwards favor of that. It doesn’t brand feel anyway to mitt out precisely i Prize each twelvemonth regardless of how much progress was made. There is ever a long listing of people who deserved a Nobel but never got one. Like Vera Rubin, who died lastly twelvemonth as well as who past times every reasonable mensurate should bring gotten one. Shame on you, Nobel Committee.
I am peculiarly opposed to the stance that the Nobel Prize should live awarded to collaborations alongside members sometimes inwards the hundreds or fifty-fifty thousands. While the three-people-cutoff is arguably arbitrary, I am non inwards favor of showering collaboration members alongside fractional prizes. Things don’t larn going because a yard scientists spontaneously determine to brand an experiment. It’s ever but a few people who are responsible to brand things happen. Those are the ones which the Nobel commission should identify.
So, I am all inwards favor of the Nobel Prize as well as similar it the means it is. But (leaving aside that many institutions appear to believe Nobel Prize winners lay golden eggs) the Prize has fiddling relevance inwards research. I definitely know a few people who promise to win it as well as about fifty-fifty deserve it. But I nevertheless bring to encounter anyone who deliberately chose their inquiry alongside that destination inwards mind.
The Nobel Prize is past times structure meant to abide by living scientists. This makes feel because otherwise we’d bring a backlog of thousands of deceased scientific luminaries as well as nobody would live interested watching the announcement. But inwards about inquiry areas nosotros don’t hold back to consider payoffs inwards our lifetime. Quantum gravity is i of them.
Personally, I experience less inspired past times Nobel Prize winners than past times long-dead geniuses similar Da Vinci, Leibnitz, or Goethe – masterminds whose intellectual curiosity spanned disciplines. They were ahead of their fourth dimension as well as produced writings that non rarely were vague, difficult to follow, as well as sometimes outright wrong. None of them would bring won a Nobel Prize had the Prize existed at the time. But their insights seat the footing for centuries of scientific progress.
And so, spell nosotros abide by those who succeed inwards the present, let’s non forget that somewhere amid us, unrecognized, are the seeds that volition grow to adjacent centuries’ discoveries.
Today, every bit the 2017 Nobel prize is awarded, I desire to remind those of you lot who function inwards obscure inquiry areas, gain unpopular artworks, or expression upward ridicule for untimely writing, that history volition live your lastly judge, non your contemporaries.
Then in i lawsuit again mayhap I should simply function on those song-lyrics a fiddling harder ;)
No, I don’t promise to win a Nobel Prize. If that’s what I’d been after, I surely would bring chosen a dissimilar field. Condensed thing physics, say, or quantum things. At to the lowest degree cosmology. But surely non quantum gravity.
 |
| Nobel Prize medal for physics as well as chemistry. It shows nature inwards the cast of a goddess emerging from the clouds. The veil which covers her expression upward is held upward past times the Genius of Science. Srsly, consider Nobelprize.org. |
But the Nobel Prize is of import for science. It’s of import non because it singles out a few winners but because inwards scientific discipline it’s the i annual final result that catches everybody’s attention. On which other twenty-four hr menstruation does physics brand headlines?
In recent years I heard increasingly louder calls that the Prize-criteria should live amended as well as then that to a greater extent than than iii people tin forcefulness out win. I am non inwards favor of that. It doesn’t brand feel anyway to mitt out precisely i Prize each twelvemonth regardless of how much progress was made. There is ever a long listing of people who deserved a Nobel but never got one. Like Vera Rubin, who died lastly twelvemonth as well as who past times every reasonable mensurate should bring gotten one. Shame on you, Nobel Committee.
I am peculiarly opposed to the stance that the Nobel Prize should live awarded to collaborations alongside members sometimes inwards the hundreds or fifty-fifty thousands. While the three-people-cutoff is arguably arbitrary, I am non inwards favor of showering collaboration members alongside fractional prizes. Things don’t larn going because a yard scientists spontaneously determine to brand an experiment. It’s ever but a few people who are responsible to brand things happen. Those are the ones which the Nobel commission should identify.
So, I am all inwards favor of the Nobel Prize as well as similar it the means it is. But (leaving aside that many institutions appear to believe Nobel Prize winners lay golden eggs) the Prize has fiddling relevance inwards research. I definitely know a few people who promise to win it as well as about fifty-fifty deserve it. But I nevertheless bring to encounter anyone who deliberately chose their inquiry alongside that destination inwards mind.
The Nobel Prize is past times structure meant to abide by living scientists. This makes feel because otherwise we’d bring a backlog of thousands of deceased scientific luminaries as well as nobody would live interested watching the announcement. But inwards about inquiry areas nosotros don’t hold back to consider payoffs inwards our lifetime. Quantum gravity is i of them.
Personally, I experience less inspired past times Nobel Prize winners than past times long-dead geniuses similar Da Vinci, Leibnitz, or Goethe – masterminds whose intellectual curiosity spanned disciplines. They were ahead of their fourth dimension as well as produced writings that non rarely were vague, difficult to follow, as well as sometimes outright wrong. None of them would bring won a Nobel Prize had the Prize existed at the time. But their insights seat the footing for centuries of scientific progress.
And so, spell nosotros abide by those who succeed inwards the present, let’s non forget that somewhere amid us, unrecognized, are the seeds that volition grow to adjacent centuries’ discoveries.
Today, every bit the 2017 Nobel prize is awarded, I desire to remind those of you lot who function inwards obscure inquiry areas, gain unpopular artworks, or expression upward ridicule for untimely writing, that history volition live your lastly judge, non your contemporaries.
Then in i lawsuit again mayhap I should simply function on those song-lyrics a fiddling harder ;)
Comments
Post a Comment