3 ms·

The Nobel Prize Committee doesn't do mistakes, right? Right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Physics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobe

The Nobel Prize Committee doesn't do mistakes, right? Right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Physics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Phys... Thousands of people worked on gravitational waves, but somehow only LIGO is the one taking credit. I'd like to know what other physicists think of the LIGO results and methods.

consp 8y ago
Since VIRGO wasn't running at high enough signal to noise ratio before 2017, yes. But then again "LIGO" is not just one person but hundreds if not more. The same could be said for CERN which had initial papers with around 1000 coauthors.
maxnoe 8y ago
Astroparticle physicist here. I work in gammay-ray astronomy. We work closely together with LIGO, they alert us in case something interesting happens so we can observe the same position. This is e.g. what happened with the Neutron star merger. The community has great respect for the awesome work our colleagues at LIGO do. Especially since they made data and code public, which sadly is something that just starts gaining track in gammaray astronomy.
grigjd3 8y ago
As a former numrel person who definitely did not get credit, the LIGO collaboration deserved this.
canhascodez 8y ago
The idea that Nobel prizes are inherently unfair actually has wide credence[0][1][2]: basically everyone agrees that singling out individuals or even single organizations ignores the real degree of collaboration between scientists of all fields and levels. However, they're a tradition, and a good show, they're fantastic as a tool for publicity, the money is usually appreciated by the recipients. However, the real point of the Nobel Prize is that it's a great honor, and the effect of that honor is diminished in proportion to the number of recipients--ditto for the prize money. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/10/the-absurdity-of-the-nobel-prizes-in-science/541863/ [1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/its-time-to-rethink-the-nobel-prizes/ [2] https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_believe_the_Nobel_Prize_is_fair_and_or_even_relevant

consp 8y ago

Since VIRGO wasn't running at high enough signal to noise ratio before 2017, yes. But then again "LIGO" is not just one person but hundreds if not more. The same could be said for CERN which had initial papers with around 1000 coauthors.

maxnoe 8y ago

Astroparticle physicist here. I work in gammay-ray astronomy. We work closely together with LIGO, they alert us in case something interesting happens so we can observe the same position. This is e.g. what happened with the Neutron star merger. The community has great respect for the awesome work our colleagues at LIGO do. Especially since they made data and code public, which sadly is something that just starts gaining track in gammaray astronomy.

grigjd3 8y ago

As a former numrel person who definitely did not get credit, the LIGO collaboration deserved this.

canhascodez 8y ago

The idea that Nobel prizes are inherently unfair actually has wide credence[0][1][2]: basically everyone agrees that singling out individuals or even single organizations ignores the real degree of collaboration between scientists of all fields and levels. However, they're a tradition, and a good show, they're fantastic as a tool for publicity, the money is usually appreciated by the recipients. However, the real point of the Nobel Prize is that it's a great honor, and the effect of that honor is diminished in proportion to the number of recipients--ditto for the prize money. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/10/the-absurdity-of-the-nobel-prizes-in-science/541863/ [1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/its-time-to-rethink-the-nobel-prizes/ [2] https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_believe_the_Nobel_Prize_is_fair_and_or_even_relevant