3 ms·

These three propositions are all simultaneously true (in my opinion): 1) Every person who has ever received a Nobel Prize in physics has richly deserved it; 2

These three propositions are all simultaneously true (in my opinion): 1) Every person who has ever received a Nobel Prize in physics has richly deserved it; 2) Culture and politics influence the awarding of the Prize; 3) Several people who did not get the Prize would have if they had not been women. (3) is a corollary to (2). One example is Jocelyn Bell Burnell, who discovered pulsars. The Nobel Prize for that was awarded to two men.

tediousdemise 5y ago
Although it's factual, many people put their fingers in their ear and scream when you mention point (2). I would extend that point to any prestigious award.
- leephillips 5y ago
  At least (1) is still true. Contrast the Literature and Peace prizes, which have truly become bad jokes.
  - tephra 5y ago
    To argue a bit I'd say that the science prizes have it a bit easier. Here's the criteria that Alfred Nobel set out in his will[0] for the literature prize (kinda badly translated from 19th century Swedish): "one part to whom in literature have produced the most excellent work in an ideal direction". You have had 18 members of the Swedish Academy debating what the hell that means since forever. [0] https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/alfred-nobels-testamente/ https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/alfred-nobels-testam...
    - leephillips 5y ago
      Hmmm. OK, that’s quite something to have to interpret.
barwell 5y ago
But at least in the case of Jocelyn Bell Burnell, even though she put in a lot of the legwork, it was her supervisors who did much of the theoretical work to explain the discovery. Also of note is that she agreed with the Nobel committee decision. From her Wikipedia page: "First, demarcation disputes between supervisor and student are always difficult, probably impossible to resolve. Secondly, it is the supervisor who has the final responsibility for the success or failure of the project. We hear of cases where a supervisor blames his student for a failure, but we know that it is largely the fault of the supervisor. It seems only fair to me that he should benefit from the successes, too. Thirdly, I believe it would demean Nobel Prizes if they were awarded to research students, except in very exceptional cases, and I do not believe this is one of them. Finally, I am not myself upset about it – after all, I am in good company, am I not!"
- leephillips 5y ago
  Yes, (1) is true even in this case. It’s not that her supervisors didn’t deserve to share in the prize, it’s that she should not have been excluded. I know of her statements about the incident. I think she’s being modest, and I disagree with her idea that awarding the Prize to someone who happened to be a student during the time of discovery would somehow demean the Prize. Her work was as crucial as theirs. It wasn’t just “legwork”, she discovered the regular signals and recognized them as something new and important.
kens 5y ago
As for (1), Dalén's 1912 physics Nobel Prize for a regulator for lighthouse illumination seems out of place.

tediousdemise 5y ago

Although it's factual, many people put their fingers in their ear and scream when you mention point (2). I would extend that point to any prestigious award.

leephillips 5y ago
At least (1) is still true. Contrast the Literature and Peace prizes, which have truly become bad jokes.
- tephra 5y ago
  To argue a bit I'd say that the science prizes have it a bit easier. Here's the criteria that Alfred Nobel set out in his will[0] for the literature prize (kinda badly translated from 19th century Swedish): "one part to whom in literature have produced the most excellent work in an ideal direction". You have had 18 members of the Swedish Academy debating what the hell that means since forever. [0] https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/alfred-nobels-testamente/ https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/alfred-nobels-testam...
  - leephillips 5y ago
    Hmmm. OK, that’s quite something to have to interpret.

barwell 5y ago

But at least in the case of Jocelyn Bell Burnell, even though she put in a lot of the legwork, it was her supervisors who did much of the theoretical work to explain the discovery. Also of note is that she agreed with the Nobel committee decision. From her Wikipedia page: "First, demarcation disputes between supervisor and student are always difficult, probably impossible to resolve. Secondly, it is the supervisor who has the final responsibility for the success or failure of the project. We hear of cases where a supervisor blames his student for a failure, but we know that it is largely the fault of the supervisor. It seems only fair to me that he should benefit from the successes, too. Thirdly, I believe it would demean Nobel Prizes if they were awarded to research students, except in very exceptional cases, and I do not believe this is one of them. Finally, I am not myself upset about it – after all, I am in good company, am I not!"

leephillips 5y ago
Yes, (1) is true even in this case. It’s not that her supervisors didn’t deserve to share in the prize, it’s that she should not have been excluded. I know of her statements about the incident. I think she’s being modest, and I disagree with her idea that awarding the Prize to someone who happened to be a student during the time of discovery would somehow demean the Prize. Her work was as crucial as theirs. It wasn’t just “legwork”, she discovered the regular signals and recognized them as something new and important.

kens 5y ago

As for (1), Dalén's 1912 physics Nobel Prize for a regulator for lighthouse illumination seems out of place.