Notices
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: The Nobel Science Prizes: Most are warranted, some are not, and other works simply ignored.

  1. #1 The Nobel Science Prizes: Most are warranted, some are not, and other works simply ignored. 
    Forum Senior Double Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    317
    Einstein never received the Nobel for Relativity - only the photoelectric effect (with references to his other "contributions to physics"). This seems to be a grave injustice to many.

    Not being much of an expert on all those given out :

    Out of curiosity, and to limit the responses to the most significant awards (given or not) -- which are the three best and three worst awards for the sciences (or thereabouts)?

    Hubble did not win one for discovering the expansion of the universe since "there was no category for astronomy" (or so I have read), although his work clearly falls within the realm of physics, and defines a great deal of it!

    Besides Hubble and Einstein, who else was ignored for truly outstanding work in science?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    KJW
    KJW is online now
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,691
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Helix View Post
    Besides Hubble and Einstein, who else was ignored for truly outstanding work in science?
    Nicola Cabibbo


    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Senior Double Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Helix View Post
    Besides Hubble and Einstein, who else was ignored for truly outstanding work in science?
    Nicola Cabibbo

    Nicola Cabibbo is largely known for his work on weak interaction (1). It is one of four fundamental interactions, the three others being electromagnetism, the strong interaction, and gravitation.

    According to (2) :

    "This force is the mechanism of interaction between subatomic particles that is responsible for the radioactive decay of atoms."

    end quote

    According to a number of people, Cabibbo should have shared the Nobel in physics with Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa in 2008 since they expanded on Cabibbo's work on the weak interactions in "up and down quarks, between electrons and electron neutrinos, and between muons and muon neutrinos" (1).

    Apparently Kobayashi and Maskawa helped to create the "Cabibbo–Kobayashi–Maskawa matrix" to describe these observations, but the Nobel committee failed to recognize Cabibbo in the award. Perhaps the physics was too complex for them to comprehend the work contributed by Cabibbo.

    Cabibbo and KJW are not alone in their position that he should have been recognized as well (1,3,4).


    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicola_Cabibbo

    2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_interaction

    3. https://physicsworld.com/a/overlooke...icola-cabibbo/

    4. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14885-physics-nobel-snubs-key-researcher/?ignored=irrelevant


    (additions and corrections are appreciated)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Helix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Helix View Post
    Besides Hubble and Einstein, who else was ignored for truly outstanding work in science?
    Nicola Cabibbo
    I second that. He was robbed, IMNHO.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,751
    Rosalind Franklin. Never even nominated for a Nobel. Laid out the foundation for structure of DNA molecule. Some say Nobel was stolen from her by associates Crick & Watson. May be a case of being born at the wrong time.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Senior Double Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    Rosalind Franklin. Never even nominated for a Nobel. Laid out the foundation for structure of DNA molecule. Some say Nobel was stolen from her by associates Crick & Watson. May be a case of being born at the wrong time.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

    It may be that all those X-rays she worked with prevented an award, as she passed away in 1958 (age 37), before the structure of DNA was firmly accepted.

    She certainly was a giant in the determination of molecular structures.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 16th, 2018, 01:14 PM
  2. nobel prizes are almost all politics
    By ballyhoo in forum Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: August 30th, 2012, 11:51 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 13th, 2012, 12:27 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •