Discoveries Without a Nobel Prize
The ritual of Nobel speculation, particularly about who will win the three science prizes, got the editors at National Geographic thinking: What amazing discoveries haven’t won? We asked our Phenomena science bloggers, science editors, and select contributors to pick their favorite advance or invention that was passed over.
more…
They didn’t mention “General Relativity”. IMHO that’s the greatest discovery not to win a Nobel Prize.
I say “General Relativity” for Einstein.
Another one that hasn’t been mentioned in the article is the first Hubble Deep Field. The influence of this one photograph on the science of cosmology has been enormous, IMHO deserving of a Nobel Prize. It’s been as game-changing as the Penzias-Wilson discovery of the cosmic microwave background.
> The First Genome
Definitely worth a Nobel Prize for Venter.
> Black Hole Death
IMHO, still unproved, although accepted by nearly everyone as true. Hawking is on record as saying that he’ll get a Nobel Prize for this one as soon as it’s observed experimentally.
“Cosmic Inflation” by Guth is in the same situation. Accepted by nearly everyone as true, but no definitive experimental proof hence no Nobel Prize. I’d say Guth ought to get the Nobel Prize for that one.
> The Periodic Table
Definitely would have been worth a Nobel Prize for Mendeleev
> The Lightbulb
Doesn’t really fall in the “Nobel Prize” category. Which science is it?
> The Quark. “Murray Gell-Mann won the Nobel Prize in physics in 1969 for his contributions and discoveries concerning the classification of elementary particles and their interactions.”
That’s the same thing. Doesn’t deserve to be on this list.
> Modern Evolutionary Synthesis
What? Nah, not unless you can pin down specifically the person or few people responsible for the first combination of Mendel’s and Darwin’s work.
> Dark Matter
Accepted by nearly everybody. But in this case there is a defining confirming experiment (or two). The Bullet Cluster. Definitely deserves a Nobel Prize for Rubin and possibly Ford.
> Tree of Life
The article should have retitled this section the “Discovery of Archaea”. Definitely would have been worth a Nobel Prize for Woese.
> Dinosaur Renaissance
Perhaps this one, the discovery of Deinonychus, or for the more recently the “feathered dinosaurs”, or even more recently for the proof that birds are descended from dinosaurs.
There’s another aspect to the Nobel Prize, the money.
The basic idea was that the Nobel Prize funded further research. Those for whom the money is meaningless, such as those who have retired or died, or those who have large sources of external income (such as Edison and Venter), tend not to receive Nobel Prizes.
Whoever invented this deserves a Nobel Prize.
Barry O’Bama won a Nobel Prize for being black.
mollwollfumble said:
There’s another aspect to the Nobel Prize, the money.The basic idea was that the Nobel Prize funded further research. Those for whom the money is meaningless, such as those who have retired or died, or those who have large sources of external income (such as Edison and Venter), tend not to receive Nobel Prizes.
So that’s the reason there’s no posthumous Nobels.
Inge Lehmann’s use of seismic waves to determine the structure of the earth.
Peak Warming Man said:
Barry O’Bama won a Nobel Prize for being black.
You sure?
I thought it was for being a PotUS.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Peak Warming Man said:
Barry O’Bama won a Nobel Prize for being black.
You sure?
I thought it was for being a PotUS.
Tamb said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Peak Warming Man said:
Barry O’Bama won a Nobel Prize for being black.
You sure?
I thought it was for being a PotUS.
No, he won it for not being a woman.
Didn’t he get the Nobel Peace Prize for not starting a war in Iraq?