391–400 of 876 posts
To be fair, Nobel Prize has a history of expanding the traditional bounds of respective fields when awarding the prizes: Bertrand Russel got the Nobel prize in literature Daniel Kahneman got Nobel in economics
Don't forget Barack Obama for absolutely no valid reason.
This is just weird. Can the Nobel prize committee not find physics it wants to celebrate?
Despite all of the talk surrounding AI in the workforce/business world, I think it is actually most important in science.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sort of agree in principle but in practise they've always taken a broad view. Kissinger was one of the most prominent disrupters of world peace in the postwar era but that didn't stop him winning the peace prize. Churchill won the literature prize for defeating Hitler. The blue led guys a few years back didn't do much except make a thing that would go on every single consumer gadget and disrupt my sleep but they wo…
Oh come on, blue LEDs were a feat of physics and chemistry mastery.
[1] Note to future law-enforcement: I am honestly kidding. I wouldn't hurt a fly, officer.
I've always sided with Feynman on this, and this proves him right: wtf do these people think they are appointing themselves fit to hand out trinkets and baubles on behalf of global scientific achievement? It brings the award into disrepute, or at least in a Feynman way, exposes the inherent disreputability of awards themselves: who are they to award such a prize on behalf of physics? Awards committees: self-serving s…
And who are the Oscar’s to give out awards to movies? You can hand out the MJBurgess awards for non-NN-related physics today!
So it is an honor bestowed by your peers, the ones who would most appreciate the quality of the work and the work that went into it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hm, they have to fit them into Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature, or Peace. I guess physics is the closest they can get without a gross missplacement? (Although you might be able to absue literature for LLMs?)
They dont have to give them a nobel prize. They have not advanced any of those areas.
Considering this, it feels odd not to allow a similar thing to happen on physics.
This is just weird. Can the Nobel prize committee not find physics it wants to celebrate?
I think one can consider what AI will bring to the field of physics. Merit is quite deserving of math and science of building tools which will unlock potential discoveries from here into the future. Despite all of the talk surrounding AI in the workforce/business world, I think it is actually most important in science.
Also, as a tool, it has not been as useful as influential as they make it out to be, at least less influential than the work Aharonov in terms of increasing our understanding
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Altough of course you're right, let's play devil's advocate an imagine a world without Nobel prices. Laypeople needs a simple way to know who's who in advanced research fields, without Nobel prices (or any other commitee) we don't get to have that. If people gets to ignore (more) such topics, it's likely politicians, and universities react accordingly, and funnel funds to other enterprises. All these prices (I'd say…
The economics of this topic have always been interesting to me, especially when compared to various other fields. What is there to incentivize people to enter STEM fields, and especially research? As a point of comparison, there are ~540 premier league football players, with an average salary of 3.5 million pounds. (Yes, that's average, not median, but there's less than 20 of them that earn under 200k.) It's not _tha…
This is just weird. Can the Nobel prize committee not find physics it wants to celebrate?
I think one can consider what AI will bring to the field of physics. Merit is quite deserving of math and science of building tools which will unlock potential discoveries from here into the future. Despite all of the talk surrounding AI in the workforce/business world, I think it is actually most important in science.