Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

nobelprize.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 876 posts

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#541

Post by oefrha »

juanjmanfredi wrote: post #474
oefrha wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former high energy theorist here: things are not looking so good for high energy physics (both theoretical and experimental) which loosely speaking accounted for maybe 1/3-1/2 of Nobel Prizes in the 20th century. That’s part of the reason I got out. I’m inclined to say astrophysics and cosmology, another pillar of the fundamental understanding of the universe, isn’t doing that well either, probably in the okayish but…

What are you considering "high energy physics"? "1/3-1/2 of Nobel Prizes in the 20th century" is a significant overestimation unless you are including topics not traditionally included in high energy physics. For example, there were many Nobel prizes in nuclear physics, which shares various parallels with high energy physics in terms of historical origins, experimental techniques, and theoretical foundations. But nuc…

Much of nuclear physics was effectively “high energy physics” (or more appropriately named elementary particle physics) back in the day. They ceased to be elementary or high energy at some point. My very loose categorization is everything on the microscopic path towards the fundamental theories; and there’s another macroscopic path, cosmology.

Edit: Expanded a few times.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#542

Post by photochemsyn »

nilkn wrote: post #515

This must be frustrating to see for all the actual physicists out there. What work in physics got ignored so that a prize for AI could be shoehorned in? I do think work on neural networks does rise to the level of a Nobel Prize. So I don't have any problem with this work getting such high-level recognition. But I really struggle with the physics classification and the side effect of omitting an award to physicists th…

The distinctions between experimental-theoretical scientific disciplines are fairly arbitrary, e.g. where does one draw the line between physics and chemistry and biology? Mathematics is something of an exception but there's no Nobel for that, nor for astronomy, planetary science, etc.

The Nobels are grossly overrated and the idea that one can follow the most important scientific developments of the past century by just listing off the Nobel Prizes since 1905 is one best abandoned.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#543

Post by go13 »

pknomad wrote: post #527
nilkn wrote: post #515

This must be frustrating to see for all the actual physicists out there. What work in physics got ignored so that a prize for AI could be shoehorned in? I do think work on neural networks does rise to the level of a Nobel Prize. So I don't have any problem with this work getting such high-level recognition. But I really struggle with the physics classification and the side effect of omitting an award to physicists th…

I was scratching my head but then it seems like the precedence for awarding Nobel prize for Physics for something that isn't "exclusively" physics has been set before. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2018/summary/ Peter Shor also got an award (albeit non Nobel) for something that overlaps Physics with Math + CS. https://news.mit.edu/2022/shor-spielman-breakthrough-prize-0... To me, I'd rather see a Nobel Pr…

[dead]

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#544

Post by [deleted] »

nilkn wrote: post #515

This must be frustrating to see for all the actual physicists out there. What work in physics got ignored so that a prize for AI could be shoehorned in? I do think work on neural networks does rise to the level of a Nobel Prize. So I don't have any problem with this work getting such high-level recognition. But I really struggle with the physics classification and the side effect of omitting an award to physicists th…

[deleted]

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#545

Post by hildolfr »

OneDonOne wrote: post #513

What do computer programs have to do with physics?

I get the hoopla about why this shouldn't be in physics, but to answer your question: everything.

We like to act like it's a new abstraction entirely, but everything about code is predicated on physics and earlier associated works.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#546

Post by gandalfgreybeer »

dev1ycan wrote: post #506

You can't take this back, this literally just discredited the only nobel that actually mattered, great job discrediting the nobel.

Two of my research advisers whose dissertations in PhD Physics had Hopfield as their primary reference. I'm also a PhD candidate working on one right now (no longer my primary reference because of all the developments) but I can trace several of my main references back to them.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#547

Post by gandalfgreybeer »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #100

There's a long backlog of major achievements in physics that haven't gotten a Nobel Prize in Physics . Giving the prize to something that has essentially nothing to do with physics is just a slap in the face to the physics community.

My adviser's PhD dissertation (PhD Physics) has Hopkins as one of her major references. This is grounded in Physics.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#548

Post by crmd »

I strongly suspect consciousness will be the next great paradigm in physics, following electrodynamics, quantum mechanics, and general relativity, now that the ‘detour’ of string theory is mostly behind us. Some, like Penrose, are already thinking about it but too late in their careers to make any breakthroughs.

Machine learning research is the logical entry point as the ‘particle physics’ of cognition and consciousness.

I think in retrospect we will say it was obvious why so many physics PhDs were working on ML during this era.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#549

Post by hildolfr »

OneDonOne wrote: post #521
ww520 wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ML absolutely has helped astrophysics in sorting the massive amount of observation data to make new discovery.

So do telescopes. Has anyone every won a Nobel for a telescope?

People have won it over new microscope designs and techniques.. possibly telescopes, too.. but I'm less familiar with that and not somewhere where it's convenient to look it up.

Re: Nobel Prize in Physics awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton [pdf]

#550

Post by DangitBobby »

choilive wrote: post #514
andrepd wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The most important factor tends to be the positive impact on society Making it even more baffling that this won then

If you don't think machine learning and neural networks have made massive positive contributions to humanity then you are naive.

"Massive" seems overstated. Also doubt that it's net positive.
Post reply on HN