Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Nobel Prizes Awarded 159

Posted by chrisd from the recognition-and-cash-for-smart-people dept.
imrdkl writes: "Looks like Cisco has done a deal with CNN to present a nice overview of the Nobel Prizes this year. The Science awards that have been presented so far include one for singing atoms in Physics, as well as others linked from the URL above for medicine and chemistry. It's worth noting that the physics article was already covered here on slashdot, but now it's official for all."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nobel Prizes Awarded More

Nobel Prizes Awarded

Comments Filter:
  • I'm so excited about Annan winning the money. It always amazes me how much money the Nobel is: a million dollars! Take a look at last year's winners, Arafat and Rabin [cnn.com]. Together, they shared the Nobel Prize for Peace in the Middle East. Admittedly, each of them only pocketed half a million apiece, but that's still some serious dough.

    And Annan's work has been every bit as effective as theirs! The Nobel comittee has done a great job picking the best representatives of peacemaking in the world.

    I hope Arafat still has some of his money, so he can use it to build a house which is impervious to helicopter-mounted missiles. It isn't always easy being a Leader of Peace. But you know what they say: one step forward, one step back, but the Path to Peace is still on track!
    • Actually there's always been people in that category who had no business getting it; Kissinger, Menchu, etc. I think the Nobel committee in a lot of cases uses it to try to influence peace initiatives rather than reward them. To tell the truth, that's probably a better reason to reward them than just as a prize.
      • To be fair, the commitee didn't know about Menchu's/her biographer's fabrications when they awarded her the prize, and there is, of course, the debate over whether it matters (whether true in every respect or not, the work did what it did to call attention to the plight of Guatemala). I'm not a fan of Menchu, but I don't think the awards should be based on my political opinions. If they were though...
        • Well, the problem I think is that she cast it in the light of evil-rightist-government vs. poor-indigenous-marxist-rebels she misrepresents the nature of the conflict (which supposedly is really about evil-rightist-government vs. evil-marxist-rebels, with the indigenous people victimized by both).
          • True, and that it primarily my beef with her, though I'm still not certain that that means her Nobel is undeserved (unless dishonesty is against the interests of peace). A remarkably good book on this subject is called "Rigoberta Menchu and the Story of All Poor Guatemalans [amazon.com]" by David Stoll, which was actually the one to research her claims and present a more balenced view of things, and one that I would argue is much more honestly concerned with Guatemalans that Menchu's politicized stories. And it is a brillant examination of the problem of having one person be held of as the voice of an entire people.
    • Uh, Arafat and Rabin won in 1994, as the page you linked to noted. Rabin was murdered by a Jewish extremist in 1995.
    • The scary part is when you realise that what they give out is the interest (growth if you count in stocks) of Alfred Nobel's fortune, minus what is required to keep for inflation and a few salaries.

      That's $6M in interest. Ok, perhaps not too much by todays standards, but he made this fortune in the 19th century. Quite an achievement, if you ask me.

  • Will Hardie wrote an article [hclinfinet.com] for HCL InfiNet. Interestingly enough,

    Cornell, from the US National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado, is a particularly young Nobel laureate at just 39 -- though not the youngest. William Lawrence Bragg won the same prize in 1915 at the age of 25.

    The Independent [millennium-debate.org] also published an article by Will Hardie. There's an opinion I don't particularly agree with about signing atoms at Jang.com.pk [jang.com.pk]. Good reading nontheless.

  • Singing Atoms (Score:3, Funny)

    by Spooky Possum ( 80044 ) on Monday December 10, 2001 @09:24PM (#2685297)
    As someone who works with Bose-Einstein condensates all I can say is that I've never heard one sing. Since they're kept under vacuum I can't hear them scream either. Pity.
    • Darn I was going to ask what type of music they sang that would make it Nobel Material.

      If any one could get a recording I am sure we would al love to hear it.. :-)
    • Singing atoms is (probably) just an interesting soundbite for TV guys to run. (And an interesting quote for that article, it was one of a very few in there).
    • For those unaware of what a Bose-Einstein condensate is, check here: for the info [colorado.edu]. It really is an amazing and laudable acheivement, especially considering that we have created a state of matter that, as far as we know, exists nowhere else in the universe. Go mankind!

  • Singing atoms... brain... storage... (Score:4, Funny)

    by PM4RK5 ( 265536 ) on Monday December 10, 2001 @09:29PM (#2685308)
    I'm not sure I'd want "computers that rival the brain in ... storage."

    My experience is the brain has an exceedingly high rate of data loss =)
    • Yeah, probably caused by the very lossy compression used to store stuff...

      At least, in my case, that is :-P

    • and i hope it doesn't also follow that only about 20% of it could actually be used
    • My experience is the brain has an exceedingly high rate of data loss =)


      Well, as long as you don't poor beer into the case every night, it shouldn't be too big a problem.
  • The economics prize [cnn.com] was given to researchers into "asymmetric information" - or how information affects your behaviour. Sounds interesting, but the reporter struggled to explain it:
    It also explored how people with inside knowledge of a high-technology company's financial prospects gain an edge over other investors, while people who don't fully understand a company's finances may invest unwisely.

    One assumes there was slightly more to their theories than this!

    More worryingly, why does one of the recipients look exactly like Steve Martin?

    • Re:Economics prize (Score:5, Informative)

      by camusflage ( 65105 ) on Monday December 10, 2001 @11:23PM (#2685567)
      One assumes there was slightly more to their theories than this!

      There's more. A lot more. The best "dumbed down" explanation is that of a used car sale. There's a buyer and a seller. Typically, the seller will know a lot more about the vehicle than the buyer. If the seller offers to sell a $15,000 car for $10,000, is this because the seller knows something the buyer doesn't, is the seller looking to unload it quickly, or is the seller just an idiot?

      It's a relatively simple concept, but one with profound impacts as far as markets go. Consider the dotcom bubble. Was it because the companies were really worth it, was it "irrational exuberance", or was it asymmetric information? The basic theory is that there's always going to be a certain degree of asymmetric information, but that in the extreme, the market breaks down [fuckedcompany.com].
      • > [asymmetric information is] a relatively simple concept, but one with profound impacts as far as markets go.

        And your .sig - referring to Operation Clambake [xenu.net] is another excellent example.

        The cult can exist only insofar as it retains an informational advantage over non-cultists. As soon as the "suckers" can discover the cult's core beliefs without spending $360,000, the cult's power evaporates.

    • Re:Economics prize (Score:2, Informative)

      by junkgrep ( 266550 )
      As noted above, the research essentially codifies the "market for lemons" theory of economics: a description of how asymetric information effects markets.

      The classic example is of used cars: where each car can either be a "lemon" (a bad one that will break down quickly) or a "plum" (good one that'll run fine). But while dealers know which each car is (knowing its history), consumers don't.
      Without some remedy, what the theory predicts will happen in this situation is this: consumers will only be willing to pay the _average_ value of both lemons and plums (to hedge their risk), which means that the prices they are willing to pay for a used car are usually below the value sellers are willing to get for their "plums." This has the effect of making dealers much more willing to offer lemons for sale than plums. Eventually, this means that the market for used cars becomes almost all lemons, and consumers lower their willingness to pay even further to reflect this. This is, needless to say, a sub-optimal outcome, so clearly defining it, as the Nobel Prize winners have, is truly useful for people who seek to identify and fix such problems.
    • It runs something like this: You know your used car is a good one, worth $15,000.
      All I know is that about half the used cars for sale are lemons, worth nothing, and about half are good ones, worth $15,000. I have no way of knowing which is which. On average, if I buy a bunch of these cars, I'll be ok if I pay $7,500 each.

      If you sell your good car for $7,500, you get screwed.
      If no-one will sell good cars for less than $15,000, then I know that there are no good cars for sale, and I don't buy at all.

      Both these outcomes are market failure due to imperfect information. Neither version is likely to last for long in the real world: some third party will come along and sell inspections (i.e., information) for a big chunk of the profits we are loosing.

      Of course, this is just the beginning. Take a look in Mas-Colell, Whinston and Green's Microeconomic Theory for more. I don't think Varian has it.

      More worryingly, why does one of the recipients look exactly like Steve Martin?

      Obviously, one of the economists who got the Nobel prize was wearing a Steve Martin mask, trying to pose as a celebrity. Some people will do anything to be noticed.

  • Professor Farnsworth (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Obligatory Futurama reference ("Mars University" episode):

    Professor: "It's a little experiment that may well win me the Nobel Prize."
    Leela: "In what field?"
    Professor: "I don't care, they all pay the same."

  • Cisco did a survey of Nobel Laureates... (Score:4, Informative)

    by F250SuperDuty ( 65363 ) on Monday December 10, 2001 @10:31PM (#2685470) Homepage

    ...regarding where the Internet might take us in the next 20 years.
    More information can be found here [cisco.com].
    -k

  • Who reads what.... (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by Anonymous Coward
    1. The Wall Street Journal is read by people who run the country.

    2. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the country.

    3. The Washington Post is read by people who think they should run the country.

    4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand the Washington Post. They do, however, like their smog statistics shown in pie charts.

    5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country, if they could spare the time, and if they didn't have to leave L.A. to do it.

    6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parent used to run the country, and they did a far superior job of it, thank you veddy much.

    7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country, and don't really care, as long as they can get a seat on the train.

    8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country either, as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.

    9. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure there is a country, or that anyone is running it; but whoever it is, they oppose all that they stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped, minority, feminist, atheist dwarfs, who also happen to be
    illegal aliens from any country or galaxy as long as they are democrats.

    10. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country but need the baseball scores.

    11. The Spokane Spokesman-Review is read by people who need high grade tinder to fire up their woodstoves, and can barely get their cars running in this cold.

    12.) /. is read by clueless screen gazers that have yet to learn that it takes more than a half-baked opinion and routine typing skills to run a country.
  • who won the nobel prize for "attempted chemistry"?

  • The CNN photo caption is wrong. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Johnny Vector ( 93021 ) on Monday December 10, 2001 @11:23PM (#2685566) Homepage
    The CNN photo has Wieman and Cornell reversed. Eric is the one on the left. Not that anyone cares, but, y'know... I knew Eric Cornell, I worked with Eric Cornell, and Carl is no Eric Cornell.

    And singing, what's up with that?

    • And singing, what's up with that? Johnny Vector

      I love the idea that, with the right spin, and sufficient charm, you can get particles to sing. I just hope they're not segregated based on color -- otherwise there'd be charges pending, a matter of real gravity. But fortunately there are strong forces in our society that would prevent such waves of abuse (although sometimes we fear that they seem like particularly weak forces). Anyway, I'm sure you get my point, which although not singular at least should come out on top -- or near the horizon at any event.
  • regarding: "Looks like Cisco has done a deal with CNN..." - Don't you think it would be nice if the advertising implicit in this statement had been screened out before the story was accepted?
  • Has anyone noted that the MIT presence [mit.edu] among the Nobel laureates this year is particularly strong? 8 of 14 had some MIT affiliation.
  • I read CNN's page about the Medicine prize, and all I got was that the winners had something to do with cancer. For real "in-depth" information on the prizewinners and their discoveries, forget CNN and go to the Nobel site at http://www.nobel.se/ (Click on the category then laureates) They have the presentation speeches and other content for those of us who can read above the 6th grade level. The illustrated presentations are especially cool.
  • Did any one ever win them all?

Slashdot Top Deals

This is now. Later is later.

Close