The Nobels for physics have been announced, and I thought the story had some interesting implications for us MAists. Look at the reaction of the three Japanese physicists who shared the prize. One says, he had pretty much given up any hope of it, by this point. One says, hey, I was just doing what I like to do. And the third one says... "Big deal!!" Different reactions, but all three illustrate the point of one of my favorite quotations from the New Testament: "Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?"
The prize was awarded for one of the most profound insights, and surprising followups, in all science: the concept of physical symmetries (which is kind of the norm, since all conserved quantities in nature are associated with a symmetry), and the fact that there are spectacular examples where those symmetries are broken, even thought the laws of physics themselves are symmetrical—the idea is, yes, the laws, expressed by certain equations, are symmetrical, but particular solutions are not. This discovery of 'broken symmetry' has been the foundation of modern physics, and note that these discoveries were made just shy of half a century ago, and only twelve years later, amongst the three winners. It took the Nobel Committee in the vicinity of 36 to 48 years to get around to honoring these guys. Did their colleagues need to wait till this year to recognize how outstanding their achievements were? Did it suddenly make them great, in their own or anyone else's eyes, when they got The Phone Call from Stockholm? Pretty bloody unlikely—this stuff is the theoretical lifeblood of every working physicist in high-energy/fundamental physics. The late hour of the award, especially for Nambu at 87 years old, might be a reflection on the wisdom of the Nobel Committee (and there's plenty of grounds to question that wisdom, or even their good intentions), but never on what these guys did.
Now look at the rank-hogging, posturing and pretense that we see so often in the MAs, with people strutting around at way-inflated belt levels, or arguing bitterly who was the designated lineage-carrier, or who was so-and-so's favorite student or got the Good Stuff that so-and-so reserved only for an elite in-group, or stuff like that... it's not a MA thing exclusively, but we do see an awful lot of it in the MAs. And it makes me wonder, does anyone think that in reality they've added one tiny little bit to their stature when they get an extra bit of paper distinction? The physicists who won the prize this year pretty much knew who, and how good, they were, and their fellow physicists knew who and how good they were, without the Nobel. That's pretty much true for all of us, I think—you get to a certain point and people know just what you have (and haven't) done, and 'taking thought' (i.e., worrying, fretting, rationalizing) isn't going to change it one bit. I just wonder why so many people in our neck of the woods seem not to recognize that... :idunno:
The prize was awarded for one of the most profound insights, and surprising followups, in all science: the concept of physical symmetries (which is kind of the norm, since all conserved quantities in nature are associated with a symmetry), and the fact that there are spectacular examples where those symmetries are broken, even thought the laws of physics themselves are symmetrical—the idea is, yes, the laws, expressed by certain equations, are symmetrical, but particular solutions are not. This discovery of 'broken symmetry' has been the foundation of modern physics, and note that these discoveries were made just shy of half a century ago, and only twelve years later, amongst the three winners. It took the Nobel Committee in the vicinity of 36 to 48 years to get around to honoring these guys. Did their colleagues need to wait till this year to recognize how outstanding their achievements were? Did it suddenly make them great, in their own or anyone else's eyes, when they got The Phone Call from Stockholm? Pretty bloody unlikely—this stuff is the theoretical lifeblood of every working physicist in high-energy/fundamental physics. The late hour of the award, especially for Nambu at 87 years old, might be a reflection on the wisdom of the Nobel Committee (and there's plenty of grounds to question that wisdom, or even their good intentions), but never on what these guys did.
Now look at the rank-hogging, posturing and pretense that we see so often in the MAs, with people strutting around at way-inflated belt levels, or arguing bitterly who was the designated lineage-carrier, or who was so-and-so's favorite student or got the Good Stuff that so-and-so reserved only for an elite in-group, or stuff like that... it's not a MA thing exclusively, but we do see an awful lot of it in the MAs. And it makes me wonder, does anyone think that in reality they've added one tiny little bit to their stature when they get an extra bit of paper distinction? The physicists who won the prize this year pretty much knew who, and how good, they were, and their fellow physicists knew who and how good they were, without the Nobel. That's pretty much true for all of us, I think—you get to a certain point and people know just what you have (and haven't) done, and 'taking thought' (i.e., worrying, fretting, rationalizing) isn't going to change it one bit. I just wonder why so many people in our neck of the woods seem not to recognize that... :idunno: