The US has most winners – and there are depressingly few women
*The Nobel science *prizes will be awarded at the start of October and among those named as the latest members of what many see as the world's most prestigious club will be one middle-aged man in the US.
This bold assertion is not based on clairvoyance, a pattern in the tea leaves, or a leak from the famously secretive Scandinavians who choose the winners. The various Nobel committees have yet to cast their votes. But I will place the bet regardless. The odds are so much in my favour.
The Nobels were launched in 1901, with an overwhelming emphasis on Europe. Indeed more than a decade passed before the award went to anyone who wasn't a European.
But in the decades since, Europe's domination has waned as other nations have become stronger contenders. The US has risen to such prominence that it now has far more Nobels than any other country – and more than all the European nations combined. The US has indeed won at least one prize a year since the second world war.
Of course, America is not guaranteed a Nobel this year. As with stocks and shares, past performance is not an indicator of future results. But the disclaimer is too strong when it comes to the Nobels. America has invested heavily in science and deservedly reaps the rewards. The rise of other regions, chiefly Asia, is worth keeping an eye on, but is unlikely to wipe the US from the winners' table just yet.
There are three Nobel prizes in the sciences: physiology or medicine, physics, and chemistry, though the last of these is increasingly awarded for what most people would regard as biology. Since each prize can be shared by a maximum of three people, the number of winners each year ranges from three to nine.
Given such numbers, it is hardly surprising that at least one winner every year will be a man. But it is the extent to which the prizes go to men that is striking. In more than 100 years, the number of times that the science prizes have gone to women stands at only 17. The figures are depressing and reflect problems that run deep at all levels of academia. The balance may be shifting a touch: nearly a third of women winners were honoured since 2000. But this is a mountain that remains to be moved.
*Other shifts are *more firmly under way. In times gone by, the Nobel prize enforced the stereotype of the brilliant young genius. In 1915, Lawrence Bragg won the prize at the tender age of 25. In 1932, Werner Heisenberg bagged a Nobel at the age of 31. But prize winning work is increasingly done by older scientists.
As a result, more winners are now middle-aged or retired. The oldest recipient was Raymond Davis, who won the prize in 2002 at the age of 88. He died four years later. And so a word of warning: hopeful scientists must be patient scientists.
Whoever wins the Nobel prizes in October will bask in the glory and kudos. But the cash is nothing to be sniffed at, and here there is good news. Hefty tax bills and restrictions on investments put a serious dent in the prize money between 1920 and 1980. During that time, the winnings hovered at around a third of their original 1901 value. In the 1990s, tax exemptions and more active investments led to a sharp increase in the Nobel prize money and, while not at a historic high, the winnings stand close to the amount that began the most prestigious club in the world. Reported by guardian.co.uk 1 day ago.
*The Nobel science *prizes will be awarded at the start of October and among those named as the latest members of what many see as the world's most prestigious club will be one middle-aged man in the US.
This bold assertion is not based on clairvoyance, a pattern in the tea leaves, or a leak from the famously secretive Scandinavians who choose the winners. The various Nobel committees have yet to cast their votes. But I will place the bet regardless. The odds are so much in my favour.
The Nobels were launched in 1901, with an overwhelming emphasis on Europe. Indeed more than a decade passed before the award went to anyone who wasn't a European.
But in the decades since, Europe's domination has waned as other nations have become stronger contenders. The US has risen to such prominence that it now has far more Nobels than any other country – and more than all the European nations combined. The US has indeed won at least one prize a year since the second world war.
Of course, America is not guaranteed a Nobel this year. As with stocks and shares, past performance is not an indicator of future results. But the disclaimer is too strong when it comes to the Nobels. America has invested heavily in science and deservedly reaps the rewards. The rise of other regions, chiefly Asia, is worth keeping an eye on, but is unlikely to wipe the US from the winners' table just yet.
There are three Nobel prizes in the sciences: physiology or medicine, physics, and chemistry, though the last of these is increasingly awarded for what most people would regard as biology. Since each prize can be shared by a maximum of three people, the number of winners each year ranges from three to nine.
Given such numbers, it is hardly surprising that at least one winner every year will be a man. But it is the extent to which the prizes go to men that is striking. In more than 100 years, the number of times that the science prizes have gone to women stands at only 17. The figures are depressing and reflect problems that run deep at all levels of academia. The balance may be shifting a touch: nearly a third of women winners were honoured since 2000. But this is a mountain that remains to be moved.
*Other shifts are *more firmly under way. In times gone by, the Nobel prize enforced the stereotype of the brilliant young genius. In 1915, Lawrence Bragg won the prize at the tender age of 25. In 1932, Werner Heisenberg bagged a Nobel at the age of 31. But prize winning work is increasingly done by older scientists.
As a result, more winners are now middle-aged or retired. The oldest recipient was Raymond Davis, who won the prize in 2002 at the age of 88. He died four years later. And so a word of warning: hopeful scientists must be patient scientists.
Whoever wins the Nobel prizes in October will bask in the glory and kudos. But the cash is nothing to be sniffed at, and here there is good news. Hefty tax bills and restrictions on investments put a serious dent in the prize money between 1920 and 1980. During that time, the winnings hovered at around a third of their original 1901 value. In the 1990s, tax exemptions and more active investments led to a sharp increase in the Nobel prize money and, while not at a historic high, the winnings stand close to the amount that began the most prestigious club in the world. Reported by guardian.co.uk 1 day ago.