On 09 Oct 2013, at 22:22, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/9/2013 12:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 08 Oct 2013, at 23:56, LizR wrote:
Today the 2013 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to François
Englert (Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium) and Peter W.
Higgs (University of Edinburgh, UK). The official citation is “for
the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our
understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and
which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the
predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments
at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider.”
I know him very well. I begun my work in his team, with Robert
Brout. He asked me how to apply QM in cosmology, and I refer to the
MWI. He added some footnote in one of his papers, just referring to
Everett's original work, without any detail. He didn't like this,
but somehow understood it is hard to make sense of quantum
cosmology without it.
I am happy that after 50 years he is recognized as one the main
discover of the "Higgs boson". I am happy for Higgs too.
The seminal papers suggesting the higgs-field were written
independently about the same time by Higgs, by Englert and Brout,
and also by Kibble, Gaulnik, and Hagen. I've often thought the it
came to called the higgs boson just because it's a lot easier to say
"higgs" than "englert-brout" or "kibble-gaulnik-hagen". I
understand that Peter Higgs is a very nice, modest man and is a
little embarassed by having the particle named after him, although
he did develop the idea a little more than the others and is
But in my view, even more deserving are the thousands of engineers,
technicians, and physicists who designed and built the LHC and the
ATLAS and CMS detectors. Surely the most amazing machine ever built.
I agree. In a forum someone asked if the Nobel prize should not be
given to those who made the LHC, and the answer was that they were too
I find unfair also that there is no post-mortem Nobel prize, as Robert
Brout deserves it too, but then he died too early.
Well, the mathematician's Field medal is worse, you have to be younger
But all this is vanity. François Englert said that he was happy with
the Nobel prize, but that he was still more happier from having done
his fundamental research.
Now, the Nobel prize itself has been obscured by "Obama's peace
prize", like if it was giving him the right to use drones to kill
civilians, or to sign the NDAA ... Englert should have refuse it,
perhaps, like Sartre in France or Perelman in Russia, ... I am not
really serious, as it seems than the scientific Nobel prize is more
The Nobel Peace Prize has been wielded as a tool of political
influence and has thereby become almost meaningless. Obama got it
for being a little less bellicose that George Bush.
... before his term! (may be we are in a Gödel rotative universe,
with time loops, in which case they could give the Nobel prize of
physics, also before the research is done ... :)
"Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded
the Nobel Peace Prize."
--- Tom Lehrer
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.