Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Kizmet, Oct 5, 2016.
The Chemistry Prize
It's interesting to look at the recipients' institutional affiliations.
So far, the Medicine/Biology prize (for investigating how cells adapt to changing oxygen levels) has gone to Harvard, Johns Hopkins and Oxford researchers.
Although William Kaelin, the Harvard researcher, seems to actually be on the staff of the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, which is a teaching affiliate of Harvard Medical School. I wonder if he's just an adjunct at Harvard (the way that scientific staff at the Salk Institute are all adjuncts at UCSD. I'm sure that Harvard will lose no time in claiming him as one of theirs, though). What's more, his highest degree is an MD. ([irony]Imagine how he might have succeeded if he had a real doctorate![/irony])
The Chemistry prize (for lithium ion batteries!) to chemists at U. Texas Austin, SUNY Binghamton and Meijo University in Japan (I believe that this is their third Nobel laureate).
Though Akiro Yohino appears to mostly be an industrial researcher, having spent his career (to the present) with the Asahi Kasai Company where he's General Manager of his own Yoshino Laboratory, doing advanced battery research. (He's probably just an adjunct at Meijo, advising doctoral students or something like that.) Interestingly he did a bachelors and masters in engineering (U. Osaka) in the 1970's, and only completed a doctorate (U. Kyoto) in 2005, after he had co-invented the lithium-ion battery in the 1980's. ([irony]Thus proving once again that a person is nothing without a doctorate.[/irony].)
You're right, that was illuminating!
This is a great (and funny) observation. There's this too,
Jack Kilby won the Nobel prize in physics in 2000 for inventing the first integrated circuit. He has 'only' a masters in electrical engineering from the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee.
Koichi Tanaka shared the Nobel prize in chemistry in 2002 for developing a novel method for mass spectrometric analyses of biological macromolecules. He has 'only' a bachelors in electrical engineering from Tohoku University.
I love a good crossover post. ALIENS!
Here come old flat top....
Not only was it absurd to give it to a songwriter, they didn't even get it right. Leonard Cohen (now passed) and Tom Waits should both have been ahead of Zimmerman.
Embarrassingly, I've never heard of either Literature winner. Has Ted Heiks???
The thing with the Literature Prize is that you are always safest picking the authors that you (and everyone else you know) has never heard of.
Greta goes home empty-handed as the Peace Prize goes to Abiy Ahmed
Sounds like a neat guy and a worthy recipient.
I had my money on the guy next door, Sheikh Djibouti. (Apologies to both Frank Zappa and Hugh Casey.)
Abiy Ahmed was about as good a choice as they ever make. And I had one of those "uh-oh" moments when I realized he's just a shade younger than I am. :-O
Well, the member of the Shenzi pack who was born in Addis Abeba is both happy and proud, but also aware of the challenges Ethiopia is facing.
K, well if Yasser Arafat can win a Nobel Prize for only being a per-diem terrorist instead of a full time terrorist and if Barack Obama can win a Nobel Prize just for existing (or, to be fair, also using polling data to determine what his supposed personal opinions should be at any given moment), then I see no reason why Greta shouldn't have gotten a Nobel Prize for making mean faces at a president that the press doesn't like.
"Terrorist" is one way of looking at it. "Effective asymmetric warrior" would be another. As a (now retired) military officer, I got to study this subject in my professional development. The idea of asymmetric war--war using guerrilla tactics and other means--against a mightier foe to expel him from your land--was a robust one. My favorite example is the North Vietnamese. They failed to win a single major battle against the US--including the Tet Offensive. But they won the war, just as Ho predicted (and explained to the US when they refused to help him get rid of the French).
One person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
Star Trek fans will remember the episode where Dr. Crusher is kidnapped by a terrorist leader who tells her, "I've studied your history. I am no different from your own George Washington."
Different perceptions are nothing new. (Paul Simon: "One man's ceiling is another man's floor.")
From 1947's Finian's Rainbow:
When a rich man doesn't want to work
He's a bon vivant.
But when a poor man doesn't want to work,
He's a laughter, he's a lounger
he's a lazier good for nothing
He's a jerk!
When a rich man loses on a horse
Oh, isn't he the sport!
When a poor man loses on a horse
He's a gambler, he's a spender
He's a low life, he's a reason for divorce!
When a rich man chases after dames
He's a man about town,
But when a poor man chases after dames
He's a bounder, he's a rounder
He's a rotter, and a lot of dirty names!
I think that people's willingness to agree with this idea is likely to be dependent on how you define those terms. They are both used widely and variously by many people.
Separate names with a comma.