Physics Nobel Won By Laser Wizardry -- Laureates Include First Woman in 55 Years (nature.com)
A trio of laser scientists have won the 2018 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work using intense beams to capture superfast processes and to manipulate tiny objects. From a report: The laureates include Donna Strickland, who is the first woman to win the award in 55 years. Strickland, at the University of Waterloo, Canada, will share half the 9 million Swedish krona (US$1 million) prize with her former supervisor, Gerard Mourou, from the Ecole Polytechnique, in Palaiseau, France. The other half of the prize went to Arthur Ashkin, of Bell Laboratories in Holmdel, New Jersey.
Strickland and Mourou pioneered a way to produce the shortest, most intense pulses of light ever created, which are now used throughout science to unravel processes that previously appeared instantaneous, such as the motion of electrons within atoms, as well as in laser-eye surgery. Ashkin won the prize for his pioneering development of 'optical tweezers', beams of laser light that can grab and control microscopic objects such as viruses and cells. Further reading: The Guardian.
Strickland and Mourou pioneered a way to produce the shortest, most intense pulses of light ever created, which are now used throughout science to unravel processes that previously appeared instantaneous, such as the motion of electrons within atoms, as well as in laser-eye surgery. Ashkin won the prize for his pioneering development of 'optical tweezers', beams of laser light that can grab and control microscopic objects such as viruses and cells. Further reading: The Guardian.
she will never know if she was really worthy of it, or just a diversity token.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
"Gender doesn't matter! Everyone is exactly the same as everyone else!"
Yet we're constantly having "I'm a woman therefore my accomplishments are special!"
If gender doesn't matter, why is it constantly thrown in our faces?
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Yet we're constantly having "I'm a woman therefore my accomplishments are special!"
You seem to be mistaking an argument for equality for an argument for preference. Perhaps you would understand if your accomplishments were dismissed as unimportant because of your skin color or age or gender or some other irrelevant bit of your physiology rather than the quality of your ideas. Women aren't arguing for special treatment. They are arguing for EQUAL treatment. It only sounds like a call for "special" treatment to people who are missing the point.
If gender doesn't matter, why is it constantly thrown in our faces?
Gender SHOULDN'T matter for topics like this yet It DOES matter because too many people (like yourself) make it matter in the wrong places. Gender is supposed to matter in some circumstances but physics isn't one of them. It is really hard to explain why there hasn't been a single woman worthy of a Nobel prize in Physics in over a half century without invoking some amount of sexism in the explanation. Maybe unintentional sexism but sexism all the same. They don't deserve the award because of their gender but they also shouldn't be excluded from it because of their gender either. Sexism is real and if you think fighting against it is "throwing it in your face" then you are part of the problem.
Nobel peace prize given to:
Obama - ordered the killing of thousands with drone strikes
Al Gore - made a movie
Yasser Arafat - a terrorist leader
Nobel peace prize NOT given to:
Gandhi - advocating peaceful protesting
Pretty much sums it up
People do not get that fundamental physics is over
Yeah yeah, people were making this bullshit argument centuries ago.
(you would not call seriously "string theory" "scientific" would you?).
As long as it make predictions that can be empirically tested then of course I would.
I know I am repeating what Lord Kelvin said to his embarrassment just before great discoveries in relativistic physics, quantum physics, etc.
And he was just as wrong as you are.
The clear indication that we are close to the limit is absence of ANY fundamental discoveries since a long time ago.
What are you babbling about? You are in a scientific golden age for discoveries. Furthermore we have well known holes in our knowledge of fundamental physics. We have no way to reconcile gravity to quantum mechanics. We can't explain large amounts of seemingly missing matter in the universe. Just because we're not rolling out a new theory of special relativity every other week doesn't mean we've explained everything. It was literally centuries between Newton and Einstein but the only reason Einstein's work was such a breakthrough was because of a LOT of important work done in time between the two men.
Call them for what they are: Nobel Prizes in Technology
You seem to have a huge misapprehension. Physics only advances when we can built devices to test our theories independent of human senses. Theories are fine but they are meaningless without the tools to verify them. Furthermore we cannot refine our theories without the data from these tools which inform us how the world actually behaves. A theory of gravity waves is meaningless unless you have some tool to test for their existence. Physics isn't just blackboards and chalk.
We are gradually shifting towards applied science and mere technology. All of three fields, basic science, applied science and technology are essential for humanity, but the fact is that the first one is almost over or probably over already.
When you see a shift away from basic science and into applied science / technology, it generally just means our instrumentation is not sufficient for basic science to march forward at an equal pace. Once technology improves enough to enable new methods in basic science, the pendulum swings back.
We have so much left to learn that we are nowhere near hitting the limits of what science can discover.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
> If a woman wants to be a physicist, nothing will stop her. If she doesn't, no one can make her.
That's just incredibly naive.
Your statement is bullshit. You apparently believe thatr men are pushed along, with nary a cloudy day, their road to physics paved with gold.
When the fact is - it's not easy. This is not a fraternity. Today, there are sexists on both sides. There are large scale disagreements.
But here's the truth coward. This is not a field for the easily dissuaded. If you have a theory, there are going to be those who oppose it. Either because of belief, or even devil's advocate. I've sat in rooms where my ideas are called bullshit. I've been called an asshole. (so what's new)The lady physicists and scientists get no free pass, nor do they want one. The opposition is part of the process.
But here's the kicker.
I don't care. Neither do they. They are in this because this is what they want to do with their life. This is not a world where certain groups are above criticism.
Naive? What is naive is the concept that anyone, male or female will sit down one day and say "I think my passion is to be a physicist! At least until someone anyone opposes me, then I'm nothing and it is their fault."
Sorry cowardly entity, but if you want to be a physicist, you must have passion - real passion, not one that you get from a career day in 3rd grade, but one you know you have. And real passion is a white hot pillar of flame that drags you along with it. The men and women who I made careers with had it. Interestingly enough, the biggest skeptics of today's modus were those same women.
Today, some folks are attempting to redefine passion as a mild interest. In truth, so few people have real passion.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Why are there 4 fundamental forces (wait, 5?) instead of 2 or 3? Why the three dimensions (plus time)? Why is space expanding? Will it expand forever? Why does the fabric of space wobble? Are gravitons a thing? And I still don't get how black-holes can be singularities, but retain rotational momentum, and be a donut... but also still a singularity. Aren't we still confused about how quantum mechanics jive with... gravity and electromagnetism? We've still only got interpretations of just whateverthefuck is going on in the dual slit experiment. Copenhagen is winning, I guess? Wooo popularity contests.
There's plenty of fundamental physics we don't know. I dunno if we'll ever get around to answering them, but you can't say "it's done".
And yet there hasn't been a female Nobel Prize for Physics will in over 50 years. No matter how you cut it, at least *some* of the reason for such a long gap between awards has to be driven by sexism.
It's good luck to be superstitious