Nobels are announced next month

>but who will get the prize for CRISPR?

>>Economics (Optional)
Ludwig von Mises

I don't care. The whole prize is tainted by the sham peace prizes given to Arafat, Kissinger, the North Vietnamese leader, Obama and the little pakistani girl who didn't actually do anything. It also doesn't help that the literature is by-definition usually required to be humanistic and uplifting (or at least cathartic) in some way, and therefore often bland.

It is true that many great advances in the sciences are historically recognized by the nobel, but then you have meme stuff like the buckyball. Name me an application of the buckyball apart from the cool fact that it's shaped like a soccer ball and you get to sound smart by knowing what it is and describing it.

I propose a splitting of the Nobel prize into its useful aspects (the STEM side) and its frequently worthless and hypocritical side (the non-STEM side), and I say this as a person who appreciates the non-STEM areas of human endeavor. But in the Nobel's case, the contrast couldn't be more stark, to the benefit of the self-esteem and smugness of the STEM crowd. Of course, this will never happen because such a split would tacitly acknowledge that one category of prizes is better than the other (which it actually is), to the denigration of the latter. The Nobel committee regularly use the event in order to make their own political statements as well, as in the absurd nomination of Obama before he had actually done anything - only as a pat-on-the-back to the "normally stupid" Americans for replacing Bush with a convenient figurehead.

Instead, I will look forward to knowing who the next Fields medalists are. Here too, however, a certain diversity quota seems likely, as the first and only female laureate promptly died of late, while fully 75% of all medalists /are still alive/ (the prize is young, and mathematicians lead dull, safe, largely uneventful lives). TPTB will be itching to have a vagina-medalist again, I'm told. But at least this doesn't rise to the above level of stupidity.

>Hoping it goes to Harry Gray or John Goodenough
I was thinking maybe like Raphael Levine, dude should've gotten one a long time ago, though the same could be said about dozens of scientists. Good choices btw.
>Gravitational waves detection
Can't say I agree, considering the people who made the theoretical prediction are all dead and there are thousands of people working at ligo unless they award to the entire collaboration somehow I don't think that'd fly, even if you justified giving it to the 'top brass' there's dozens of those, so who do you pick?
>a certain diversity quota seems likely
You know there are a few women alive who could legitimately win the fields medal, the two with the best chances are Maryna Viazovska and Sophie Morel, though I imagine what might happen is that neither win this round and Maryna gets the award in 2022 provided she can generalize her results on the sphere packing problem.
>Name me an application of the buckyball apart from the cool fact that it's shaped like a soccer ball and you get to sound smart by knowing what it is and describing it
You can make them into superconductors by doping them with potassium, in fact it was at one point the highest temperature superconductor out there, it isn't now but still.
It would be nice if Gell-Mann and Zweig finally got the prize for the quark model, but that's not happening. More likely than not it'll just be another set of three scientists who long since did Nobel caliber work and were never awarded (rip Tom Kibble)

try again

>stronk woman

Thank you for your thoughtful, calm and informed replies to my above tl;dr bitchfest about the nobel.

>The whole prize is tainted by the sham peace prizes given to Arafat, Kissinger, the North Vietnamese leader, Obama and the little pakistani girl who didn't actually do anything.

I know this is bait but reminder to any brainlet memeing this retarded argument that the first legit winner of a Nobel prize that actually tainted the awards was António Egas Moniz who pushed psychosurgery and lobotomy. In which both the field and technique lost nearly all credibility within a matter of a few decades. And because of said prize and winner the gross abuse of medical malpractice was utilize destroying the lives of thousands of people.

Retards like you don't even know the meaning of the word "tainted" if you think the peace prizes given recently did some kind of wrong to world.

It isn't bait at all. In fact, we agree. Read on!.

Your posting of a person who did an awful thing in the sciences only strengthens my above original point. What did you hope to achieve by posting a winner in the /sciences/ which only goes to my point?

My basic point is that the Nobel Prize is a sham, and I stressed the non-STEM side as proof. You gave an example on the STEM side, of how awful things are recognized by the Nobel. So, we agree! The prize is garbage. What did you mean? Is English your first language?

I think that you chose your image as a subconscious reflection of your own state of mind about whatever argument you were trying to make (you were the cat). But we really agree.

So then why did you use Nobel Peace prize winners in your argument in a thread that focused on all but the peace prize?

Why didn't you bring up António Egas Moniz as your initial argument which would have legitimized your post more? You could have easily brought up lobotomy and other subjects that have yielded little producible benefit in comparison to others that did not win the prizes.

Where you hoping to irritate anons like me who actually follow the Nobels somewhat moderately? Because if you did good job.

I feel stronger than ever that we really agree. Great!

I think that all that you really wanted of me was to post an example of a STEM laureate, in order to make the point that we both agree on, and that you already knew about, in order to validate your own knowledge. I happily concede your citaiton of the lobotomy-man, and I validate your knowledge! The Nobel Prize is shit!

We agree! No more argument, of course.

Is this post satirical, or are you actually retarded?

>>Physiology or Medicine
Transgender Breakthroughs
>>Chemistry
Hormone Replacement Science
>>Physics
Feminine Fluid Fysics
>>Economics (Optional)
"How illiterate refugees without a 1st grade level education will surely trigger an entrepreneurial boom and bring forth a new economic gold age for all in a country which they don't understand the local language, customs, or law"
>>Literature (Optional)
The Conceptual Penis

Not until all the litigations are over.

>>Gravitational waves detection
>Can't say I agree, considering the people who made the theoretical prediction are all dead and there are thousands of people working at ligo unless they award to the entire collaboration somehow I don't think that'd fly, even if you justified giving it to the 'top brass' there's dozens of those, so who do you pick?
A lot of CERN awards were to the group heads where hundreds had been working. And the transistor also had a lot of dead theoreticians when it was awarded to the group at Bell.

dis dick

>Physics
Kip Thorne for gravitational waves

My professor who is friends with Kip told us he had said he didn't want to to win the Nobel Prize as it controls your life afterwards.

My bet for the Fields Medal in 2018:

Maryna Viazovska
Ciprian Manolescu
Sophie Morel
Peter Scholze

Kip Thorne was already awarded the Breakthrough Prize alongside Rainer Weiss and Ronald Drever. It's most likely the trio will share the Nobel as well.

The onus is on you to explain why your feelings are wrong. Snark is feminine, impresses no one, and above all does not win arguments.

Fullerenes are pretty commonly used for organic photovoltaics and some inorganic cells.

Maryanthe Malliaris may end up being a dark horse, she and Saharon Shelah solved a major open problem in set theory.

Scholze in 2022, he's only 29

>Physiology or Medicine
someone I never heard of
>Chemistry
someone I never heard of
>Physics
someone I never heard of
>Economics (Optional)
not a nobel prize
>Literature (Optional)
someone I never heard of
>Peace
someone I never heard of

>Unironically following Nobels
I too like to feel intelligent by knowing who gets what prize from subjectively important people for subjectively important endeavors.
Non-STEM disciplines being chosen by an even more subjective lottery is the icing on the cake.

Replace economics with computer science

Replace Literature with Engineering

Replace Peace with Maths

I don't know about the need for straight up replacements, but those things do deserve medals in their own categories.

>Replace Peace with Maths
we have fields and abel for that

There's no way Kip will git it without Rai Weiss who was arguably more important. Ronald Drever sadly died early this year so he won't.

>Nobel Prize as it controls your life afterwards.
in what sense/way?

but user, literature IS engineering