Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by luckyt 3356 days ago
> just eight have won Nobel Prizes

You pick 2000 teenagers, and 8 go on to win a Nobel Prize, and you're still not satisfied? High expectations much...

4 comments

Author also contradicts himself.

First the author laments only 8 novel prizes of the batch. Then in the next sentence goes on to praise Lisa Randall for revolutionising physics, and notes that for every Lisa Randall there are dozens that fall short of their potential.

Ironic because Lisa Randall didn't win a Nobel Prize in physics. Yet.....

> Ironic because Lisa Randall didn't win a Nobel Prize in physics. Yet.....

And given her current work and experimental results there is no reasonable prospect she ever will, unlike people that you know that would win sooner or later (unless they died)

> For every Lisa Randall who revolutionizes theoretical physics

She did not revolutionize Physics. Not even close. She barely made a dent.

Yeah this is actually a terrible article. The author keeps confusing creativity with success. And he keeps thinking that "creative" people are the ones that change the world, which is ridiculous. To change the world, you need to be almost insanely stubborn and almost insanely self-confident.
Agreed. This article may or may not have made some good points, but I couldn't keep reading after that.
Same here - an instant blocker for me.
That means 1 in 250 go on to win a Nobel Prize. An absurd rate.

I'd bet money that the only group to perform better over the same timeframe is the list Nobel Prize winners themselves.

Edit: I stand corrected. Solvay Conference had 15/29 one year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvay_Conference#Fifth_Confer...

Isn't the group of CalTech alumns slightly worse but on around the same order of magnitude?