[spodek]

It sounds like an odd award to me. I can't see how its existence would motivate anyone to behave any differently, though I like that it creates more social recognition of science and scientists.

It reminds me of Richard Feynman not seeing any point in honors like the Nobel Prize. It may apply here, though many people think differently than he. Still, I suspect people don't go into physics for the money. They probably like the recognition of their peers, but I expect winners of this new award will already have that.

Feynman said, "I don’t see that it makes any point that someone in the Swedish academy just decides that this work is noble enough to receive a prize — I’ve already gotten the prize. The prize is the pleasure of finding a thing out, the kick in the discovery, the observation that other people use it — those are the real things. The honors are unreal to me. I don’t believe in honors."

From the article: "future recipients of the Fundamental Physics Prize, to be awarded annually, will be decided by previous winners."

More on Feynman, again not directly related, but close: he became so exasperated [at the National Academy of Sciences] that he resigned his membership, saying that he saw no point in belonging to an organization that spent most of its time deciding who to let in.

[lusr]

It rewards people who contribute to science, who in turn can use the reward as they see fit. It is logical to believe that allocating wealth to people who have demonstrated high quality results will increase the number of future high quality results, which is surely a desirable result.

I'm puzzled by Feynman's attitude in those comments - he doesn't discuss the prize money at all, which one can easily see e.g. funding a number of students who might otherwise not be able to afford the type of education he received and thereby not receive the type of pleasure he speaks of.