[yorwba]

I don't think even the Cultural Revolution or anything else Mao did had much of an effect on Nobel prize-worthy research, simply because there wasn't much to disrupt to begin with. In terms of education, the biggest change was in secondary school enrollment, which more than doubled during the Cultural Revolution before dropping back down, which I assume represents people staying students for longer instead of graduating, rather than an expansion of access. University education remained a rarity for long after that, only surpassing 10% enrollment in 2002: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/primary-secondary-enrollm...

I guess we'll see Chinese scientists winning Nobels at a rate commensurate with other big countries in 20–40 years or so.

[hker]

> I don't think even the Cultural Revolution or anything else Mao did had much of an effect on Nobel prize-worthy research, simply because there wasn't much to disrupt to begin with.

Count points:

- Intellectuals, academics, and teachers were persecuted, attacked, and killed by the youth (the Red Guards), in all schools and institutions in China.

- Search for “scholars killed during the cultural revolution”, or “list of scholars abnormally died in China during the cultural revolution” (or for a short list in Chinese https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-cn/中华人民共和国被迫害人士列表#科学技术人士). This includes the leader of Two Bombs, One Satellite (nuclear weapon, ICBM, artificial satellite) 赵九章. Besides, those returned from overseas were considered traitors or spies, and just within the Chinese Academy of Sciences (top science institution), there are 229 scholars died due to the Cultural Revolution [1]. This destroyed the environment needed to do great science. Imagine if Yang went back to China in the early 1950s.

[1]: https://blog.wenxuecity.com/myblog/74771/201904/2157.html "文革时中科院131位科学家被打倒 229人遭迫害致死"

> I guess we'll see Chinese scientists winning Nobels at a rate commensurate with other big countries in 20–40 years or so.

Such predictions—Chinese scientists will win more science Nobels—has been made long ago. In 1998, “The Chinese-American Nobel Laureate Chen Ning Yang has also predicted that mainland scientists will win a prize within twenty years – even more than one, if the country’s economic development continues at its current rate.“ [2]

[2]: https://china-us.uoregon.edu/pdf/Minerva-2004.pdf "CHINESE SCIENCE AND THE ‘NOBEL PRIZE COMPLEX’"

But reality shows otherwise, not until scientists and academics are respected in China. During COVID, politics overruled science, resulting in the Zero-COVID policy, which were brought down by widespread protests, not by science (counter evidence to the ineffectiveness of the Zero-COVID policy).

Unless you are implying that you predict a regime change by that time...

[yorwba]

Of course the number of scholars killed is large in absolute terms and relative to the size of the Chinese research ecosystem at the time, but it's also small relative to the number of researchers worldwide at the time and to the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of Chinese scientists researching all kinds of things now, which is the result of explosive growth primarily over the past few decades.

Chen-Ning Yang was technically not wrong with his 1998 prediction, since Tu Youyou got 1/3 of the 2015 Nobel in medicine, but it didn't really make sense for him to link this to continued development, since the delay between discovery and award means that most of the prizes from 1998–2018 were for work that was already done before he made his prediction.

Over the same time frame, tertiary school enrollment went from 6.3% to 53.4%, and my 20–40-year prediction is based on a guess of how long it will take for the work of all those freshly-minted scientists to enter the range of consideration for a Nobel.

[hker]

Quantity ≠ Quality.

> Chen-Ning Yang was technically not wrong with his 1998 prediction, since Tu Youyou got 1/3 of the 2015 Nobel in medicine, but it didn't really make sense for him to link this to continued development, since the delay between discovery and award means that most of the prizes from 1998–2018 were for work that was already done before he made his prediction.

Agreed. Though to nitpick, the part on “even more than one, if the country’s economic development continues at its current rate” is technically wrong, if we just count Chinese Nobel scientists developed in Mainland China (only Tu Youyou).

Chen-Ning Yang was bullish on Chinese science, but reality did not deliver.

Shing-Tung Yau is as bullish on Chinese mathematics in the future, but even he admitted that China is still decades behind in mathematical research, due to systematic issue which ‘“places too much emphasis on material rewards” and tends to encourage young researchers to work for titles instead of scientific advancements’. [1]

[1]: https://archive.is/MRDlP "China has problems to solve before its mathematics research can rise above WWII levels, scholar says"

This is a problem with the culture of science.