In article <··········@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>, ······@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Cameron Laird) writes:
> There's no need to presume. <URL:http://www.nobel.ki.se/cgi-bin/
> uncgi/nobel?to=17;;&lng=0&bkp=4&ctr=1&picb=0&gfx=1> excerpts and
> translates Nobel's will:
>
> ... annually distributed in the form of prizes
> to those who, during the preceding year, shall
> have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind.
> The said interest shall be divided into five
> equal parts, which shall be apportioned as fol-
> lows: one part to the person who shall have made
> the most important discovery or invention within
> the field of physics; one part to the person who
> shall have made the most important chemical
> discovery or improvement; one part to the person
> who shall have made the most important discovery
> within the domain of physiology or medicine; one
> part to the person who shall have produced in the
> field of literature the most outstanding work of
> an idealistic tendency; and one part to the per-
> son who shall have done the most or the best work
> for fraternity between nations, for the abolition
> or reduction of standing armies and for the hold-
> ing and promotion of peace congresses.
Then why was a Nobel prize of economics created?
Doesn't that mean that the executors of the will have some powers to
change the system according to the evolution of our society?
If economics qualifies, then why not computer science?
> 'Doesn't seem to me that RMS qualifies. Why was this in dispute?
Well, that's another question.
--
David Monniaux, normalien, maths/informatique, Ecole Normale Superieure de Lyon
(mathematics and computer science student)
e-mail: ········@ens-lyon.fr http://www.ens-lyon.fr/~dmonniau
On 15 Nov 1995 15:06:09 GMT, David Monniaux (········@ens-lyon.fr) wrote:
: In article <··········@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>, ······@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Cameron Laird) writes:
:
: > There's no need to presume. <URL:http://www.nobel.ki.se/cgi-bin/
: > uncgi/nobel?to=17;;&lng=0&bkp=4&ctr=1&picb=0&gfx=1> excerpts and
: > translates Nobel's will:
: > [...]
:
: Then why was a Nobel prize of economics created?
: Doesn't that mean that the executors of the will have some powers to
: change the system according to the evolution of our society?
: If economics qualifies, then why not computer science?
Because computer science, as a field, doesn't really have a grasp
on the fundamental problems that face it, and is all too aware of that
fact. (i.e., the ``Software Crisis'' that has been facing us down every
day for the last twenty years.) Economics, on the other hand, doesn't
have a grasp on the fundamental problems that face it, and don't even
realize it.
--
"[I]n fact, I didn't know that cats _could_ grin."
"They all can," said the Duchess; "and most of 'em do."
"I don't know of any that do," Alice said very politely, feeling quite
pleased to have gotten into a conversation.
"You don't know much," said the Duchess; "and that's a fact."
Erik Naggum <····@naggum.no> wrote:
> The Memorial Prize in Economics was instituted in 1969, and is funded
> by the central bank of Sweden, not by the Nobel estate. A similar new
> prize could be instituted if someone had enough money.
Although there are no Nobel prizes in mathematics and computer science,
the Fields Medal and the Turing Award are well-respected (though not
quite as prestigious, nor as lucrative).
--
Gareth Rees
>[David Monniaux]
>
>| Then why was a Nobel prize of economics created? Doesn't that mean
>| that the executors of the will have some powers to change the system
>| according to the evolution of our society? If economics qualifies,
>| then why not computer science?
>
>the Memorial Prize in Economics was instituted in 1969, and is funded by
>the central bank of Sweden, not by the Nobel estate. a similar new prize
>could be instituted if someone had enough money.
I had wondered why there wasn't a Nobel Prize in mathematics (yes, I
was a mathematics major). One of my professors explained that it was
because Dr. Nobel's wife had had an affair with a French mathematician,
whos name I cannot recall. But after all these years, he might have
gotten over it.
So it seems that the best course of action would be to press for a
prize in mathematics. Then, by claiming that computer science is
really just applied mathematics, RMS would become eligable for a
Nobel prize.
In <···················@daacdev1.stx.com> ·····@daacdev1.stx.com (John Kodis) writes:
> I had wondered why there wasn't a Nobel Prize in mathematics (yes, I
> was a mathematics major). One of my professors explained that it was
> because Dr. Nobel's wife had had an affair with a French mathematician,
> whos name I cannot recall. But after all these years, he might have
> gotten over it.
That's apparently an urban legend. According to the sci.math FAQ,
Mr. Nobel was never married. Probably the real reasons are that he
didn't care much for mathematics, and that there was already a well
known Scandinavian prize for mathematicians.
For more information, see
<http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/sci-math-faq/nobel/faq.html>
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ···@thomsoft.com (···@alsys.com still works)
TeleSoft^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Alsys^H^H^H^H^H Thomson Software Products
10251 Vista Sorrento Parkway, Suite 300, San Diego, CA, USA, 92121-2718
Because I'm weird enough, I'm sick enough, and doggone it, people fear me!
In article <···················@daacdev1.stx.com> ·····@daacdev1.stx.com (John Kodis) writes:
>>[David Monniaux]
>>
>>| Then why was a Nobel prize of economics created?...
This thread has been way off-topic for the comp. lists for quite a while.
Could you guys please take it elsewhere? Thanks.
From: Cameron Laird
Subject: Nobel wasn't even married, folks (was: Ethics in programming)
Date:
Message-ID: <48huok$fi7@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
In article <···················@daacdev1.stx.com>, John Kodis
<·····@daacdev1.stx.com> wrote:
.
.
.
>I had wondered why there wasn't a Nobel Prize in mathematics (yes, I
>was a mathematics major). One of my professors explained that it was
>because Dr. Nobel's wife had had an affair with a French mathematician,
>whos name I cannot recall. But after all these years, he might have
>gotten over it.
.
.
.
French mathematics has given the world many wonders, but
this, I think, is beyond even it. As A. Lopez-Ortiz lu-
cidly explains in <URL:http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/
hypertext/faq/usenet/sci-math-faq/nobel/faq.html>, this
explanation is simply false.
'Fact, how about an AMS resolution to the effect that
promulgating it amounts to professional misconduct?
There are enough good mathematicians sloshing around
looking for employment that a few draconian dismissals
could only help the discipline.
Also, I know of no doctorate A. Nobel obtained in academe;
did he receive honorary ones?
I've forwarded a courtesy copy of this to Mr. Kodis, and
narrowed follow-ups.
--
Cameron Laird http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html
······@NeoSoft.com +1 713 623 8000 #227
+1 713 996 8546 FAX
[Vladimir Ivanovic]
| It's technically not a Nobel Prize.
true.
| Only the five subjects specified in the will are. Sort of like, "And
| the Nobel Prize in Physics is awarded to .. ; and finally, the Foo
| Nobel Institution awards its prize in Economics to ..." (Clearly I
| don't know the name of the organization.)
I wish more people would look things up in readily available reference
works before posting. this has also been covered before. (you're forgiven
for not reading all of this thread, though. :)
the World Almanac and Book of Facts 1995, lists the Nobel Prize Winners and
starts the section like this:
Afred B. Nobel (1833-96), inventor of dynamite, bequeathed $9,000,000,
the interest to be distributed yearly to those who had most benefited
humankind in physics, chemistry, medicine-physiology, literature, and
peace. Prizes in these 5 areas were first awarded in 1901. The first
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science was awarded in 1969, funded by
the central bank of Sweden.
#<Erik 3025813155>
--
"if you know what you want and you don't go out and do it yourself,
you're basically a loser, you know." -- Bj�rk.
In article <···················@daacdev1.stx.com> ·····@daacdev1.stx.com (John Kodis) writes:
So it seems that the best course of action would be to press for a
prize in mathematics. Then, by claiming that computer science is
really just applied mathematics, RMS would become eligable for a
Nobel prize.
and with sufficient effort in proof, everything is applied
mathematics.
physics is applied mathematics
chemistry is applied physics is applied mathematics
biology is applied chemistry is applied physics is applied mathematics
ksh
I don't know how this issue came to be discussed on this bboard, but
anyway. As it was reported in the Swedish media, when the Economics
price was announced (I lived in Sweden at the time), Alfred Nobel's
will left open the possibility for others to contribute to the fund,
that he started, as long as the Nobel prices were awarded in his name
only. When the Swedish national reserve bank had a major anniversary
(300 years I think) they decided to commit themselves to match the
award money given in the original categories, for a price in economics
to be given "in the memory of Alfred Nobel". Therefore the Economics
price is a 'real Nobel price' in the sense that it's awarded by the
Nobel Committee operating under Alfred Nobels will, but the money
doesn't come from the return on the Nobel fund, but is a yearly
contribution from the Swedish national reserve bank.
Ingemar Hulthage
In article <······················@sun71.mri.com> ········@mri.com (Vladimir Ivanovic) writes:
>It's technically not a Nobel Prize. Only the five subjects specified in
>the will are. Sort of like, "And the Nobel Prize in Physics is awarded
>to .. ; and finally, the Foo Nobel Institution awards its prize in
>Economics to ..." (Clearly I don't know the name of the organization.)
I'm glad to hear this. It's clear that the "Foo Nobel Prize" in
Economics is a complete sham, they always award it to a Universe of
Chicago economist for his work propping up the propaganda bullwarks of
Monopoly Capitalism, 2 prizes ago it went to someone who misused
Statistics to "prove" that Slavery was an efficient economic practice.
In article <··········@mozo.cc.purdue.edu>,
Bill Richter <·······@banach.math.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>I'm glad to hear this. It's clear that the "Foo Nobel Prize" in
>Economics is a complete sham, they always award it to a Universe of
>Chicago economist for his work propping up the propaganda bullwarks of
>Monopoly Capitalism, 2 prizes ago it went to someone who misused
>Statistics to "prove" that Slavery was an efficient economic practice.
>
While I am utterly thrilled to see people
debating the merits of an intellectual
enterprise in a coherent and rational manner
(note the careful use of supporting details
in the above), might I suggest that it migrate to
some more appropriate place (surely there are
better forums than comp.lang.lisp).
Cheers,
Andy
In article <··········@cri.ens-lyon.fr> ········@ens-lyon.fr (David Monniaux) writes:
> Then why was a Nobel prize of economics created?
Because a bank put up the money. Technically the Economic prize is
different from the "real" Nobel prizes.
> Doesn't that mean that the executors of the will have some powers to
> change the system according to the evolution of our society?
> If economics qualifies, then why not computer science?
Put up the money, see what happens.
--
Robert I. Eachus
with Standard_Disclaimer;
use Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...