1954年，理論物理學家楊振寧和羅伯特·L·米爾斯(在布魯克海文國家實驗室)得出結論，所有的基本力量是自然試圖保持對稱性的結果- 例如，電荷守恒在電磁的情況下，或保護動量和能量的情況下，愛因斯坦的引力。(Refer to 評論 [1] [3] below: 嶽東曉2）規範不變原理) ) (also refer to: 聽諾貝爾物理學獎楊振寧講演:【規範與對稱之美】-- （楊―米爾斯規範場理論）本文引用地址：http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-847277-655944.html )
1957年眾所周知，楊振寧李政道諾貝爾物理學獎獲的工作對宇稱不守恒。
1964年，希格斯寫了兩篇論文，每篇都隻有兩頁長，內容就是現在被稱為希格斯場的東西。《物理快報》接收了第一篇論文，但拒掉了第二篇論文。著名物理學家南部陽一郎在評審第二篇論文的時候，建議希格斯加上一部分內容來解釋這一理論的物理學意義。希格斯加了一段話，預言這個場中會產生一種新的粒子，即上帝粒子。然後，他把改過的論文投給了那家雜誌的對手——《物理評論快報》，結果發表了。(Refer to: 評論[18]方錦清的博客, also below) （參考＃2，＃3, #4）
I’m surprised to read this article from known liberalnewspaper (Ref. #1)! Thank God and the God Particle for The New York Times. Areader can count on The Times to provide a story about the Nobel Prize inphysics that is clear, simple and satisfying.
In view of multiple articles (Ref. #2, #3) on Science Net,here I wanted to add some trivia on the topic:
“At the heart of this quest was an ancient idea, theconcept of symmetry, and how it was present in the foundations of physics buthidden in the world as we experience it. In art and nature,something is symmetrical if it looks the same when you move it one way oranother, like a snowflake rotated 60 degrees; in science and math, a symmetryis something that does not change when you transform the system, like thelength of an arrow when you turn it around or shoot it.
They credited Chen Ning Yang’s work to set up the foundation for2013 Nobel Prize work! Perhaps, Yang is a New Yorker?
In 1954, the theorists ChenNing Yang and Robert L. Mills at the Brookhaven National Laboratory concludedthat all fundamental forces were the result of nature’s trying to maintainsymmetries — for example, the conservation of electric charge in the case ofelectromagnetism, or the conservation of momentum and energy in the case ofEinstein’s gravity.”
“His paper was rejected by thejournal Physics Letters, which was published at CERN, as having no relevance tophysics. So he rewrote it and sent it to a rival journal, Physical ReviewLetters. Along the way he added a paragraph at the end, noting that the theorypredicted a new particle, a spinless creature of indeterminate mass, whichwould become famous as the Higgs boson.”
”How could you find the missing “God particle?”His model predictshow you can locate the particle. It appears simple like puzzle games. It seemsa treasure hunt: You got the map (he predicted) and you followed and found it.
“Imagine you are working on a picture puzzle andit is mostly finished. You have a piece that you know the shape of and itsbasic color and pattern, but you don't see it anywhere on your table. So youget some strong people, like those at CERN to look around, and they move yourcouch, and there is the piece, and it fits perfectly. That is what justhappened. Congratulations to Drs. Higgs, Englert, and Dr. Bose and the amazingteam at CERN.”
“For the experimentalists,”she added, “we are kind of used to being excluded from the Nobel.”
Hopenative Chinese scientists pay more attention on theoretic science, coming upwith hypotheses and theory.
Again,I don’t trust URL links, so I copied and pasted for my future reference asfollows.
*********** Acknowledgment - Sources of Inspiration: Reference ********************7777777777777777
The “God particle” became the prize particle on Tuesday.
Two theoretical physicists who suggested that an invisible oceanof energy suffusing space is responsible for the mass and diversity of theparticles in the universe won the Nobel Prize in Physics on Tuesday morning.They are Peter W. Higgs, 84, of the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, andFrançois Englert, 80, of the Université Libre de Bruxelles in Belgium.
The theory, elucidated in 1964, sent physicists on ageneration-long search for a telltale particle known as the Higgs boson, popularlyknown (though not among physicists) as the God particle. The chase culminatedlast year with the discovery of this particle, which confers mass on other particles, at the Large HadronCollider at CERN, in Switzerland. Dr. Higgs and Dr. Englert will split a prizeof $1.2 million, to be awarded in Stockholm on Dec. 10.
“You may imagine that this is not unpleasant,” Dr. Englert said inan early morning news conference.
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences had not been able to contactDr. Higgs, who had vowed he would not be available Tuesday. A friend and fellowphysicist, Alan Walker, said in a phone interview on Tuesday morning that Dr. Higgs, who does not use acellphone or a computer, had gone off by himself for a few days without sayingwhere, and that he would return Friday.
Dr. Higgs, he said, is a modest man who likes his own company andthe ability to come and go without a fuss. Even before the announcement, hesaid, one journalist had invaded Dr. Higgs’s building looking for an interview.“He was sent away with a flea in his ear,” Dr. Walker said.
In a statement released later bythe University of Edinburgh, Dr. Higgs pronounced himself “overwhelmed,”saying, “I hope thisrecognition of fundamental science will help raise awareness of the value ofblue-sky research.”
The prize had been expected ever since physicists working at theLarge Hadron Collider announced on July 4, 2012, that they had discovered aparticle matching the description of the Higgs. Thousands of particle physicistsworked on the project,and for many of them the Nobel is a crowning validation.
Fabiola Gianotti, who led one of the teams at CERN, the EuropeanOrganization for Nuclear Research, called the prize “a great emotion and agreat satisfaction,” adding that it was nice that the experiments were cited inthe award. “The young physicists are superexcited.”
The Higgs was the last missing ingredient of the Standard Model, asuite of equations that has ruled particle physics for the last half-century,explaining everything from the smell of a rose to the ping when your computerboots up. According to this model, the universe brims with energy that actslike a cosmic molasses, imbuing the particles that move through it with mass,the way a bill moving through Congress attracts riders and amendments, becomingmore and more ponderous and controversial.
Without the Higgs field, many elementary particles, likeelectrons, would be massless and would zip around at the speed of light. Therewould be no atoms and no us.
For scientists, the discovery of the Higgs (as physicists call it)affirmed the view of a cosmos ruled by laws of almost diamond-like elegance andsimplicity, but in which everything interesting — like us — is a result oflapses or flaws in that elegance. That is the view that emerged in a period offeverish and tangled progress after World War II, in which the world’sphysicists turned their energies from war to looking under the hood of nature,using the tools of quantum field theory.
At the heart of this questwas an ancient idea, the concept of symmetry, and how it was present in thefoundations of physics but hidden in the world as we experience it. In art and nature, something is symmetrical if it looks the samewhen you move it one way or another, like a snowflake rotated 60 degrees; inscience and math, a symmetry is something that does not change when youtransform the system, like the length of an arrow when you turn it around orshoot it.
In 1954, the theorists ChenNing Yang and Robert L. Mills at the Brookhaven National Laboratory concludedthat all fundamental forces were the result of nature’s trying to maintainsymmetries — for example, the conservation of electric charge in the case ofelectromagnetism, or the conservation of momentum and energy in the case ofEinstein’s gravity.
By then, however, two more forces of nature had been added to theroster: the so-called weak nuclear force, responsible for some types ofradioactive decay, and the strong force, which holds atomic nuclei together. Inquantum field theory, forces are transmitted by bundles of energy calledbosons. By quantum rules, the mass of a boson is related to the range of theforce: the more massive the boson, the shorter its reach.
When the physicist Sheldon Glashow, now of Boston University,wrote down a theory in 1961 that explained the weak force and electromagnetismas manifestations of a single “electroweak” force, the math indicated that theparticles that transmitted the nuclear part of that force should be massless,like the photons that transmit light and can spread across the universe. Butthe nuclear forces barely reach across an atomic nucleus, suggesting that theircarriers should be among the most massive of elementary particles. How did thecarriers of the weak force become so massive while their brothers the photonsremained free and easy?
It was Yoichiro Nambu of the University of Chicago, who would wina Nobel in 2008, who suggested that the fault might lie not in the laws ofphysics but in how those laws play out in the real world. By a process calledsymmetry breaking, a situation that started out balanced can wind upunbalanced.
Imagine, for example, a pencil standing on its tip; it willeventually fall over and point only one way out of many possibilities. The massof the boson can be thought of as the energy released when the pencil falls.
In 1964, three papers by the different physicists showed how thiscould work by envisioning a kind of cosmic molasses filling space. Particlestrying to go through it would acquire mass.
The first to publish this idea were Dr. Englert and hiscolleague Robert Brout, who died in 2011. Dr.Englert was born in Etterbeek, Belgium, in 1932, and he studied engineering andphysics at the Université Libre de Bruxelles, emerging with a Ph.D. in 1959.While a research associate at Cornell, he bonded with Dr. Brout, a professorthere. When Dr. Englert returned to Belgium, Dr. Brout went with him.
While they were working on their paper, Dr. Higgs, a youngtheorist born in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England, was working on his own versionof the theory.
His paper was rejected by the journal Physics Letters, whichwas published at CERN, as having no relevance to physics. So he rewrote it andsent it to a rival journal, Physical Review Letters. Along the way he added aparagraph at the end, noting that the theory predicted a new particle, aspinless creature of indeterminate mass, which would become famous as the Higgsboson.
That paper was accepted with the proviso that he mention Dr.Englert and Dr. Brout’s paper, which had beaten him into print by seven weeks.
Meanwhile, three other physicists — Tom Kibble of ImperialCollege, London; Carl Hagen of the University of Rochester; and Gerald Guralnikof Brown University — were writing their own paper. Just as they were about to send it in, mail that had beendelayed by a postal strike came in, containing journals with the other twopapers, the one by Dr. Higgs and the one by Dr. Englert and Dr. Brout.
The groups and their friends have been arguing ever since overexactly who did and said what. In 2004, Dr. Higgs, Dr. Brout and Dr. Englertwon the Wolf Prize, considered an important forerunner of the Nobel. In 2010,all six physicists shared the Sakurai Prize of the American Physical Society,another big award. Dr. Brout might logically have shared the Nobel if he werealive today; the prize is not awarded posthumously.
The Higgs boson became a big deal after Steven Weinberg made itthe linchpin in a 1967 paper that unified the electromagnetic and weak forcesalong the lines proposed by Dr. Glashow earlier, earning himself a share of the1979 Nobel Prize.
Along the way, the Higgs boson achieved a presence in pop culturerare in abstract physics. To the eternal dismay of his colleagues, LeonLederman, the former director of Fermilab, called it the “God particle” in hisbook of the same name, written with Dick Teresi. (He later said that he hadwanted to call it the “goddamn particle.”) Journalists and the news media couldnot resist the nickname, however, and many particle physicists grudginglyadmitted that the name had brought a dose of drama and public excitement to afield almost breathtakingly austere and abstract.
The July 4 announcement last year ended that tension. That day wasalso the first time that Dr. Higgs and Dr. Englert had ever met. Indeed, thenewly discovered boson so far fits the theoretical predictions so well thatphysicists are a little dismayed. They were hoping for a surprise or two thatwould tell them how to improve on the Standard Model.
The award on Tuesday sets the stage for the Swedish academy tofigure out someday how to recognize the 10,000 scientists who built the LargeHadron Collider and sifted 2,000 trillion subatomic fireballs for a few dozentraces of the precious godlike particle.
“We are of course thrilled — the first big discovery of theL.H.C., for which we built the giant machine and detectors,” said MariaSpiropulu, a professor at the California Institute of Technology and a memberof one of the CERN teams that tracked the Higgs particle down. “For theexperimentalists,” she added, “we are kind of used to being excluded from theNobel.”
The Nobel Prize inPhysics 2013 was awarded jointly to François Englert and Peter W. Higgs "forthe theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understandingof the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmedthrough the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS andCMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider"
2012年7月4日兩個科學家第一次見麵的情況
François Englert andPeter Higgs meet for the first time, at CERN when the discovery of a Higgsparticle was announced to the world on 4 July 2012.
Nobel Prize-winning scientist Prof Peter Higgs has revealed he did not know he had won the award until a woman congratulated him in the street.
Prof Higgs, who does not own a mobile phone, said a former neighbour had pulled up in her car as he was returning from lunch in Edinburgh.
He added: "She congratulated me on the news and I said 'oh, what news?'"
The woman had been alerted by her daughter in London that Prof Higgs had won the award, he revealed.
He added: "I heard more about it obviously when I got home and started reading the messages."
The 84-year-old emeritus professor at the University of Edinburgh was recognised by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences for his work on the theory of the particle which shares his name, the Higgs boson.
He shares this year's physics prize with Francois Englert of Belgium, and joins the ranks of past Nobel winners including Marie Curie and Albert Einstein.
Watch: David Shukman profiles the "shy but brilliant" Peter Higgs
'God particle'
The existence of the so-called "God particle", said to give matter its substance, or mass, was proved almost 50 years later by a team from the European nuclear research facility (Cern) and its Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva, Switzerland.
Speaking for the first time about the award at a media conference at the University of Edinburgh, he said: "How do I feel? Well, obviously I'm delighted and rather relieved in a sense that it's all over. It has been a long time coming."
An old friend told him he had been nominated as far back as 1980, he said.
Prof Higgs added: "In terms of later events, it seemed to me for many years that the experimental verification might not come in my lifetime.
"But since the start up of the LHC it has been pretty clear that they would get there, and despite some mishaps they did get there".
Stressing the involvement of other theorists and Cern, he added: "I think clearly they should, but it is going to be even more difficult for the Nobel Committee to allocate the credit when it comes to an organisation like Cern.
"I should remind you that although only two of us have shared this prize, Francois Englert of Brussels and myself, that the work in 1964 involved three groups of people, (including) two in Brussels.
"Unfortunately Robert Brout died a few years ago so is no longer able to be awarded the prize, but he would certainly have been one of the winners if he had still been alive.
"But there were three others who also contributed and it is already difficult to allocate the credit amongst the theorists.
"Although a lot of people seem to think I did all this single-handed, it was actually part of a theoretical programme which had been started in 1960."
Landmark research
Prof Higgs was born in Newcastle, but developed his theory while working at the University of Edinburgh.
The landmark research that defined what was to become known as the Higgs boson was published in 1964.
Discovering the particle became one of the most sought-after goals in science, and the team of scientists behind the $10bn LHC at Cern made proving its existence a key priority.
In July of last year, physicists at Cern confirmed the discovery of a particle consistent with the Higgs boson.
Prof Higgs, who had often been uncomfortable with the attention his theory brought, was in Geneva to hear the news, and wiped a tear from his eye as the announcement was made.
Reacting to the discovery at the time, he told reporters: "It's very nice to be right sometimes."
This year's Nobel Prizes are being unveiled this week. Are there any predictors that point to who will be selected? Here's George Beadle's (medicine, 1958) response: "Study diligently. Respect DNA. Don't smoke. Don't drink. Avoid women and politics. That's my formula."
Is precocity in childhood a predictor? When the 2001 economics laureate, George Akerlof, was in second grade, he was asked what he wanted for Christmas, and he said, "A steel mill." Asked the same question by his scientist father, Roger Kornberg (chemistry, 2006) said, "A week in the lab."
But early privilege is not essential. Mario Capecchi (medicine, 2007) was an abandoned child on the streets of wartime Italy. Albert Camus (literature, 1957) grew up fatherless, in poverty in Algiers.
In addition to childhood hardship, many Nobel laureates, men and women, at some point in their lives suffered imprisonment. Nelson Mandela (peace, 1993) set a record with his 27 years in prison in South Africa. Autobiographies show that prison strengthened the convictions of future laureates and toughened their resolution.
Childhood deprivation and adult imprisonment are, however, atypical. The typical Nobel laureate in science is a male, born in a Western country into a middle-class family. His father is a professional, manager or professor. His family is Protestant, agnostic or Jewish. His parents seek out good K-12 schools for him, and he proceeds to a good university. He receives his doctoral degree before he is 25 and undertakes post-doctoral work under a Nobel-level supervisor. He does his groundbreaking research in his late 30s or early 40s, for which he is awarded the Nobel Prize 15 years later.
Rosalind Yalow (medicine, 1977) told women, "You can have it all!" But only 43 of 862 laureates have been women. The prizes got their start in 1901, before women won universal suffrage in most nations, let alone an equal share of education. In the sciences, even in contemporary times, the difficulty of combining motherhood with experiments that have to be checked at 3 a.m. has channeled many women into teaching universities rather than research institutes.
In their autobiographies, many Nobel laureates pay tribute to an outstanding mentor. Five of Enrico Fermi's (physics, 1938) post-docs went on to win the Nobel Prize, and 12 of Ernest Rutherford's (chemistry, 1908). Otto Warburg (medicine, 1931) advised an American doctoral student, "If you wish to become a scientist, you must ask a successful scientist to accept you in his laboratory, even if at the beginning you would only clean his test tubes."
Is eccentricity a concomitant of Nobel-level genius? In fact, laureates are mostly down-to-earth and unpretentious. In the United States, 44% of marriages end in divorce. Among Nobel laureates in the 20th century, the rate was 11%. Much time and energy are saved by a stable family life. Naturally there are exceptions. Erwin Schrödinger (physics, 1933) lived for some years in a middle-class Dublin suburb with his wife and his mistress, while simultaneously carrying on affairs with his students and fathering children with two other Irish women.
There remains one quality that is essential. It is what Leon Lederman (physics, 1988) called "compulsive dedication." What distinguishes Nobel laureates is passion for their work, work that engages their hearts as well as their heads.
Let the example of Marie Curie (physics, 1903; chemistry, 1911) and her husband Pierre (physics, 1903) stand for the experience of many others. The Curies became convinced that radium could be isolated from the mineral pitchblende. The Sorbonne assigned them a shed with a leaking roof and a dirt floor, where the Curies worked for years, freezing in winter and sweltering in summer.
"And yet," Marie Curie wrote in her biography of her husband, "it was in this miserable old shed that the best and happiest years of our life were spent, entirely consecrated to work. I sometimes passed the whole day stirring a mass in ebullition, with an iron rod nearly as big as myself. In the evening I was broken with fatigue…. We worked in the unique preoccupation of a dream."
This experience — being utterly immersed in and dedicated to a task of great significance — is common to all Nobel laureates, and it is cherished by them as much as the prize itself.
David Pratt compiled "The Impossible Takes Longer: The 1,000 Wisest Things Ever Said by Nobel Prize Laureates."
PS: Postscript*** Add-on note for my posts: 各位有緣人【總之就是正在看著屏幕的您！】，[em:3:] blessings! “己所不欲，勿施於人”，實質就是換位思考、尊重別人的利益 = decency。I wrote all my posts based on what I read online, a way of taking break, a routine of daily activity. I can't write anything without this fabric of other's writing, an inspiration that triggers my own motivation to write. Copy/paste the original article provides me with a context to track down where I got the idea, a way to credit back to those writers.“己所不欲，勿施於人”，實質就是換位思考、尊重別人的利益 -You're free to quote my writing. If you're objected to my quotation, can you let me know so I can correct it? Thanks.
Reference: I'd credit the original source of my inspiration to write this post by citing the entire article above, only for academic/teaching purpose, but not for commercial purpose - making and promoting any products. I use both URL (URL is an acronym for Uniform Resource Locator and is a reference (an address) to a resource on the Internet. A URL has two main components: Protocol identifier: For the URL http://example.com , the protocol identifier is http . Resource name: For the URL http://example.com , the resource name is example.com .) and the entire article for my electronic library as URL is drifted with time, so it's hard to find the original citation. Let me know if you're objected to my citation of your article - I'd act accordingly. Thanks so much for your attention.
~~~~~~~~~
add-on note: I've practiced to copy/paste the entire document of my reference to the post I referred to as above to avoid the below problem. It's hectic to do, but it's good for readers. You can see why below.
A common problem with many Chinese Language websites
In re-reading some of my older blog articles, I have found the following problem with many Chinese language websites. When my article gave reference to material associated with my article, e.g., a website, the Chinese website do not archive old news reports. Instead one finds the website referenced has new stories featured that has nothing to do with my article. The old article referenced by me has disappeared and nowhere to be found. There is nothing I can do about this. On the other hand, international news sites such as CNN or NY Times has a distinct reference for each page of content featured. Reader can always see it even if the content is ten years old. I hope ScienceNet reader and the general public can urge these Chinese websites to change their practice. After all, these days computer memory to a first approximation cost nothing.
本博網編者園地個人點滴時空軌跡：滿足本個人不同時空 (on travel, on silent, with the public, being alone, staring the sky, feel blue) 閱讀需求，本個人探討國內國際動態，本個人版塊解讀態勢，呈現本個人立體環境。偶而在於傳遞更多信息(If you swing by for drop-in visit of my blog webpage)。歡迎關注評論指正轉載 - 本個人擇善固執, 因此不敬之處請原諒。
((擇善固執-- I've read many classic books of thinkers and some of them were read many times. Still feel not much has changed in me by reading those books. In the end, we are who we are, and intentional molding and self-help are of little use. Personality determines fate, and personality is of 90% hereditary, so our fate and destiny were pretty much decided when we were born. Sorry for being little pessimistic. ))
所以，雖然楊振寧、李政道及近年可能得獎的張首晟等確實理論強，但他們是華人的異數，即使在華人科學家中迄今也屬於例外。純數學確實有陳省身、丘成桐、田剛、夏誌宏等少數突出的，但他們占世界頂尖純數學的比例很低，而應用數學和統計的華人就多很多，占世界的比例高。如果要總結多數人的情況，中國人實驗強的比較多，理論強的極少。在美國留學的中國學生，實驗好的多，背理論的人多、但理論思維強的少，背理論的能力不等同於思考、提出理論的能力，這點在中國學生表現特明顯。迄今在美國成名的華人科學家，絕大多數是以實驗見長，而同期出現的理論（包括因為實驗結果而提出ideas）多半並不來自華人科學家。中國國內的生命科學的主要工作，迄今也是實驗為主，還沒有提出過重要理論或ideas。重實驗而輕理論的副作用之一是認為“ideas are cheap”，這恐怕是因為我們中國人迄今很難想到非常重要的ideas，說ideas便宜如果不是偷懶、就是給自己解嘲。
李泳: "2009年， Guralnik回憶了他們自己的工作（The History of the Guralnik, Hagen and Kibble development of the Theory of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking and Gauge Particles），也講述了那一段對稱破缺的曆史。他們剛向PRL投稿時，看到了遲來的EB和H的論文，感覺盡管他們的目標一樣，但對自己的工作沒構成挑戰（they did not form a serious challenge to our work.）。
G認為，EB和H的工作是不完整的，他們發現了對稱破缺能產生有質量的玻色子，但沒有證明他們的近似是正確和合理的。Hagen就說，“EB和H解決了問題的一半，讓規範粒子有了質量；GHK才解決了整個問題，不但讓粒子有了質量，還躲過了Goldstone定理的魔手。”（“In a sense EB and H solved half of the problem — namely massifying the gauge particle. GHK solved an entire problem — massifying and also showing how the deadening hand of the Goldstone theorem is avoided.”） G認為，不帶偏見地通讀那些文章，都會看清GHK是完全獨立思路的結果。（“An unbiased reading of all the papers should make it clear that GHK is the result of an entirely independent train of thought.”）可是，幾十年過去了，今天的人隻接受結果，不關心那些陳年舊事，也忽略了“正確”和“完整”的意義。“我們遲遲不把文章發出來，還把那些文章列入文獻，真是太天真了。但是，我們從沒想過那會有什麽影響。”（While we were too innocent in our slowness to publish and in the way the referencing was included, we never thought that this would in any way affect）（GHK把EB和待刊的H都列為參考文獻了。） 本文引用地址：http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-279992-731275.html
方錦清的博客: (這是專家！我將它在我的組合的參考文獻。That's an expert's prose! I got move it up in my portfolio of references literature. So much to learn, so little time!) [轉載]你真正了解上帝粒子嗎？沒有上帝粒子就沒有人類 已有 140 次閱讀 2013-10-10 17:31 |個人分類:科學論壇|係統分類:科普集錦|關鍵詞:上帝粒子
博主回複(2013-10-10 08:58)：鮑林了兩次，不同的類別。居裏夫人兩次了。Linus Pauling got twice, different categories. Madam Curie got twice. "夫妻雙雙獲獎的典型代表就是居裏夫婦（Marie Curie and Pierre Curie），他們分享了1903年的諾貝爾物理學獎，但是居裏夫人（Marie Curie）在8年之後又獲得了1911年的諾貝爾化學獎。" (本文引用地址：http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-212210-731640.html ). So, it's hard to tell; let time take the course. Perhaps, Yang Chen Ning may make the oldest age record of getting a Noble (second time). Do you want to bet?
博主回複(2013-10-10 08:40)：請繼續去寫你的故事！我們需要您告訴物理學有關領域的。Go on, continue to expand writing story please! We the public need someone with your caliber to tell what is your field of physics about. If you don't, nobody will do in a way you can explain. Your unique perspective is valuable to the public! However, please try to use the lay language at the level to make it simple to illustrate your complex physics. Thanks!
博主回複(2013-10-10 09:06)：你的閱讀感感覺很靈！！這就是我試圖完成的！"我感到文學寫作：兩字，“情”與“理”。有“情”可成文；有“理”可成文；“情”與“理”相融，文學上品！讀者會為你的真誠心意感動。情真意切是文學寫作的精靈。精靈來無影，去無蹤。無情，非真，心不動，筆不轉。硬寫，常是 “無病呻吟”。"(本文引用地址：http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-847277-728976.html) Wow! You got a great sense of reading the author's mind! That's what I tried to accomplish!
博主回複(2013-10-10 08:51)：[16]biofans 2013-10-10 07:40 >> [8]曾傑 2013-10-10 15:18 印象中，獲得諾貝爾獎時，楊振寧是中國籍，丁擎中是美國籍。 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 中國、中華民國和中華人民共和國有區別。 中國國籍、中華民國國籍和中華人民共和國國籍也有區別。 You should expand your thought on the following: [1]曾傑 2013-10-9 23:17 印象中，獲得諾貝爾獎時，楊振寧是中國籍，丁擎中是美國籍，可見，都已具備開拓研究能力；所以，必須思考文化傳統的教育背景。 猶太裔獲諾貝爾獎最多，同時，又是堅持傳統文化和宗教傳統最強。 隻有文化之樹根深，才能葉茂，美國電影《雲中漫步》，也充分反映了這個道理。
博主回複(2013-10-9 21:03)："希格斯的論文並沒有引用YANG-MILLS的論文。希格斯示範希格斯機製用的例子是最簡單的U(1)規範場，也就是電磁場。後人才把希格斯機製推廣到YANG-MILLS場。" 紐約時報這篇文章, 或許意味著希格斯文章，他應該引用楊的論文。尊重曆史，尊重你的同胞的科學家同事，我們必須引用對方的貢獻。Isaac Asimov, one of the most prolific writers of all time, having written or edited more than 500 books and an estimated 90,000 letters and postcards, said that nowadays 96% of our writing either directly or indirectly borrowed from others. It's up to a writer to give such credits to the original sources. I wonder if someone asked Higgs, "Did you read Yang's articles?" What will he say?
精選
Related photos »
