This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site you agree to our use of cookies. To find out more, see our Privacy and Cookies policy.
Skip to the content

Share this

Free weekly newswire

Sign up to receive all our latest news direct to your inbox.

Physics on film

100 Second Science Your scientific questions answered simply by specialists in less than 100 seconds.

Watch now

Bright Recruits

At all stages of your career – whether you're an undergraduate, graduate, researcher or industry professional – can help find the job for you.

Find your perfect job

Physics connect

Are you looking for a supplier? Physics Connect lists thousands of scientific companies, businesses, non-profit organizations, institutions and experts worldwide.

Start your search today


Do you agree with this year’s Nobel decision?

Facebook poll

By James Dacey

So another year goes by and we have two new Nobel physics laureates who join the pantheon of scientific idols. Just in case you have been confined in the Utah desert in some kind of Mars-simulation experiment for the past couple of days, this year’s prize went to Serge Haroche and David Wineland for their nifty experimental work on trapping and manipulating quantum systems.

What do you make of the choice? Let us know by visiting our Facebook page and taking part in our poll.

In truth, the decision of the Nobel committee has proved largely uncontroversial in the physics community, with tributes to the pair flying in from all quarters. Among the congratulators was Sir Peter Knight, president of the UK Institute of Physics, who hailed Haroche and Wineland for bringing “tremendous advances in our understanding of quantum entanglement, with beautiful experiments to show how atomic systems can be manipulated to exhibit the most extraordinary coherence properties”.

The only murmuring of a controversy is the suggestion that the Caltech researcher Jeff Kimble was overlooked as a third recipient of the prize. Kimble was one of the pioneers of cavity quantum electrodynamics (CQED) – a technique whereby the properties of an atom are controlled by placing it in an optical or microwave cavity. It was for developing the field of CQED that Haroche won his half of this year’s prize.

Interestingly, there has been no official congratulation from CERN on either its homepage or Twitter feed. Some people, including the editor of Hamish Johnston, had argued that the confirmed discovery of a new boson at the LHC was enough to secure this year’s Nobel prize. That was also the sentiment of Physics World readers who took part in last week’s poll, with 63% of them selecting the discovery of the Higgs boson as their choice for the prize.

In fairness, though, Wineland and Haroche’s work on quantum optics was not one of the options in our poll. In customary style, the Nobel committee managed to identify a perfectly sensible choice of winner that had not been widely predicted beforehand.

So let us know what you think of this year’s prize by taking part in this week’s poll.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
View all posts by this author  | View this author's profile

Comments are closed.


  • Comments should be relevant to the article and not be used to promote your own work, products or services.
  • Please keep your comments brief (we recommend a maximum of 250 words).
  • We reserve the right to remove excessively long, inappropriate or offensive entries.

Show/hide formatting guidelines

Tag Description Example Output
<a> Hyperlink <a href="">google</a> google
<abbr> Abbreviation <abbr title="World Health Organisation" >WHO</abbr> WHO
<acronym> Acronym <acronym title="as soon as possible">ASAP</acronym> ASAP
<b> Bold <b>Some text</b> Some text
<blockquote> Quoted from another source <blockquote cite="">IOP</blockquote>
<cite> Cite <cite>Diagram 1</cite> Diagram 1
<del> Deleted text From this line<del datetime="2012-12-17"> this text was deleted</del> From this line this text was deleted
<em> Emphasized text In this line<em> this text was emphasised</em> In this line this text was emphasised
<i> Italic <i>Some text</i> Some text
<q> Quotation WWF goal is to build a future <q cite="">
where people live in harmony with nature and animals</q>
WWF goal is to build a future
where people live in harmony with nature and animals
<strike> Strike text <strike>Some text</strike> Some text
<strong> Stronger emphasis of text <strong>Some text</strong> Some text