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


And the winner is: our 2015 Nobel-prize predictions

Psychic world: we are prepared to be wrong about this year's prize

Psychic world: we have another go at predicting the Nobel winners. (Courtesy: iStockphoto/shutter_m)

By Tushna Commissariat and Hamish Johnston


Update: Looks like we were quite spectacularly wrong this time around with our predictions as this year’s Nobel has been awarded to Arthur McDonald and Takaaki Kajita “for the discovery of neutrino oscillations, which shows that neutrinos have mass”. While Physics World’s news editor Michael Banks did predict this in 2013, we did not think this would be the year. Clearly, as our “Which physics disciplines attract the most Nobel prizes” infographic suggests, the field of particle physics still seems to be the most Nobel-worthy one.

It’s a mug’s game, we know, but come the start of October we just can’t resist trying to predict who will win the Nobel Prize for Physics, which this year will be announced on Tuesday 6 October.

With the exception of 2013 – when most pundits were right in thinking that the prize would be related to the 2012 discovery of the Higgs boson – predicting the next Nobel winners (or winners) is a tough call. If you want to take an analytical approach, check out the infographic we published last year: “Which physics disciplines attract the most Nobel prizes”. It suggests that the field of atomic, molecular and optical physics is due a prize, and one of us (Hamish Johnston) thinks an excellent bet is Deborah Jin for her work on fermionic condensates. If Jin were to win, she would be only the third woman ever to win a physics Nobel – the other two being Marie Curie in 1903 and Maria Goeppert-Mayer in 1963.

Another ongoing prediction (three years and counting) shared by Physics World editor Matin Durrani and reviews editor Margaret Harris is that the award will go to Alain Aspect, Anton Zeilinger and John Clauser for their Bell’s inequality experiments, which established quantum entanglement. The trio has already bagged the Wolf Prize for this work, which is a good predictor of Nobel success. There is more about these experiments in this Physics World article co-written by Zeilinger: “A quantum renaissance”.

One of the most important discoveries in astronomy over the past few decades is that the Milky Way is chock-full of exoplanets – planets orbiting stars other than the Sun. One of us (Tushna Commissariat) is predicting an exoplanet-related prize, as is Physics World multimedia editor James Dacey. However, who would get the prize for exoplanets would be a tricky decision for the Nobel committee. While undoubtedly worthy research, there is a bit of controversy over who actually made the first confirmed observation of an exoplanet. Possible winners include Aleksander Wolszczan, Dale Frail, Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz.

Other physicists who could soon be buying tickets to Stockholm include Yakir Aharonov and Michael Berry for their work on the Aharonov–Bohm effect and the Berry phase (David Bohm died in 1992 and the prize is not given posthumously). The pair shared the Wolf Prize back in 1998, which, as we mentioned before, is a good sign. Also on our list are John Pendry, David Smith and Ulf Leonhardt for their prediction and discovery of negative refraction.

In case you missed it, yesterday we unveiled two new infographics that chart the migration of physicists with Nobel prizes. Creating the infographics involved taking a close look at the lives of all 198 physics Nobel laureates, which was a fascinating exercise. In particular, the infographics cast light on the effect of the Second World War on the global physics community. As well as the Jewish physicists who fled Europe, others caught up in the chaos include a young Peter Grünberg, who was born to German-speaking parents in the Czechoslovakian city of Plzen in 1939. The family was interned after the war and Grünberg’s father died in the camp before his family joined the hundreds of thousands of ethnic Germans who were expelled from the country. Despite this tough start in life, Grünberg went on to share the 2007 physics Nobel prize for the discovery of giant magnetoresistance.


Of course, many physicists travel the world to pursue their research, and Neil Turok is no exception. Born in South Africa, Turok trained as a theoretical physicist in the UK before taking several positions in the US and ending up as a professor at Princeton University. Then it was back to the UK, where he was Chair of Mathematical Physics at the University of Cambridge. Turok now directs the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada, where on 7 October he will be giving a public lecture on the “The astonishing simplicity of everything”. Like all events at Perimeter it will be streamed live, and Turok may have something to say about this year’s Nobel prize. You can watch the preview of the lecture in the above video.

This entry was posted in The Red Folder and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
View all posts by this author  | View this author's profile


  1. Dugic

    It would be huge boost for science, not just for the ‘causal’ discoveries, to see the trio Aspect-Zeilinger-Clauser to thank the Nobel committee.

    • orbiters

      So true. And it’s sad that John Bell died so young before possibly receiving his own Nobel for the work he did which led to the findings of Aspect, Zeilinger, Clauser et al.

  2. Dariusz Dudało

    Zeilinger, Yakir Aharonov … They conduct experiments and don’t have a clue how it works. Maybe first the question of how it works? Without miracles and strange explanation. The answer really is simple and what he did Yakir is a milestone because it lets you leave information from the future … but in order to comprehend need to simplify the physics …. but nobody wants to listen

  3. Trackback: The 2015 Nobel Prize for Physics: could it be Vera Rubin? | In the Dark

  4. M. Asghar

    The Aharonov–Bohm effect showed that the gauge electric and magnetic potentials set up to express the electric and magnetic fields of the Maxwell’s EM-Equations, have a physical exitence and not just a mathematical tool. However, this effect results directly from the Berry’s phase.

  5. M. Asghar

    As the work on the QM-entanglement is still going on, the “fermionic condensates” may go for the prize, if the choice falls in the PW’s bracket. However, the cosmology is weighing down, too, via the Planck-satellite cmb results.

  6. Trackback: It’s No-Belt Week! :-) | Patricia Daukantas, Science Writer/Editor


  • 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