View Full Version : The 2013 Nobel Prize thread

C. Ross
09-30-2013, 11:53 PM
First up, physiology or medicine, October 7th, followed by physics on the 8th, chemistry on the 9th, and the peace prize on the 11th.

The following week, economics on the 14th and literature to follow.

Any wagers to be made?

10-01-2013, 01:55 AM

C. Ross
10-06-2013, 08:26 AM
The medicine or physiology prize will be announced tomorrow morning.

Over the last 11 years, Thomson Reuters has correctly predicted 27 individual awardees, accounting for 15 of the 44 possible prizes in Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, and Chemistry.

Their predictions?

Adrian P. Bird, University of Edinburgh, and/or Howard Cedar and Aharon Razin, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, for DNA methylation and gene expression. (What makes a cell turn into a lung or eye cell, and can you keep a cell from becoming a cancer cell?)

Or... (These guys hedge their bets. I hope they at least get differential odds for win, place and show. Criminey.). Or Daniel J. Klionsky, University of Michigan, Noboru Mizushima, University of Tokyo and/or Yoshinori Ohsumi, Tokyo Institute of Technology for insights into autophagy. (Cellular garbage collecting.)

Or Dennis J. Slamon, University of California Los Angeles for the HER-2/NEU oncogene. (Women exhibiting the HER-2 protein who got breast cancer are not likely to recover. Salmon discovered an antibody that blocks the protein, leading to the drug Herceptin.)

ScienceWatch predicts A. Paul Alivisatos, Chad A. Mirkin, and Nadrian C. Seeman for their work on DNA nanotechnology.

A couple of years ago the Nobels were all about carbon. Smart money says this year's award in medicine is about DNA.

C. Ross
10-06-2013, 08:32 AM
However...you also have to look at the paired Ig Nobel prize winners. (http://www.improbable.com/ig/winners/)

This year's prize for medicine was as follows:

MEDICINE PRIZE: Masateru Uchiyama [JAPAN], Xiangyuan Jin [CHINA, JAPAN], Qi Zhang [JAPAN], Toshihito Hirai [JAPAN], Atsushi Amano [JAPAN], Hisashi Bashuda [JAPAN] and Masanori Niimi [JAPAN, UK], for assessing the effect of listening to opera, on heart transplant patients who are mice.
REFERENCE: "Auditory stimulation of opera music induced prolongation of murine cardiac allograft survival and maintained generation of regulatory CD4+CD25+ cells."

The Bilge proved in its Wagner thread that this is not true. Mice don't live longer when they're exposed to opera music, it just feels like they're living longer.

However, as King Rat for the month, I have to point with happiness at these heroic Japanese researchers dedicated to improved survival rates of mouse heart transplant patients! Hang in there little cousins! A cure is on its way!

10-06-2013, 08:41 AM
One of my family has already won so we're going to stand aside for a few years to give others a chance.

Phillip Allen
10-06-2013, 09:35 AM
the prize is meaningless since the political chicanery with the Obama campaign/election

10-06-2013, 10:39 AM
I nominate this guy.


10-06-2013, 11:35 AM
I nominate this guy.


I second the nomination, with runner up going to Sarah Palin for her research combining carbon emissions, environmentalism, and football
"Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emissions themselves, doing an end run around the American people. "

C. Ross
10-06-2013, 02:13 PM
Rep. Barton's nomination might belong in chemistry. More likely literature.

Phillip, with respect to Peace Prize Politics, it might interest you to know that Alfred Nobel stipulated that the Peace Prize should be selected by a Norwegian committee, while all other prizes are selected by Swedish committees.

Being partially of Swedish extraction, it would be wrong of me - very wrong indeed - to point out any inferiority of the Norwegian committee compared to the Swedish committees. But I think the facts make the situation perfectly clear.

10-06-2013, 04:09 PM
the prize is meaningless since the political chicanery with the Obama campaign/electionThe Nobel Peace prize nomination process is different from all the others and takes place in Norway not Sweden. It's been done that way for more than a year and a bit, where have you been? Oops! I see I'm late. Anyway the criteria for the Peace prize is quite different, having a number of Norwegians in my family and recognizing the reasons the Peace prize selection was not left in the hand of the Swedes I think Obama's selection was within reason...for reasonable people.

C. Ross
10-07-2013, 07:09 AM
And the prize for medicine or physiology goes to ....

(Reuters) - Americans James Rothman and Randy Schekman and Germany's Thomas Suedhof won the 2013 Nobel medicine prize for their work on how hormones are transported within and outside cells, giving insight into diseases such as diabetes and Alzheimer's.


Rothman is from Yale, Schekman from UCLA Berkeley, and Suedhof from Stanford.

Your BROTM notes that Schekman is a native of St. Paul, Minnesota. Where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are (clearly) above average.

10-07-2013, 07:34 AM
This thread need pictures. From last year...

There's something about a King Gustaf or whatever. The real question, is who are those girls in front?


Oh sit down already!


10-07-2013, 08:09 AM
One of my family has already won so we're going to stand aside for a few years to give others a chance.Namedropping time ... a moderately distant relative won the Economics Nobel some years back. (Any such blood in my veins is greatly diluted :D)

Who else? This is a distinguished crowd - I'm sure you can do better than me.

10-07-2013, 06:56 PM
Name dropping? Ok.

And the prize for medicine or physiology goes to ....


Rothman is from Yale...

In offices done by myself, with pleasure, the good doctor has exceptional taste.
I expect he'll rate even swankier accommodations now.

C. Ross
10-07-2013, 08:06 PM
Sweet. Hope you get to do the upgrade!

OK! Tomorrow is Physics. This HAS to be the Higgs-Boson year, right? But who gets the award?

Lew Barrett
10-07-2013, 10:05 PM

I'm just going to jump the gun here, since the PP was already kicked about.

Malala! Malala! Malala!

The Bigfella
10-08-2013, 04:15 AM
Good call Lew.

Yeah, couple of years ago I was invited to a small dinner party with a French Physics Professor and his wife. He was part of the research group that got the leader the prize for Physics. His work now is on lasers that can help target treatments at the cell level. Fantastic stuff. Almost worth a trip to France just to catch up with them again. Certainly gives the brain a workout.

C. Ross
10-08-2013, 05:52 AM
STOCKHOLM The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has delayed the announcement of this year's Nobel Prize in physics by at least an hour.

That's an unusually long delay by the prize committee, which typically announces its decision right on time or just a few minutes later.

The academy said on Twitter that, "The Academy is still in session," but didn't give further details. The members of the academy's physics committee pick the winners in a majority vote on the day of the announcement.

It was supposed to reveal the winners at 5:45 a.m. EDT, but delayed the announcement several times, saying it would take place no earlier than 6:45 a.m. EDT.

I think they're going to award the prize to someone who figured out time travel. That's the only thing that could explain the delay.

10-08-2013, 05:59 AM
Looks like it'll be Higgs, who's he?

10-08-2013, 06:18 AM
Higgs just announced, sharing with someone whose name I didn't catch.

10-08-2013, 06:28 AM
Higgs just announced, sharing with someone whose name I didn't catch.Englert of Belgium

Lew Barrett
10-08-2013, 08:43 AM
We need a photo thread about classic quarks.

They just don't make sub atomic particles like they used to!

10-08-2013, 08:44 AM
We need a photo thread about classic quarks.

They just don't make sub atomic particles like they used to!
You take a picture of one first, ok? :D

10-08-2013, 08:50 AM
Here ya go, taken at Jeff Lab.
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070629182910/memoryalpha/en/images/8/8e/Quarks_Bar,_Who_mourns_for_Morn_2.jpg (http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070629182910/memoryalpha/en/images/8/8e/Quarks_Bar,_Who_mourns_for_Morn_2.jpg)

C. Ross
10-08-2013, 10:27 PM
Ok, tomorrow Is chemistry. Does anyone care about chemistry?

"All theoretical chemistry is really physics; and all theoretical chemists know it." Nobel laureate (in physics) Richard Feynman

Nah? Me neither. So here's the best song ever written about chemistry: The Suburb's punk classic "Chemistry Set" from 1981 (following a minute and a half of the Vince Guaraldi "Linus & Lucy")


The Bigfella
10-08-2013, 10:38 PM
Shouldn't the chemistry prize go to the founder of the Silk Road website?

10-08-2013, 10:45 PM
DOn't know of any Boson songs, but here's Hawkwind's Quark, Strangeness and Charm:


C. Ross
10-08-2013, 10:49 PM
Shouldn't the chemistry prize go to the founder of the Silk Road website?

Or this guy. Same idea.


C. Ross
10-09-2013, 05:38 AM
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 2013 to Martin Karplus Université de Strasbourg, France and Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA, Michael Levitt, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA, and Arieh Warshel, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
The work of Karplus, Levitt and Warshel is ground-breaking in that they managed to make Newton’s classical physics work side-by-side with the fundamentally different quantum physics. Previously, chemists had to choose to use either or.


Feynman is right, again.

10-09-2013, 10:12 AM
Feynman just points out the obvious as far as theoretical chemists are concerned. Heck, even my undergraduate chem advisor had Chemical Physics rather than Physical Chemistry printed on his office door.

Going back to 1895 when Alfred Nobel signed his will the distinction between chemists and physicists was more pronounced. This was long before people like Rutherford and Marie Curie won their prizes in Chemistry. Nobel himself was a chemist among other things.

The prize in Chemistry seems to bounce between “physics” and “chemistry” in different years. The large macromolecule stuff is still too complex to be analyzed by theoretical physical methods and seems to warrant the continued distinction between these two prizes.

So, I’m not at all surprised when the Nobel in Chemistry is awarded for work in physics and am always interested in the naming of the current Nobel prize winner(s) in Chemistry.

I wonder what Feynman or Alfred Nobel would say about The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel.:o

10-09-2013, 10:18 AM
The chemistry prize should go to the person who invented the Gilbert Chemistry Set. ;-)

C. Ross
10-09-2013, 09:12 PM
Alllrighteeee then!

Tomorrow's literature. The pundit class is favoring Haruki Murakami, Umberto Eco, Ismail Kadare, Alice Munro, Joyce Carol Oates, or Thomas Pynchon.

I'm gonna go out in a limb and say Terri Pratchett. (Though if I was wagering I'd put a bet on Eco.)

Keith Wilson
10-09-2013, 09:50 PM
Umberto Eco's very good. I've been a fan ever since Name of the Rose.

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 05:55 AM
With five minutes to go, Ladbrookes's 5-2 favorite Murakami is replaced by Svetlana Alexievich, a Belarusian chronicler of Soviet and post-Soviet history best known for her oral history of the Chernobyl disaster, Voices from Chernobyl.

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 06:05 AM
And the prize goes to Canadian Alice Munro, "master of the contemporary short story."


10-10-2013, 06:07 AM

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 07:02 AM
What? No one likes literature? Is it that she writes short stories or because she's Canadian?

10-10-2013, 07:19 AM
In an interview with AP in 2003, she described the '60s as "wonderful."
It was "because, having been born in 1931, I was a little old, but not too old, and women like me after a couple of years were wearing miniskirts and prancing around," she said.

She would fit right in here in the Bilge.

10-10-2013, 07:43 AM
What? No one likes literature? Is it that she writes short stories or because she's Canadian?
To be honest, I've always had mixed feelings about Dear Alice. She's a fixture in Canadian lit, of course, so I'm sorta obliged to be proud of her.

But her books aren't ones which drive me to pull them off the shelf and re-read in wonder.

10-10-2013, 07:47 AM
But her books aren't ones which drive me to pull them off the shelf and re-read in wonder.Who?

10-10-2013, 07:57 AM
Who?Exactly. Alice Munro is a very talented author, a distinctive voice ... but one that just doesn't capture me.

10-10-2013, 08:02 AM
Exactly. Alice Munro is a very talented author, a distinctive voice ... but one that just doesn't capture me.Who?

Full Tilt
10-10-2013, 08:03 AM
Girl books

10-10-2013, 08:25 AM
Girl booksWho?

10-10-2013, 08:41 AM
Somebody let an owl in here by accident? :D

10-10-2013, 08:49 AM
Somebody let an owl in here by accident? :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8N2SftkPmQ Eagle owls, I'm surprised they don't have an accent.

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 07:45 PM
Exactly. Alice Munro is a very talented author, a distinctive voice ... but one that just doesn't capture me.

Perhaps you're more of a Margaret Atwood fan?

The Bigfella
10-10-2013, 07:55 PM
Who's up today?

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 08:24 PM
Who's up today?

Peace prize, but you'd hardly know it. Neither Ladbrookes nor Paddy Power have current betting lines.

Earlier, Paddy Power had Malala Yousafzai favored at 2/1 odds, followed by Denis Mukwege (6/4) and Bradley Manning (16/1). Some other rankings list Edward Snowden.

The Peace Prize seems to veer between "America! We forgive and forget!" and "Heh, America! Here's a stick in yer eye!" The prize awarded to Senator Gore, of course, achieved both of these simultaneously.

What says the Bilge?

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 08:25 PM
But not to worry...I've got alllllll weekend to pimp the economics prize.

Lew Barrett
10-10-2013, 08:32 PM
Malala should be a shoe in. She earned it the hard way. I wouldn't be surprised if they picked her; it's probably the most visible award, and she's not controversial anywhere except certain regions of Pakistan. So Snowden for the win?

C. Ross
10-10-2013, 08:40 PM
LOL. Exactly Lew.

The only thing I worry about with Malala...is the "child actor" parallel. You know, cute kids become meth-headed skank dating fool spewing adults. What happens to "child Nobel Prize winners?"

Ian McColgin
10-11-2013, 05:14 AM
The Peace Prize goes to Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. A fairly non-controversial choice.

C. Ross
10-11-2013, 05:42 AM
Another "most likely to succeed" Peace Prize.

The Norwegians are very hopeful and aspirational in their Peace Prize choices, aren't they?

Since neither the United States nor Russia have met their obligations to destroy our chemical weapons stocks by April 2012 under the Chemical Weapons Convention associated with this UN body, and this group is just beginning its work to destroy Syria's chemical weapons under extreme conditions is just beginning, one wonders.

Given the Russian sponsorship of the Syrian effort on behalf of their unsavory client, the cynical among us wonder if we might observe the presence of one or more idiot utiles in retrospect by the time the next award is issued.

Malala would have been a much better recipient.

Lew Barrett
10-11-2013, 10:24 AM
Malala would have been a much better recipient.

Oy! Makes you want to slap them on the back of the head. The PP now begins to assume the status of an Oscar rather than a recognition of personal merit. They gave it to a committee!

"Here's Billy Crystal with the envelope. And the winner is......."

C. Ross
10-11-2013, 12:03 PM
How very Norwegian to award a committee.

Paul Pless
10-11-2013, 12:08 PM
A fairly non-controversial choice.could they get any more boring?

perhaps they are attempting to make up for erroneously giving the prize to these three war mongers two decades ago. . .

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/arafat.jpg (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/arafat.html)
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/peres.jpg (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/peres.html)
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/rabin.jpg (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/rabin.html)

C. Ross
10-11-2013, 06:30 PM
Tehreek-e-Taliban slithers out from under a rock with its views on the award:

The decision not to reward Pakistani teen activist Malala Yousafzai with the Nobel Peace Prize was met with disappointment and derision across the world, but at least one group was pleased: The one that tried to kill her.The Pakistani Taliban called the decision "very good news" and praised the committee for "not selecting this immature girl for this famous award," according to a statement by spokesman Shahidullah Shahid.

Slideshow: Schoolgirl attacked by Taliban in Pakistan (http://nbcnews.com/id/49402511/displaymode/1247?beginSlide=1)

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/_archive/News/_International%20News/ss-121013-malala/ss-121218-malala-tease.380;380;7;70;0.jpg (http://nbcnews.com/id/49402511/displaymode/1247?beginSlide=1)Sixteen-year-old Malala Yousafzai was shot by the Taliban for speaking out against Pakistani militants and promoting education for girls.

Launch slideshow (http://nbcnews.com/id/49402511/displaymode/1247?beginSlide=1)

Yousafzai had been the bookmakers' favorite to win the prize for her campaign for girls' right to education, but she was edged out by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OCPW) in an announcement Friday.

After receiving death threats from the Taliban for defying the Islamist militant group with her outspoken views on the right to education, the 16-year-old was shot a year ago while on a school bus near her village in Swat in northwestern Pakistan.

She recovered after she was flown to Britain for surgery, but the militants, known as Tehreek-e-Taliban, have vowed to try again.

"If we get another chance, we will definitely kill her and that will make us feel proud," Shahid said.

The also have reportedly threatened to kill the shopkeepers in her home country if they are found selling the teenager’s new book, "I Am Malala."

A Twitter account for the Malala Fund congratulated the weapons watchdog on their selection.
“Congratulations @OPCW (https://twitter.com/OPCW) on winning the #Nobelpeaceprize (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Nobelpeaceprize&src=hash) and your wonderful work for humanity. Honoured to have been nominated @Nobelprize_org (https://twitter.com/Nobelprize_org),” it read.


Here is the vile Mr. Shahid, seated in the center.


Lew Barrett
10-11-2013, 06:46 PM
We can be disappointed, but we might also recognize that a group of people who spend their time in the most dangerous parts of the world in an effort to remove hideous weapons from the face of the earth are also worthy of recognition.

Congratulations to them, and great good luck to them in the successful pursuit of their truly quite noble goals.

Those Taliban are really something. Malala remains an inspiration to us, an amazing woman.

C. Ross
10-11-2013, 07:11 PM
We haven't heard the last from Ms Malala.

C. Ross
10-11-2013, 07:24 PM
OK, so now the Most Important Nobel Prize, Economics.

Here's the Wall Street Journal's take on the potential candidates. So many economists!!

Here are names — some perennials on Nobel shortlists — that economists say are contenders for what many consider the field’s highest honor.

If the award is for work on financial crises, banks, liquidity and regulation, Douglas Diamond of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and Philip Dybvig, of the Olin School of Business at Washington University, St. Louis, are headliners. In 1983, the pair wrote a seminal paper spelling out why bank runs happen. The authors explained that deposit insurance could reassure customers and keep them from panicking and pulling their money out en masse.

Another name cited for finance and regulation is Jean Tirole, of the Toulouse School of Economics, who has done work on industrial organizations, antitrust and the regulation of corporations. Other potential winners in this area include Bengt Holstrom, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Oliver Hart, of Harvard University; Gary Gorton, of the Yale School of Management and Paul R. Milgrom of Stanford University. Mr. Milgrom’s areas of research include auctions, akin to last year’s laureates (http://kva.se/en/pressroom/Press-releases-2012/The-Prize-in-Economic-Sciences-2012/), Alvin Roth and Lloyd Shapley. Messrs. Roth and Shapley worked, separately, on how markets, such as the system for pairing medical residents with hospitals, come up with matches.
For his fundamental work in finance, game theory and corporate economics, David Kreps, of Stanford Business School, also is seen as a potential laureate.

Some observers say 2013 may be the year for econometrics — the application of math and statistics to economic data — because the most recent Nobel in the area was awarded 10 years ago (http://www.kva.se/en/pressroom/press-releases-2008-2001/The-Prize-in-Economic-Sciences-2003/), to Robert Engle and Clive Granger. If they are correct, Lars Peter Hansen, of the University of Chicago, is seen by many as a shoo-in. He developed a widely used econometric tool, the Generalized Method of Moments, for running regression analyses, which economists use to uncover relationships among variables. Jerry Hausman, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also is considered a strong candidate.

If 2013 is the year for behavioral economics, contenders include Robert Shiller, of Yale, who challenged the idea that financial markets are completely efficient, with asset prices reflecting all available information at a given moment. Instead, movements in stock prices are far more volatile than would be justified by fundamental information, such as dividends. Prices, Mr. Shiller concluded, move for many strange reasons. One reason for market inefficiency, according to another possible Nobelist, Richard Thaler, of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, may be the fact that people have biases — and don’t always make the best long-term decisions.

If the Nobel honors work on economic growth, many see Paul Romer, of New York University’s Stern School of Business, and Robert Barro, of Harvard, as inevitable. A handful of key papers by Mr. Romer emphasized the importance of investment in human capital, ideas, innovation and research and development in expanding an economy. Mr. Romer runs NYU’s Urbanization Project, which helps cities plan to absorb expanding populations and also is working on establishing completely new cities. Mr. Barro, in research from the early 1990s (http://www.nber.org/papers/w3419.pdf?new_window=1), used personal income and state growth data from the U.S. to show that poor regions or countries expand faster than rich ones.

Other possible Nobelists for economic growth include Philippe Aghion, of Harvard, and Peter Howitt, who have written papers and books together on the subject. They have focused on Schumpeter’s idea of “creative destruction” — in which an economy grows because competition spurs inventions as well as innovation in technology.

Princeton’s Angus Deaton, who has studied growth and economic development in rich and poor countries, also is said to be in the running.
For some time, news and data firm Thomson Reuters has published predictions of Nobel laureates (http://thomsonreuters.com/press-releases/092013/nobel-laureates), based on research citations. The firm is one for three in its 2013 forecasts, nailing the physics winners but missing the mark in medicine (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2013/) and chemistry (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2013/). (The physics prize (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/) went, as widely expected, to François Englert and Peter Higgs, the scientists behind the “God particle” breakthrough.)

Thomson Reuters’ predictions start with Joshua Angrist, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; David Card, of the University of California, Berkeley and Alan Krueger, of Princeton, for “their advancement of empirical microeconomics.”

Their research has tapped “natural experiments” to understand health, education and labor markets. Messrs. Angrist and Krueger studied how the Vietnam lottery draft affected mens’ lifetime earnings (http://www.nber.org/papers/w4067.pdf?new_window=1). Mr. Card examined the effect of the 1980 Mariel boat lift (http://www.nber.org/papers/w3069.pdf?new_window=1), which brought Cuban emigrants to Miami, on the city’s labor market. He also worked with Mr. Krueger on a paper studying the effects of the minimum wage on employment (http://www.nber.org/papers/w4509.pdf?new_window=1).

Thomson Reuters’ slate also includes Sir David Henry, of Oxford; M. Hashem Pesaran, of Cambridge and the University of Southern California at Los Angeles; and Peter Phillips, of Yale, for “their contributions to economic time-series, including modeling, testing and forecasting.”

The firm’s predictions conclude with a pair of University of Chicago candidates: Sam Peltzman, of the Booth School, and Judge Richard Posner, of the Law School, for “extending economic theories of regulation.”

C. Ross
10-11-2013, 07:33 PM
I have no idea who will win, of course.

So I'll start with the purely personal angle. I'm rooting for Bengt Holstrom or Robert Shiller, who taught at Yale school of management when I was there, or Gary Gorton who now teaches at Yale. This would keep my personal streak of Nobel connections alive: I had an honors macroeconomics seminar with Thomas Sargeant (who won in 2011); intermediate welfare economics with Leonid Hurwicz (2007); and business cycle theory with Edward Prescott (2004). I never took a class with Oliver Williamson (2009) but heard him lecture.

The only prospect with a political angle would be Judge Posner of the University of Chicago, who was both an economic theorist and judge implementing a number of actual decisions based on the theories that he and others developed around markets and regulation.

Lew Barrett
10-11-2013, 08:06 PM
OK, so now the Most Important Nobel Prize, Economics.


Full Tilt
10-12-2013, 04:41 AM
Seven years ago today Al Gore got his Nobel.

C. Ross
10-13-2013, 08:17 PM
The economics prize, to be announced tomorrow, is a puzzlement.

The committee in recent years has attempted to be relevant. So what are the most pressing current issues?

You could pick microeconomists who explain labor markets and why the rich are getting richer. That would say Angrist, Card and Krueger. The problem is, they gave an award to Pissarides and Diamond for this in 2010.

Maybe be economic growth? Japan has been in a 30 year doldrum, Europe is sputtering and the U.S. is fragile. You can even see slowing in China. That would say Barro and Romer.

Or or they could play small ball and give the award to a wonk whose work is crucial but not in some current spotlight. That could be Henry, Pessaran and Philips for econometrics, or Shiller for behavioral economics.

Sigh. It's like Christmas morning. Whaddya open first?

I'm betting on Shiller.

10-13-2013, 11:21 PM
My sister's father in law won for economics in 2000, I think. That is my tenuous link to fame.

C. Ross
10-14-2013, 04:58 PM
Would it be bragging to say I called it?

The 2013 Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel was awarded jointly to Eugene F. Fama, Lars Peter Hansen and Robert J. Shiller "for their empirical analysis of asset prices".

Eugene F. Fama, Robert J. Shiller and Lars Peter Hansen shared the 2013 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for at times conflicting research on how financial markets work and assets such as stocks are priced.

The three economists, all Americans, “laid the foundation for the current understanding of asset prices,” the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which selects the winner, said today in Stockholm. “It relies in part on fluctuations in risk and risk attitudes, and in part on behavioral biases and market frictions.”

Their work spans almost 50 years of research, beginning with the finding by the University of Chicago’s Fama that it’s difficult to predict price movements in the short run. That conclusion forms the basis for the theory that financial markets are efficient and led to the development of stock-index funds.

Later papers by Shiller and the University of Chicago’s Hansen focused on longer-run price swings and the extent to which they could be explained by such fundamental features as dividend payouts on stocks and the risk appetite of investors. Yale University’s Shiller, in particular, took issue with the argument that investors are always logical, using the phrase “irrational exuberance” to explain run-ups in asset prices.

The winners represent a “very interesting collection because Fama is the founder of the efficient-market theory and Shiller at least is one of the critics of it,” said Robert Solow, winner of the Nobel economics prize in 1987 and professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge.

To learn why giving this prize to these three economists is "like giving the prize to the Yankees and the Red Sox" read more here:


Paul Pless
10-14-2013, 05:04 PM
Would it be bragging to say I called it?

i've listened to every nobel winner in the last week, to the best of my knowledge these are the only ones to use the platform to make a political statement, by saying that the number one economic crisis confronting the world is income and wealth inequality*, good on them for doing so. . .

* norm should be happy

C. Ross
10-15-2013, 06:00 AM
They would be right for saying that.

Still - I CALLED it, oh yeah. :ycool: