No FEMALE won the Nobel Prize in physics

Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the representation of women in the Nobel Prize for Physics, highlighting that while Marie Curie won the prize in 1903, no woman has won it alone. Lisa Meitner is mentioned as a notable figure who should have received recognition. The conversation touches on the rarity of single winners in general, noting that the last individual prize was awarded in 1992. Participants discuss the gender disparity in physics, with statistics indicating that women make up a small percentage of physicists, which affects their chances of winning prestigious awards. The conversation also explores potential reasons for this disparity, including differences in interests between genders and the impact of societal expectations. Some argue that the lack of female winners is not necessarily a problem, suggesting that women may gravitate toward different fields. The discussion concludes with reflections on the evolving landscape of gender representation in academia and the importance of recognizing contributions across various disciplines.
  • #31
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
If we had a Nobel Prize in sandwich making, watch out boys!
 
  • #33
Negatron said:
If we had a [STRIKE]Nobel [/STRIKE]Prize in sandwich making, watch out boys!

Yeah, there're lots of those!



I'm serious to what delay women from achieving that prize in physics. They’ve been in the field long enough, yet not recognized as expected! What qualification/abilities/needs/whatever do men have that they don’t?
 
  • #34
drizzle said:
Yeah, there're lots of those!



I'm serious to what delay women from achieving that prize in physics. They’ve been in the field long enough, yet not recognized as expected! What qualification/abilities/needs/whatever do men have that they don’t?

But again, there simply aren't that many female physicists to start with; probably less than 15% of all active physicist are female and many of those are relatively young, which is relevant since there is usually a delay of 15-20 years before the prize of awarded for a discovery.
Also, note that those 15% (or whatever, it is probably less globally) is still a huge improvement over the situation say 40-50 years ago.

Hence, statistically you would at most expect something like 5-10% of all laureates to be women.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
f95toli said:
But again, there simply aren't that many female physicists to start with; probably less than 15% of all active physicist are female and many of those are relatively young, which is relevant since there is usually a delay of 15-20 years before the prize of awarded to a discovery.
Also, note that those 15% (or whatever, it is probably less globally) is still a huge improvement over the situation say 40-50 years ago.

Hence, statistically you would at most expect something like 5-10% of all laureates to be women.
Good point. Things are getting better, but it takes time. When I entered engineering school 40+ years ago, there were 5 females out of over 300 freshmen. Not good odds if you wanted a female study-partner. ;-)
 
  • #36
drizzle said:
I'm serious to what delay women from achieving that prize in physics. They’ve been in the field long enough, yet not recognized as expected! What qualification/abilities/needs/whatever do men have that they don’t?

Have you considered the fact that few girls are interested in physics? If you were really asking why this is, that's a deep question about the anatomy of the human brain and its evolutionary history. I don't think many people, if any, can answer that question.
 
  • #37
ideasrule said:
Have you considered the fact that few girls are interested in physics? If you were really asking why this is, that's a deep question about the anatomy of the human brain and its evolutionary history. I don't think many people, if any, can answer that question.

There's also the given that grad school and post doc years for women coincide with prime time for being awarded one of http://cornerstork.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/crying_baby.jpg" . I am told that these special projects can be a real time-suck, and can distract from research.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #38
This reminds me of the thread we had a few months ago on why all the top sprinters are black. There are differences between men and women, and that's just that. Don't lose any sleep over it. No one complains that most nannies or nurses are women.
 
  • #39
Lisa! said:
Look at it this way: she was very nice that she decided to share it with his husband!:-p

Pierre Curie was not a mere hanger-on. Ever here of Curie temperature in ferromagnets? That's Pierre, not Marie.
 
  • #40
Vanadium 50 said:
Pierre Curie was not a mere hanger-on. Ever here of Curie temperature in ferromagnets? That's Pierre, not Marie.
I know! I was just kidding:wink:
 
  • #41
Vanadium 50 said:
Pierre Curie was not a mere hanger-on. Ever here of Curie temperature in ferromagnets? That's Pierre, not Marie.


Nonsense, Pierre couldn't even cross a street on his own.
 
  • #42
Vanadium 50 said:
Pierre Curie was not a mere hanger-on. Ever here of Curie temperature in ferromagnets? That's Pierre, not Marie.

I never realized that, thanks. All the accounts I've read did describe him as something of a hanger-on...
 
  • #43
arildno said:
Nonsense, Pierre couldn't even cross a street on his own.

:biggrin:
 
  • #44
qspeechc said:
There are differences between men and women, and that's just that. Don't lose any sleep over it.

Possibly, but I find it hard to believe that this is the whole explanation. When I was an undergrad about 20% of the student in my class were women (this was at a technical university), but the same year about 55% of the students in chemistry were women (it was the first year they were in majority) and when they a couple of years later started a biotech program something like 80% of the students were women. As far as I remember the ratio was about the same among the PhD students. Chemistry and Physics are not THAT different.

Also, there were about 50 people in the department where I did my PhD, the majority were PhD student and of those only 3 were women. All three had the same advisor as me, and she just happened to be the only woman professor...

My point is that areas where there already are many women seems to attract even more women, and once you reach a "critical mass" the percentage of women tends to go up very quickly. Note also that some professions that are "typically male" can be "typically female" in another country, in e.g. Russia the medical profession underwent what is known as feminization after WWII and women have been in majority ever since (note that this refers to doctors, not nurses etc)
 
  • #45
As an aside, it's worth mentioning that one other woman has won the Nobel in Physics: Maria Goeppert-Mayer, for the development of the theory of magic numbers in nuclear shell structure. (Shared, with her collaborator Jensen and with Eugene Wigner, in 1963.)
 
  • #46
Susan Howson won the Adams prize (a Cambridge award) in 2002, as the first female.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
422
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K