is DNA stupid?

I don't think that Chomsky said that. However, from e7's statements, it appears that he believes that 95% of a two-year old's knowledge is prewired.

Agreed.

One counter example is that Japanese has no separate words for green and blue. Yes, most people with normal sight can tell the difference between colors that they don't have the name for, but sometimes the difference has no meaning. This could explain my wardrobe, for example. :)

-- D. Jay Newman

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]] karen715j (me): I haven't had time to check the latest thinking on this subject, but here's something from 22 years ago (using Google Groups):

HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 21 Dec 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 110

Today's Topics: Technology - WorldNet & Combinations of Telephones and Terminals & Looming Technology (2 msgs), Computers and People - Human Memory Capacity (5 msgs), Queries - Studies on Window Usage, News Article - Audio Response System

----------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 18 Dec 1982 1458-EST From: DANNY at MIT-OZ Subject: Human Memory Capacity

Does anyone out there know of any estimates of human memory capacity? That is, how many facts (or better yet bits) are stored in the average human?

------------------------------

Date: 19 December 1982 0101-EST (Sunday) From: Hans Moravec at CMU-CS-A (R110HM60) Subject: Re: Human Memory Capacity

My amateur researches agree with the 10 trillion bits/human brain figure. A survey article "The Molecular basis of Memory" by Kandel&Schwartz, Science 29 Oct 1982 reviews the increasingly conclusive evidence that all memory and learning, short and long term, indeed takes place in the synapses. Short term memory is mediated by varying concentration of a small molecule (tentatively identified) in the synapse, that dissipates in time; long term by migration of a large protein that stays lodged once it arrives.

There are great redundancies - I bet an efficient program could make like a human with only one trillion bits. -- Hans

------------------------------

Date: Sunday, 19 December 1982 02:19-EST From: MINSKY at MIT-MC Subject: Human Memory Capacity

It might be good to ask Chase, at CMU. He's been doing that stuff on people learning to remember long sequences (like 100 digits). My impression is that he thinks these people can deposit "chunks" in LTM at a rate of about 1 every three seconds or so.

This is impressive, but still within the old scale of fairly conservative size: if you did 50,000 of them for 20,000 days you'd get a billion.

[karen715j: BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!]

By the way, "chunks" ought to be like address-connections. Instead of bits, they might be routings or something.

------------------------------

Date: Sunday, 19 December 1982 13:50-EST From: DANNY at MIT-MC Subject: Human Memory Capacity

Here are some other interesting estimates I have collected over the years:

Minsky (In Semantic Information Processing) estimates you use

100,000 to a 1,000,000 facts "for ordinary things". (Do you still believe this Marvin?)

Von Neumann: 10^15 bits, he claims this comes from counting "the impressions which a human being gets in life" or "other factors".

Luria: (in Mind of a Mnensist) claims the capacity of his subject was "infinite".

-danny

------------------------------

Date: 19 Dec 1982 1427-PST Subject: Re: Human Memory Capacity From: ISAACSON at USC-ISI

Oh, well, if you actually collect these things, here is another one:

"The storage capacity of the human brain, namely a theoretical maximum of a thousand million bits in a lifetime.... though there can be few men who fill their memory to capacity..." [Source: Intelligence Came First, E. Lester Smith (ed.), at p. 56. P.S. at p.59-60 there is an interesting citation from an old paper by M. Minsky]

[karen715j: BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!]

-- JDI

------------------------------

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]] karen715j (me): And here's something from 16 years ago (using Google Web):

How Many Bytes in Human Memory? by Ralph C. Merkle

This article first appeared in Foresight Update No. 4, October 1988.

A related article on the computational limits of the human brain is available on the web.

Today it is commonplace to compare the human brain to a computer, and the human mind to a program running on that computer. Once seen as just a poetic metaphor, this viewpoint is now supported by most philosophers of human consciousness and most researchers in artificial intelligence. If we take this view literally, then just as we can ask how many megabytes of RAM a PC has we should be able to ask how many megabytes (or gigabytes, or terabytes, or whatever) of memory the human brain has.

Landauer reviewed and quantitatively analyzed experiments by himself and others in which people were asked to read text, look at pictures, and hear words, short passages of music, sentences, and nonsense syllables. After delays ranging from minutes to days the subjects were tested to determine how much they had retained. The tests were quite sensitive--they did not merely ask "What do you remember?" but often used true/false or multiple choice questions, in which even a vague memory of the material would allow selection of the correct choice. Often, the differential abilities of a group that had been exposed to the material and another group that had not been exposed to the material were used. The difference in the scores between the two groups was used to estimate the amount actually remembered (to control for the number of correct answers an intelligent human could guess without ever having seen the material). Because experiments by many different experimenters were summarized and analyzed, the results of the analysis are fairly robust; they are insensitive to fine details or specific conditions of one or another experiment. Finally, the amount remembered was divided by the time allotted to memorization to determine the number of bits remembered per second.

The remarkable result of this work was that human beings remembered very nearly two bits per second under all the experimental conditions. Visual, verbal, musical, or whatever--two bits per second. Continued over a lifetime, this rate of memorization would produce somewhat over

109 bits, or a few hundred megabytes. [karen715j: BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!]

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]] karen715j (me): The phrase, "...information needed to create [a 500 GB hard drive]" is ambiguous.

From one point of view: First evolve some chimps. Then evolve an Einstein to kickoff quantum mechanics and lasers. Then find a Turing and a Von Neuman somewhere. Then get an Edison, Townes, Maiman and Schawlow. Then find 500 very smart engineers and 100 very smart scientists. Put them to work for 40 years. (Replacing as needed.) And you MIGHT get a 500GB hard drive.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]] karen715j (me): I haven't had time to check the latest thinking on this subject, but here's something from 22 years ago (using Google Groups):

HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 21 Dec 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 110

Today's Topics: Technology - WorldNet & Combinations of Telephones and Terminals & Looming Technology (2 msgs), Computers and People - Human Memory Capacity (5 msgs), Queries - Studies on Window Usage, News Article - Audio Response System

----------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 18 Dec 1982 1458-EST From: DANNY at MIT-OZ Subject: Human Memory Capacity

Does anyone out there know of any estimates of human memory capacity? That is, how many facts (or better yet bits) are stored in the average human?

------------------------------

Date: 19 December 1982 0101-EST (Sunday) From: Hans Moravec at CMU-CS-A (R110HM60) Subject: Re: Human Memory Capacity

My amateur researches agree with the 10 trillion bits/human brain figure. A survey article "The Molecular basis of Memory" by Kandel&Schwartz, Science 29 Oct 1982 reviews the increasingly conclusive evidence that all memory and learning, short and long term, indeed takes place in the synapses. Short term memory is mediated by varying concentration of a small molecule (tentatively identified) in the synapse, that dissipates in time; long term by migration of a large protein that stays lodged once it arrives.

There are great redundancies - I bet an efficient program could make like a human with only one trillion bits. -- Hans

------------------------------

Date: Sunday, 19 December 1982 02:19-EST From: MINSKY at MIT-MC Subject: Human Memory Capacity

It might be good to ask Chase, at CMU. He's been doing that stuff on people learning to remember long sequences (like 100 digits). My impression is that he thinks these people can deposit "chunks" in LTM at a rate of about 1 every three seconds or so.

This is impressive, but still within the old scale of fairly conservative size: if you did 50,000 of them for 20,000 days you'd get a billion.

[karen715j: BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!]

By the way, "chunks" ought to be like address-connections. Instead of bits, they might be routings or something.

------------------------------

Date: Sunday, 19 December 1982 13:50-EST From: DANNY at MIT-MC Subject: Human Memory Capacity

Here are some other interesting estimates I have collected over the years:

Minsky (In Semantic Information Processing) estimates you use

100,000 to a 1,000,000 facts "for ordinary things". (Do you still believe this Marvin?)

Von Neumann: 10^15 bits, he claims this comes from counting "the impressions which a human being gets in life" or "other factors".

Luria: (in Mind of a Mnensist) claims the capacity of his subject was "infinite".

-danny

------------------------------

Date: 19 Dec 1982 1427-PST Subject: Re: Human Memory Capacity From: ISAACSON at USC-ISI

Oh, well, if you actually collect these things, here is another one:

"The storage capacity of the human brain, namely a theoretical maximum of a thousand million bits in a lifetime.... though there can be few men who fill their memory to capacity..." [Source: Intelligence Came First, E. Lester Smith (ed.), at p. 56. P.S. at p.59-60 there is an interesting citation from an old paper by M. Minsky]

[karen715j: BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!]

-- JDI

------------------------------

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]] karen715j (me): And here's something from 16 years ago (using Google Web):

How Many Bytes in Human Memory? by Ralph C. Merkle

This article first appeared in Foresight Update No. 4, October 1988.

A related article on the computational limits of the human brain is available on the web.

Today it is commonplace to compare the human brain to a computer, and the human mind to a program running on that computer. Once seen as just a poetic metaphor, this viewpoint is now supported by most philosophers of human consciousness and most researchers in artificial intelligence. If we take this view literally, then just as we can ask how many megabytes of RAM a PC has we should be able to ask how many megabytes (or gigabytes, or terabytes, or whatever) of memory the human brain has.

Landauer reviewed and quantitatively analyzed experiments by himself and others in which people were asked to read text, look at pictures, and hear words, short passages of music, sentences, and nonsense syllables. After delays ranging from minutes to days the subjects were tested to determine how much they had retained. The tests were quite sensitive--they did not merely ask "What do you remember?" but often used true/false or multiple choice questions, in which even a vague memory of the material would allow selection of the correct choice. Often, the differential abilities of a group that had been exposed to the material and another group that had not been exposed to the material were used. The difference in the scores between the two groups was used to estimate the amount actually remembered (to control for the number of correct answers an intelligent human could guess without ever having seen the material). Because experiments by many different experimenters were summarized and analyzed, the results of the analysis are fairly robust; they are insensitive to fine details or specific conditions of one or another experiment. Finally, the amount remembered was divided by the time allotted to memorization to determine the number of bits remembered per second.

The remarkable result of this work was that human beings remembered very nearly two bits per second under all the experimental conditions. Visual, verbal, musical, or whatever--two bits per second. Continued over a lifetime, this rate of memorization would produce somewhat over

109 bits, or a few hundred megabytes. [karen715j: BINGO! BINGO! BINGO!]

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]]]]]] ]]]]]]]]] karen715j (me): The phrase, "...information needed to create [a 500 GB hard drive]" is ambiguous.

From one point of view: First evolve some chimps. Then evolve an Einstein to kickoff quantum mechanics and lasers. Then find a Turing and a Von Neuman somewhere. Then get an Edison, Townes, Maiman and Schawlow. Then find 500 very smart engineers and 100 very smart scientists. Put them to work for 40 years. (Replacing as needed.) And you MIGHT get a 500GB hard drive.

I *knew* that my copy of the 1945 Japanese Aircraft Color Standards would come in handy some day! :)

Kusa-iro = Dark Green Midori-iro = Green Tanseishoku = Light Green

Kokuranshoku = Dark Blue Ao-iro = Blue Tanseishoku = Light Blue

650 megabyte CD sorry ;( (CD's use lasers. Hard drives use MAGNETS. (I think.))

THEN Start working on a 500 GB hard drive. Try parallel processing, it might speed things up.

MMOMM (The Many Modules of Marvin Minsky) as processed by: DaDa (Darwin and Dawkins)

Useful Delusions Modules: (Useful delusions that replicate themselves blindly and moronically, like Scientology and the Baptist Church) Time Space Color

snipped-for-privacy@sfu.ca&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=5&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=16&as_maxm=7&as_maxy=2004&lr=&hl=en Hallucinations (Apparently real and temporarily useful but not necessary and can be eventually discarded with the help of HedWeb drug therapy) Anger Depression Smugness Feelings of superiority Love

Einstein apparently thought everything would eventually be reduced To spacetime and a few equations and initial conditions.

But quantum mechanics seems to be true independently of spacetime.

This results in schizophrenic particles that hallucinate and have delusions.

(snip)

That comes out to 1.13 terabytes, so I don't know how that supports your single CD arguement. Regardless, I'd still question that number based on the fact it's 22 years old and, as mentioned before, the memory creation is still not fully understood and alot of research has been done between now and then. In addition, it's a single source among many that all vary in their estimates, none of which are validated.

(snip)

Remembering sequences of numbers isn't what I'd consider "maxing out" human memory potential. Remembering numbers isn't exactly a strong suite of the brain either, compared to how easy it is to remember other things (concepts, sensations, conversations, etc). When I went to a physics class, we didn't just memorize sequences of numbers. Rather, we went into theory and concepts, which deals with far more information than a single numeric sequence.

On a side note, remember a base-10 number equates to about 3.3 "bits" in terms of binary.

This is a good point.

(snip)

Again, it's a single source among many that all vary in their estimates. This varies from some other estimates you've posted. So, which one is right?

Again... single source that varies from the other estimates. Really, think about what you're saying... if you wrote down everything you knew in some equivalent "brain language" (aka not text), you think it'd only take a single CD? All your visual, audio, and other sensory memories of childhood? School? Adulthood?

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue there? :-)

Dave

I'm not saying that they can't distiguish the colors, merely that by default they are considered the same.

For example, English has many words for shades of blue and green also, but they don't make much difference normally.

-- D. Jay Newman

I spent some time today trying to get more up-to-date opinions and was very surprised that I couldn't find anything.

My own calculations go like this: (365 days/year)*(40 years)*(3 kilobytes/day) *(1000 bytes/kilobyte)*(8 bits/byte) = 350,400,000 bits = 1/15 of a CD

Summarizing yesterday's post: Moravec/Minsky >> 1000 CD's Isaacson/Smith >> 1.5 CD's Merkle/Landauer >> 1 CD

So obviously I prefer Merkle/Landauer/Isaacson/Smith/karen715j to: snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com (David Harper)

But I don't know what you credentials are other than that you are very opinionated.

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com (David Harper):

Yes.

A few cartoons worth of info for the week of April 7, 1998; etc.

A few notes and the sound of Rush Limbaugh's voice from May 16, 1989.

Miscellaneous cartoon images that I THINK I remember.

Cartoon images, rough maps, not many kilobytes.

Cartoon images, rough maps, a few phrases and sentences. (Per day -- maybe -- if even that much.)

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Karen J):

How much information is there in building a hard drive? I guess it depends on which "building operating system" you are feeding the info into.

I don't think you specifiied that.

So it's ambiguous.

- karen715j

I missed the part where 3 kilobytes/day was mentioned. How did you arrive at that figure?

3kb/day? I remember seeing a C-130 landing last week. Think of all the information that includes... color, weather conditions, and sound are easy enough and require only a few dozen "bits". The things like speed, altitude, direction, pitch... all those constantly change with time and to form a coherent memory as a function of time, your brain has to record these as they change. I remember it rolling left to line up, flairing at about 15 ft, the smoke from the wheels at touchdown.... so my brain has to remember the following:

Type of aircraft: c-130 Color: grey Special characteristics: two large fuel tanks on wings Weather conditions: sunny and hot Location: roadside by air force base Enviroment: Trees to the north and south, construction on opposite side of runway, 2 HMMWV's parked by the fence Time of day: 5pm approx Sound: low drone, approx 60 hz. Location of first sighting: over northern trees, approx 1 mile out Altitude of first sighting: approx 500 ft AGL Attitude of first sighting: straight and level Location of first first maneuver: over northern trees, approx 1/2 mile out Altitude of first maneuver: approx 200 ft AGL Observation during maneuver: landing gear down Attitude of first maneuver: slight roll left, less than 10 degrees Duration of maneuver: 5 seconds approx Attitude of after first maneuver: straight and level Location of second maneuver: just over start of the runway Altitude of second maneuver: approx 15 ft AGL Attitude of second maneuver: flair for landing Observation during second maneuver: engine power reduced Speed at touchdown: about 150 kts Distance from flair at touchdown: about 800ft Observation during touchdown: mild squelch and white smoke curling behind wheels, some spinning off into wing vortices; flaps up at about

3000ft.

And this whole episode lasted about 30 seconds. You may question the accuracy of my observations, but regardless that's still information I recorded.

According to your 3kb/info a day, I should have only remembered about .19 bits of data during that 30 seconds (assuming 18hrs of being awake). Needless to say, this memory is far more than .19 bits of data. Sure, my brain doesn't usually record information that fast when I'm sitting at home cooking, but if you want to include the average amount of things I learn at work, conversations I have with my brothers and sisters on a daily basis, etc...

This is the internet, and I don't know what your creditials are either. :-) In a public forum, it's up for you to decide what are logical arguments and what are statements made by crackpots.

Secondly, I don't think I'm any more opinionated than you. Your contention is more specific than mine. My argument is that it takes more than 1 CD to record memories. I have no idea how much more, other than to say I'd "guesstimate" it to be over 100. I wouldn't call that too opinionated.

Cartoons that require similar information needed for my C-130 landing observation. And I'm sure we both have tens of thousands of "cartoons" stored in our brain, EVEN IF WE DON'T READILY RECALL THEM. I'm sure you've had the experience of someone saying "remember when we were kids and...", thus bringing up a memory you hadn't thought of in years. Remember, creating memories and retrieving memories are mutually exclusive.

It really wouldn't vary. A hard drive's data storage is a function of surface area and the head/reader resolution. If you're using an inefficient method of recording data (aka operating system), you'll still have 500GB of "bits" on a full hard drive, although the information might not be recorded efficiently.

Regardless, I don't think the hard drive discussion is helping either of our arguements. We should probably leave this out of the next thread. :-)

Dave

(snip)

My bad, I divided by 60 one too many times. That should be 11 bits of data... and less than a couple letters worth of data. As mentioned before, that 30 second memory used FAR more information that 11 bits.

Dave

Nor should you, at all. Unless Chomsky wishes to arrive here and debate his own views.

It's the same as tilting at windmills to accept being sent off to challenge some "dead words" that cannot argue, defend, or otherwise say anything to clarify or enlighten. A "go argue with ..." is exactly the place I always leave off when trying to "have a conversation." If the person themselves isn't up to the idea of defending what they say, on their own, then that is good enough evidence for me that they don't know how and therefore don't have any idea what they are talking about.

Jon

Correction, quantum mechanics just has not been merged/encompasssed with relativity through a grand unification theory yet. The laws of physics have to be continuous, regardless of scale. Two of the leading candidates for this union are string theory and quantum loop gravity (which I'm a fan of).

Dave

Yeah, but I couldn't tell if she meant 60% are racists FOR NOT supporting equal rights or FOR supporting equal rights... so I left that one alone.

The one I didn't get was for statement #1... 90% are racists for believing Jews are smarter than two other peoples, while the rest are morons...? What is that about? Only racists are the non-morons? WTF?

Dave

Great! This is the last time I'll have to address your idiotic comments!

This whole society is based on redistribution, special help, affirmative action, and whatnot. If you'd like to turn back the clock to 1931, maybe you should try living in the Sudan or someplace. Western society doesn't seem to fit your needs.

Who the hell cares where the posts are posted? If you're tired of reading someone's drivel, just don't click on their name any more.

.:\:/:. +--------------------+ .:\:\:/:/:. | PLEASE DO NOT | :.:\:\:/:/:.: | FEED THE TROLLS | :=.' - - '.=: | | '=(\ 9 9 /)=' | Thank you, | ( (_) ) | The Management | /`-vvv-'\ +--------------------+ / \ | | @@@ / /|,,,,,|\ \ | | @@@ /_// /^\ \\_\ @x@@x@ | | |/ WW( ( ) )WW \||||/ | | \| __\,,\ /,,/__ \||/ |jgs| | (______Y______) /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

I apologize.

I'm updating my opinion on this subject, and it appears it's going to be a lot of work. Any help would be appreciated.

Here's my *very* preliminary first list of "winners of the Nobel Prize in quantum mechanics":

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2003 for pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids Alexei A. Abrikosov Vitaly L. Ginzburg Anthony J. Leggett 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA and Russia Russia United Kingdom and USA Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, IL, USA P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute Moscow, Russia University of Illinois Urbana, IL, USA b. 1928 b. 1916 b. 1938 The Nobel Prize in Physics 2001 for the achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms, and for early fundamental studies of the properties of the condensates Eric A. Cornell Wolfgang Ketterle Carl E. Wieman 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA Federal Republic of Germany USA University of Colorado, JILA Boulder, CO, USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, USA University of Colorado, JILA Boulder, CO, USA b. 1961 b. 1957 b. 1951

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999 for elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interactions in physics Gerardus 't Hooft Martinus J.G. Veltman 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize the Netherlands the Netherlands Utrecht University Utrecht, the Netherlands Bilthoven, the Netherlands b. 1946 b. 1931

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1998 for their discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations Robert B. Laughlin Horst L. Störmer Daniel C. Tsui 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA Federal Republic of Germany USA Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA Columbia University New York, NY, USA Princeton University Princeton, NJ, USA b. 1950 b. 1949 b. 1939 (in Henan, China)

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1997 for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light Steven Chu Claude Cohen-Tannoudji William D. Phillips 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA France USA Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA Collège de France; École Normale Supérieure Paris, France National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, MD, USA b. 1948 b. 1933 (in Constantine, Algeria) b. 1948

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1996 for their discovery of superfluidity in helium-3 David M. Lee Douglas D. Osheroff Robert C. Richardson 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA USA USA Cornell University Ithaca, NY, USA Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA Cornell University Ithaca, NY, USA b. 1931 b. 1945 b. 1937

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1995 for pioneering experimental contributions to lepton physics for the discovery of the tau lepton "for the detection of the neutrino" Martin L. Perl Frederick Reines 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize USA USA Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA University of California Irvine, CA, USA b. 1927 b. 1918 d. 1998

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1990 for their pioneering investigations concerning deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons and bound neutrons, which have been of essential importance for the development of the quark model in particle physics Jerome I. Friedman Henry W. Kendall Richard E. Taylor 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA USA Canada Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, USA Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA b. 1930 b. 1926 d. 1999 b. 1929

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1988 for the neutrino beam method and the demonstration of the doublet structure of the leptons through the discovery of the muon neutrino Leon M. Lederman Melvin Schwartz Jack Steinberger 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA USA USA Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Batavia, IL, USA Digital Pathways, Inc. Mountain View, CA, USA CERN Geneva, Switzerland b. 1922 b. 1932 b. 1921 (in Bad Kissingen, Germany)

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1984 for their decisive contributions to the large project, which led to the discovery of the field particles W and Z, communicators of weak interaction Carlo Rubbia Simon van der Meer 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize Italy the Netherlands CERN Geneva, Switzerland CERN Geneva, Switzerland b. 1934 b. 1925

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1981 for their contribution to the development of laser spectroscopy "for his contribution to the development of high-resolution electron spectroscopy" Nicolaas Bloembergen Arthur Leonard Schawlow Kai M. Siegbahn 1/4 of the prize 1/4 of the prize 1/2 of the prize USA USA Sweden Harvard University Cambridge, MA, USA Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA Uppsala University Uppsala, Sweden b. 1920 (in Dordrecht, the Netherlands) b. 1921 d. 1999 b. 1918

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1980 for the discovery of violations of fundamental symmetry principles in the decay of neutral K-mesons James Watson Cronin Val Logsdon Fitch 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize USA USA University of Chicago Chicago, IL, USA Princeton University Princeton, NJ, USA b. 1931 b. 1923

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 for their contributions to the theory of the unified weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, including, inter alia, the prediction of the weak neutral current Sheldon Lee Glashow Abdus Salam Steven Weinberg 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA Pakistan USA Harvard University, Lyman Laboratory Cambridge, MA, USA International Centre for Theoretical Physics Trieste, Italy; Imperial College London, United Kingdom Harvard University Cambridge, MA, USA b. 1932 b. 1926 d. 1996 b. 1933 The Nobel Prize in Physics 1976 for their pioneering work in the discovery of a heavy elementary particle of a new kind Burton Richter Samuel Chao Chung Ting 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize USA USA Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Stanford, CA, USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, USA b. 1931 b. 1936

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1973 for their experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in semiconductors and superconductors, respectively "for his theoretical predictions of the properties of a supercurrent through a tunnel barrier, in particular those phenomena which are generally known as the Josephson effects" Leo Esaki Ivar Giaever Brian David Josephson 1/4 of the prize 1/4 of the prize 1/2 of the prize Japan USA United Kingdom IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Yorktown Heights, NY, USA General Electric Company Schenectady, NY, USA University of Cambridge Cambridge, United Kingdom b. 1925 b. 1929 (in Bergen, Norway) b. 1940

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1972 for their jointly developed theory of superconductivity, usually called the BCS-theory John Bardeen Leon Neil Cooper John Robert Schrieffer 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize USA USA USA University of Illinois Urbana, IL, USA Brown University Providence, RI, USA University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA, USA b. 1908 d. 1991 b. 1930 b. 1931

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1969 for his contributions and discoveries concerning the classification of elementary particles and their interactions Murray Gell-Mann USA California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA, USA b. 1929

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1965 for their fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing consequences for the physics of elementary particles Sin-Itiro Tomonaga Julian Schwinger Richard P. Feynman 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize 1/3 of the prize Japan USA USA Tokyo University of Education Tokyo, Japan Harvard University Cambridge, MA, USA California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA, USA b. 1906 d. 1979 b. 1918 d. 1994 b. 1918 d. 1988 The Nobel Prize in Physics 1964 for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle Charles Hard Townes Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov Aleksandr Mikhailovich Prokhorov 1/2 of the prize 1/4 of the prize 1/4 of the prize USA USSR USSR Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, USA P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute Moscow, USSR P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute Moscow, USSR b. 1915 b. 1922 d. 2001 b. 1916

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1963 for his contributions to the theory of the atomic nucleus and the elementary particles, particularly through the discovery and application of fundamental symmetry principles "for their discoveries concerning nuclear shell structure" Eugene Paul Wigner Maria Goeppert-Mayer J. Hans D. Jensen 1/2 of the prize 1/4 of the prize 1/4 of the prize USA USA Federal Republic of Germany Princeton University Princeton, NJ, USA University of California La Jolla, CA, USA University of Heidelberg Heidelberg, Federal Republic of Germany b. 1902 (in Budapest, Hungary) d. 1995 b. 1906 (in Kattowitz, then Germany) d. 1972 b. 1907 d. 1973

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1962 for his pioneering theories for condensed matter, especially liquid helium Lev Davidovich Landau USSR Academy of Sciences Moscow, USSR b. 1908 d. 1968

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1961 for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his thereby achieved discoveries concerning the stucture of the nucleons "for his researches concerning the resonance absorption of gamma radiation and his discovery in this connection of the effect which bears his name" Robert Hofstadter Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize USA Federal Republic of Germany Stanford University Stanford, CA, USA Technical University Munich, Federal Republic of Germany; California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA, USA b. 1915 d. 1990 b. 1929

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1957 for their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles Chen Ning Yang Tsung-Dao Lee 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize China China Institute for Advanced Study Princeton, NJ, USA Columbia University New York, NY, USA b. 1922 b. 1926

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1954 for his fundamental research in quantum mechanics, especially for his statistical interpretation of the wavefunction "for the coincidence method and his discoveries made therewith" Max Born Walther Bothe 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize United Kingdom Federal Republic of Germany Edinburgh University Edinburgh, United Kingdom University of Heidelberg; Max-Planck-Institut für medizinische Forschung Heidelberg, Federal Republic of Germany b. 1882 (in Breslau, then Germany) d. 1970 b. 1891 d. 1957

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1949 for his prediction of the existence of mesons on the basis of theoretical work on nuclear forces Hideki Yukawa Japan Kyoto Imperial University Kyoto, Japan; Columbia University New York, NY, USA b. 1907 d. 1981

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1945 for the discovery of the Exclusion Principle, also called the Pauli Principle Wolfgang Pauli Austria Princeton University Princeton, NJ, USA b. 1900 d. 1958

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1933 for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory Erwin Schrödinger Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac 1/2 of the prize 1/2 of the prize Austria United Kingdom Berlin University Berlin, Germany University of Cambridge Cambridge, United Kingdom b. 1887 d. 1961 b. 1902 d. 1984

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1932 for the creation of quantum mechanics, the application of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of the allotropic forms of hydrogen Werner Karl Heisenberg Germany Leipzig University Leipzig, Germany b. 1901 d. 1976

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929 for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons Prince Louis-Victor Pierre Raymond de Broglie France Sorbonne University, Institut Henri Poincaré Paris, France b. 1892 d. 1987

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922 for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them Niels Henrik David Bohr Denmark Copenhagen University Copenhagen, Denmark b. 1885 d. 1962

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921 for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect Albert Einstein Germany and Switzerland Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institut (now Max-Planck-Institut) für Physik Berlin, Germany b. 1879 (in Ulm, Germany) d. 1955

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1918 in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck Germany Berlin University Berlin, Germany b. 1858 d. 1947

' . /|\ .' ' / \ ' . ' ' / | \ ' ' ' ' ' / \ ' . . / | \ ' ' . ' ' / \ . ___________________________________________ ' / | \ ' . | | ' ' . / \ . ' | You are now entering a No-Trolling zone. | . ' / | \ | Feeding of Trolls is strictly prohibited. | ' ' / \ ' '| _________________________________________ | '/ | \ ' || || ' / \ || ' || . / | \ .|| || . / \ . / | \ '