Oct 16
Nobel ‘Peace’ Prize
Written by guest on Friday, October 16th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Filed under:-guest-posts | Tags:China, nobel prize, US
Add comments
Filed under:-guest-posts | Tags:China, nobel prize, US
Add comments
Gladly we accept Nobel Prize for Obama.
For nothing he did during his nomination.
There are currently no comments highlighted.
For nothing he did during his nomination.
Potentially he holds the key for peace.
By not pressing the button to send nuclear missiles to destroy the world,
Or not sending the nuclear carrier to enforce his kingdom.
Or buying peace with money like no tomorrow.
Practically Deng saved a million from starving every year.
Not a nomination nod for this short guy.
Not destroying is more important than saving life.
Or Black is a better color than Yellow.
Wake up, you idiot committee.
There are currently no comments highlighted.
October 16th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Hope to see what you think about Deng and how Nobel prize slipped from him. We can no longer argue on TSM as Obama got it without bringing the world peace.
October 20th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Interesting but arguable facts.
* Dali Lama is the only one born and educated in China (Tibet is part of China) to receive a Nobel prize if he is still considered a Chinese citizen.
* The Chinese writer winner is a French citizen and his works are censored in China.
(The above two are most likely political as the committee wants to give prizes to the enemies of China.)
* The current Nobel winner is from Hong Kong. He is not educated for early education in China then and a Chinese citizen by takeover.
* The Chinese winners who are citizens of foreign countries should be counted as 50% Chinese at most – I estimate about 70% of science PhDs in US were born in foreign countries.
* The second generation of Chinese winners who were born in a foreign country should be counted as 25% Chinese – just for the family education from their Chinese parents.
October 23rd, 2009 at 10:58 am
Well, I think Deng and Obama are in some ways could be put into the same category, the best thing they did is stopping their own countries from going into a total war, but Deng did start the Sino-Vietnam War, this is hard to argue. About Gao Kun, he has got many nationalities, and as a physics researhcer, I find it incredible that working on optical communication can get you a Nobel Prize for Physics today. Yuan Longping is one person I believe to really deserve one. But there is no prize for agriculture.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:06 pm
When you’re using internet today, there is a good chance you’re using optical fiber which is Gao’s work to make it feasible by taking out the impurities in the optical fiber. IBM and other corporations implemented fiber optic based on Kao’s work. Do you think internet is fast without fiber optic?
Chinese scientists are doing better in US than in Europe – Kao is one of the few exceptions. There should be more Nobel winners from HK for years to come. HK has about 6.5 million and has done pretty good in most fronts.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Dear TonyP4:
I don’t doubt Gao’s huge contributions to human beings, I studied optical communication as a undergraduate. But being a physics researcher, I don’t think it brings about any innovation to the physics front. Since the mechanism behind the optical communication, the total reflection, is well understood and demonstrated to work probably more than 300 years ago. What’s left for Gao to do is actually overcoming a engineering challenge, in fact, he did this work for his thesis, which is on electrical engineering. In sum, I believe it’s a engineering problem rather than anything physics.
October 24th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Hi Justkeeper,
If you do not think Kao deserves it, then the theory of Nobel prize is given to HK to punish China for suppressing the human right parade there could be partly true. I buy it for Peace and Literature prizes but not for science.
——–
According to Nobel’s will, the Peace Prize should be awarded to the person who:
“ during the preceding year […] shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.[1] ”
———–
The Norwegians use ‘Peace’ Prize as a political tool to influence world affairs. Their yardstick is based on a rich country like Norway, so they oppose developing countries like China. The Prize should be given to where the credit is due. Period.
———–
October 24th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Dear TonyP4: How can you logically deduce such a conclusion? I don’t buy into either theories here. What I was trying to say is simply”all those deserve an award have been awarded”, since there is no major breakthrough on the fundamentals of the physics for years, the committee has started some sort of laureate hunting, they need to give the prize to someone each year anyway. And have you noticed the time gap between the time Gao produced his first optic-fiber and he got awarded? That’s about 50 years, why did the committee wait for so long?
October 24th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
I believe the Swiss selects the science winners. It is hard to believe there is no physicists eligible for such price. If no one should be awarded, there should be no prize for the year. The selection criteria could not be for major breakthrough but major usefulness for mankind. This year has a theme on optical physics.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
@TopyP4 #6,
You quoted:
You know …. we do have this credit crisis – and looming debt.
From the grapevines: the Peace Prize might have previously been awarded on concrete work, but this year, it’s the first time the prize has been awarded based on credit.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Why China will have more Nobel science winners.
(Some stat from my friend Joe)
* Education. 6 million college grade a year. 1.5 million kids studying aboard. 10 times US science graduates including science PhDs.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Why China will not have Nobel science winners soon.
* Education stressed on taking tests, not creative thinking (good and bad).
We do not have the space/guidance to do experiment when we’re young. The most we did could be a simple radio. As a middle class, we never have to do any house work or use any machine/tool – the most I used is a screw driver once.
* Research facilities and faculties are just enhancing to the world standard.
* Effect of losing a generation of education due to Cultural Revolution is still with us, but hopefully disappears for ever.
Most top scientists are well-rounded and have good guidance from their family. Most are good in music, arts…
* Like Japan, pure research is too costly. Concentrate the effort on commercial products.
* Judging from the age of science recipients, it takes about 15 more years for China’s scientists to be in the frontier stage of research.
November 6th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Nobel price material?
Cell phone could cause cancer from one of the Chinese inventors.
姓名
中文：施 敏
英文：Simon M. Sze
出生年月日
（西元） 1936年3月21日
當選院士屆數
第20屆
學歷
國立台灣大學電機系學士（1957）
美國華盛頓大學電機系碩士（1960）
美國史坦福大學電機系博士（1963）
經歷
美國貝爾實驗室研究（1963-1989）
國立交通大學電子工 程系 教授（1990 － ）
國立交通大學電子與資訊研究中心主任（1990-1996）
國科會國家毫微米元件實驗室主任（1998 － ）
專長
半導體元件物理、積體電路製程技術
曾獲得之
學術榮譽
中山學術獎（1969）
IEEE J. J. Ebers獎（1993）
中央研究院院士（1994）
美國國家工程院院士（1995）
行政院傑出科技榮譽獎（1997）
教育部國家講座（1998-2001）
中華民國斐陶斐傑出成就獎（1998）
教育部國家講座（2001-2003）
現職
國立交通大學「聯華電子講座」教授兼「國家奈米元件實驗室」主任
手機發明者之一施 敏 的良心告白
美國國家工程研究院最近公佈新院士名單，共有三位華裔學者入選，本刊上期僅提及吳京院士及陳惠發教授，尚有一位獲此殊榮者為本院新科院士、著名之電子工程專家施 敏 。施院士為台大電機工程學士、美國史丹佛大學博士，現任交通大學教授。他對現代微電子科技（Microelectronics）的發展有重大貢獻，是半導體元件物理及製程技術的權威。他在經濟部電子工業小組委員任內，協助成立工研院電子所，對開拓我國電子工業有前瞻性的建樹。
施 敏 ，是非常厲害的人物，之前在貝爾實驗室研究，幾年前才回到國內，是大哥大四個發明人之一，寫過一本半導體元件物理，發行量大概已有 一兩 百萬本，被論文引用的次數約兩萬多次 (據說是世界第一)，這樣說只是想傳達一位學術界上很有地位的學者的看法而已。
施 敏 先生在一場Evolution of Nonvolatile Semiconductor Memory的Seminar時再三的強調關於手機的危險性，他引用美國目前研究的數據：
人類如處在2mG(毫高斯)，就會有不好的影響，並當場示範，只使用可在10~200Hz(赫茲)範圍內的儀器，量的的結果是：手機超過了儀器的上限 1000mG，而手機所用的微波範圍在2000,20000Hz 或更高。
他在國家實驗室所量的結果可以到達1~2萬 mG(毫高斯)，這是通話中所量測的，更別提是在接通中了。本實驗所用的手機是motorola的，其他的品牌也不會好到哪去。
他舉一個在日本的朋友為例，他每天跟女友 用手機聊天超過8小時，結果辦了第三天就掛了。
施 敏 教授又做了一個例子，就是用耳機來講手機，在耳機旁所測的電磁波約是 10 mG（因為電磁波是成指數的衰減），所以他做了強力的建議：
就是千萬不要用手機來談情說愛，有急事才適用。最好不要超過一分鐘，而且最重要的是：一定要用耳機，不用簡直是一種慢性的自殺！
手機發明者之一的良心告白:
1.使用手機五年可能會致癌
2.手機掛在左腰比在右腰好
3.最好不要掛在身上,最好放在背 包
4.手機越迷你, 輻射越強.
5.最好用耳機聽
小心使用手機，請好好閱讀，這是忠告。
因為手機在接收訊號和發射訊號時，是利用高頻率的波來傳遞的，所以你可以把他想像成就是光，只是頻率不一樣而已。而人體由原子所構成，每個原子都有能階，如果剛好能接收這樣的入射波的話就會吸收能量，這和微波爐的原理是一樣的 所以還是得小心一點喔…
TVBS新聞中，有一則關於手机的新聞，被訪問者是一個研究員，他說他有一個朋友在大陸經商，用了五年的手機，最近竟然在耳朵到臉頰的部分出現了癌細胞，分佈的形狀就是一個手機的形狀，動手術還把肉「挖掉」，你還敢用?那位研究員還說，用一分鐘的手机，靠近耳朵的腦細胞溫度會上升1.5度細胞雖然不會死，但是細胞中的基因卻會壞死。除了這些之外，手機用多還會有失憶、提早老年痴呆的症狀， (但是不會禿頭啦!呵呵呵….)所以，除非必要，還是少用手機，多用公用電話吧!!
有手機的人越來越多，參考一下吧!!轉載自民生報醫藥保健版
方基存曾和幾位醫師為 行動電話該掛在左腰、右腰有過深入討論，最後一致結論是：左腰是較佳的選擇。因為，左側的器官較少，即使腎臟也位於後腹腔，被耐受性較強的腸子遮蔽，影響有限；反觀右腰除腎臟外，還有對電磁波耐受性不強的肝臟，危險性較大。
以下的結果是從廠商得到的相關訊息，及實驗的結果:
手機收訊越強代表來源電磁載波越強，尤其是強調在電梯，地下室，隧道都可收到訊號的手機及門號公司，這些門號公或手機廠商為了滿足收訊無死角會相互配合如加強手機上晶片的功能與基地臺的加建，! 但是這只是讓通訊電磁波可以涵蓋更廣的範圍與可收到訊息，但真正要達到收訊清楚，就要加強電磁載波與幅射訊號。
手機越小越需要更強的電磁波訊號，才能訊號完全，所以當妳聽到有人手機很迷你，功能很強，收訊很好時，不要羨慕 ，當妳聽到有人可以在電梯地下道，隧道收到手機訊號，不要羨慕，這所透露出一個訊息是：他的手機電磁波訊號是妳的好幾倍！想想看，電磁波要透電梯殼，地下道等鋼筋水泥障礙物再到妳的手機上，需要多強的訊號，這等於是妳站在微波爐前沒有將門板關上，直接啟動微波爐一樣。
December 10th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
It seems the committee is kissing Obama’s black asx (even 60% of US citizens do not agree and I bet more than 80% outside US do not agree too).
They got a Chinese pianist to play to tell the world that they’re not against China on the contrary.
I like a black president. However, the reckless spending on bailouts, wars… will lead US to another mountain of debts. We should let the ‘tooig-to-fail companies’ fail. We would suffer but we’ll securely recover.
December 10th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Hmm, it’s well know that the Nobel Peace Prize is pretty much bs. Arafat won it lol.
Anyhow, methinks that Obama winning this is not as much about Obama the President (he didn’t do much yet as the preznit) but rather about the American people. It’s a great achievement for the US as a whole that a man who looks black (although he is half white, which nobody seems to care) can actually win the highest position in this country through a democractic process. That will probably not happen in many other white dominated nations. If anything, the prize is to award Americans and to recognize its successful move towards conquering racism.
Personally I think that racism in the US is hardly conquered if you look at employment, health, and crime related metrics. But Obama winning the election does symbolizes a significant change.
December 10th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Hi Hmm, first I have to say I’m no racist but the discussion on the black is not politically correct when we come to facts.
Some of the facts.
* Do you think Obama can achieve his education if he was raised by a black, single mother instead of a white one?
* On the police incident on a black guy in Boston, he was over-reacted without checking the fact. If the guy is white, would he be reacted like that? Similar reaction on the acquittal by black on OJ.
* The statistics on the percentage of black in prisons and drug addicts/pushers/racists do not fare well for the black.
* Tiger Woods (half black and half Thai) and many other black celebrities do not sever as good models for black kids (esp. those with single, teenage mothers).
Their race has a lot of problems than Chinese in US. The Chinese here are not famous basket ball players or pop singers, but we are better citizens.