Why do Nobel laureates get older? Nobel Prize in numbers.

Marie Skłodowska-Curie, John Bardeen, Linus Pauling and Frederic Senger

On the eve of the Nobel Week started, during which the best minds of the planet will receive well-deserved awards. On Monday, the first prizes - in medicine - have already received the first "trio" of authors: Randy Shekman, James Rothman and Thomas Zudof.

In honor of this event, "Reedus" decided to recall the most interesting facts about the most prestigious award in the world. But it turned out that those were a wagon and a small cart. Therefore, in order to somehow streamline them, we connected each curious fact with a certain numeral ...

• $1.1 million. This is the amount of money awarded to the laureates this year. In June 2012, it had to be reduced by 20% in order to save money.
• Once at the ceremony, the medals were mixed up. In 1975, the Russian economics prize winner Leonid Kantorovich received the medal of his American colleague Tjalling Koopmans.
• The only winner in the world of both the Nobel Prize and the Ignobel Prize is Andrey Geim. In 2000, along with Michael Barry, they were honored by the Ignobel Physics Committee for "using magnets to demonstrate the levitation of frogs."
• The only woman to win the Nobel Prize twice is Marie Skłodowska-Curie.
• The first winner of the Peace Prize, who received it alone, Sir William Randel Creamer.
• One person received not only the Nobel Prize, but also the Oscar. Bernard Shaw in 1925 received the Literature Prize "for a work marked by idealism and humanism, for sparkling satire, which is often combined with exceptional poetic beauty." In 1938, Bernard Shaw received an Oscar for writing the screenplay for Pygmalion.

• Two Nobel laureates were seen in "connections" with drugs. 1993 Chemistry Prize winner Kary Mullis claims that the discovery of polymerase chain reaction imaging was only due to the use of LSD. Mullis has been an active advocate for lysergin ever since. Another "drug addict" is the 1962 Medicine Prize winner Francis Crick. He discovered the molecular structure of DNA, and also under the influence of "acid".
• There have been two cases of refusal of Nobel Prizes. Le Dykh Tho refused the Peace Prize, Jean-Paul Sartre - from the Literary Prize.

• Three times Nobel Peace Prize winner - International Committee of the Red Cross. This is the only three-time "champion" in the history of the award.
• More than three - do not gather. This rule also applies to the Nobel Committee. The maximum number of co-authors of one work is 3 people, for a year in one area, again, three authors can receive the award.

Marie Skłodowska-Curie, John Bardeen, Linus Pauling and Frederick Senger.

Four people have won the Prize twice: Maria Skłodowska-Curie (Physics Prize 1903, Chemistry Prize 1911), John Bardeen (Physics Prize 1956, 1972), Linus Pauling (Chemistry Prize 1954, Peace Prize 1962) ) and Frederick Senger (Chemistry Prize - 1958, 1980).

The prize in physics was not awarded six times: in 1916, 1931, 1934, 1940, 1941 and 1942.

The Literature Prize was not awarded seven times: in 1914, 1918, 1935, 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943.

Eight times no prize was awarded in chemistry: in 1916, 1917, 1919, 1924, 1933, 1940, 1941 and 1942.

Nine times the prize in medicine was not awarded: in 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1925, 1940, 1941 and 1942.

Knut Anlund.

Ten days late, the winner of the Literature Prize in 2005 was named. One of the jury members, Knut Anlund, did not agree with the award to the Austrian writer Elfriede Jelinek. In the end, in protest, Anlund left the jury, and the award found its "heroine".

The Peace Prize has not been awarded twenty times: in 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1923, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1948, 1955, 1956, 1966, 1967 and 1967.

Only twenty-one years later, Myanmar's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi was able to receive her Peace Prize. Previously, it did not work out, she was in prison. By the way, the song "Walk On" by U2 is dedicated to her.

William Lawrence Bragg.

The youngest laureate turned twenty-five years old. So much was celebrated in 1915 by the Australian William Lawrence Bragg, who received the prize in physics.

Thirty-nine years have passed since the creation of the neutron diffraction method to the awards of Schall and Brockhouse. This is the largest gap of its kind in the history of the Nobel Prize.

Forty-three percent of award winners in science disciplines are Americans.

Forty-four women have won Nobel Prizes to date.

Albert Camus.

Only forty-six years lived the winner of the award for literature Albert Camus, this is the shortest life among all laureates.

Fifty-five years is the average age of laureates in medicine.

Fifty-seven years is the average age of laureates in physics and chemistry.

Nober Prize winners in 2009. © Peter Andrews/Reuters

Fifty-nine years is the average age of all laureates in all categories.

Einstein was nominated sixty times for his formulation of the theory of relativity. He never received an award for it. An outstanding physicist was awarded for explaining the photovoltaic cell.

Sixty-nine people are the winners of the Economics Prize to date.

Ninety years old at the time of receiving the award was the American Leonid Gurvich. In 2007 he received an economics award. So far this record has not been broken.

Rita Levi-Montalcini.

One hundred and three years this year, the main long-liver among the laureates, the Italian neuroscientist Rita Levi-Montalcini, turned. She received the Physiology Prize in 1986, when she was 77 years old.

One hundred and eight people have won prizes in literature to date.

One hundred and twenty-one people have been laureates of the Peace Prize to date.

One hundred and sixty people have received prizes in chemistry to date.

One hundred and ninety-three people have received prizes for research in physics to date.

Two hundred and two people have received prizes for research in physiology and medicine to date.

1

The Nobel Prizes are truly international. This entails, firstly, a complex and multi-stage procedure for selecting candidates, as well as a magnificent awards ceremony in the atmosphere of national festivities. In the last decade, about 2,000 people in each nomination have been searching for candidates annually - these are the largest scientists, writers and politicians of the world, all Nobel laureates, the most famous universities. Secondly, among the awarded 777 individuals and 20 organizations from 50 countries of the world (in total, the prize was awarded 807 times, including twice and even thrice to the same person or organization). The presence of only 20 representatives of Russia in the list of laureates is our misfortune, guilt and shame. Thirdly, the amount of remuneration exceeds most of the existing international awards (since 2001 - 10 million SEK).

Of greatest interest to science scholars and historians of science are the lists of Nobel Prize winners. Even such a simple, at first glance, work as compiling lists, each time is a painstaking documentary study. Let's take a look at some of their analysis.

From 1901 to 2007 prizes in physics were awarded 101 times, in chemistry - 99 times, in physiology or medicine - 98 times, in literature - 103 times, to fighters for peace - 88 times, in economics (since 1969) - 39 times. Most of the omissions are in the awarding of the Peace Prize: the Norwegian Storting did not announce the winners 19 times.

Among the Nobel Prize winners are representatives of 50 countries (Tables 7 and 8), including 16 countries in physics, 19 countries in chemistry, 18 countries in physiology or medicine, 36 countries in literature, 34 countries in the world, economy - 8 countries. Russia in this list is in 7th place (2.5% of the total number of laureates), and in the coming years this place will not
will change.

Nobel Prizes were awarded 35 times to 34 women: in physics - 2 times (M. Sklodowska-Curie - 1903, M. Göppert-Mayer - 1963), in chemistry - 3 times (M. Sklodowska-Curie - 1911, I. Joliot-Curie - 1935, D. Crowfoot-Hodgkin - 1964), in physiology or medicine - 7 times (G. Corey - 1947, R. Yalow - 1977, B. McClintock - 1983, R. Levi-Montalcini - 1986, G.B. Eliyon - 1988, K. Nüsslein-Volgard - 1995, L. B. Bak - 2004), in literature - 11 times (S. Lagerlöf - 1909, G. Deledda - 1926, S. Undset - 1928, P. Bak - 1938 , G. Mistral - 1945, N. Zaks - 1966, N. Gordimer - 1991, T. Morrison - 1993, V. Szymborska - 1996, E. Jelinek - 2004, D. Lessing - 2007), world - 12 times (B .fon Suttner - 1905, J. Eddams - 1931, E. G. Balch - 1946, B. Williams - 1976, M. Corrigan - 1976, Mother Teresa - 1979, A. Myrdal - 1982, Aung San Su Ji - 1991, R. Menchu ​​Tum - 1992, J. Williams - 1997, Sh. Ebadi - 2003, V. Maathai - 2004).

This list also includes a legendary woman who won Nobel Prizes twice; her name is known to everyone - M. Sklodovskaya-Curie. The cases of receiving two Nobel Prizes are extremely rare: the American physicist J. Bardeen (prizes in physics in 1956 and 1972), the English biochemist F. Sanger (prizes in chemistry in 1958 and 1980), the American chemist and peacemaker L.K. Pauling ( Prize in Chemistry in 1954 and Peace Prize in 1962), the International Committee of the Red Cross - three times Nobel laureate (1917, 1944, 1963), and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees - twice Nobel laureate (1954, 1981) .

From the distribution of all laureates by country and nomination, it follows that the largest number of Nobel Prizes were awarded to representatives of the United States (40.3%), and in the United States, Great Britain, Germany and France there are 549 prizes, i.e. 68.5%. In the natural sciences, scientists from the first three countries received more than 72% of the awards, and representatives from the first 11 countries received more than 90%.

Statistical data on the number of Nobel Prizes awarded by five years show a gradual transition from individual creativity in the field of natural sciences to a collective one, which has been outlined after the Second World War and has not yet reached the theoretically possible culmination - 18 laureates per year or 90 laureates in a five-year period.

In absolute terms, the data on the most fruitful age of Nobel laureates is not very expressive: the youngest - W.D. Bragg (Physics, 1915) - turned 25 years old in the year the prize was awarded, and the oldest - L. Hurwitz (Economics, 2007) - 90 years old. However, in an averaged form, the picture emerges extremely indicative (Table 1).

Table 1. Average age of laureates in the year of receiving awards

Nomination	Age of laureates for periods
					54,2
					53,5
Physiology or medicine					59,0
Literature					66,6
					61,1
Economy					69,9
Total:	54,8	56,2	62,1	65,0	60,7

As this table shows, the average age of laureates, with the exception of peace activists, has increased significantly since 1901 and is about 61 years old in total for all laureates! Among other things, this fact indicates that the Nobel Prize in most cases does not contribute to the development of further activity, but to the veneration of past merits on the laurels, and very often, according to the laureates themselves, greatly interferes with further activity.

This picture does not change and the consideration of the average age of laureates for internal periods of time. So, in the second half of the 20th century, compared with the first half, the average age of physicists increased by about 15 years, chemists - by 8 years, physiologists or doctors - by 13 years. It is worth considering: natural science is aging, literature is aging, and only fighters for peace are getting younger! This phenomenon is also confirmed by other data: until the 30s of the 20th century, the number of living laureates sharply exceeded the number of those who died, in the mid-1940s. - in the middle of the 1950s, equilibrium set in, and then the picture changed to the opposite - laureates die faster than new ones are awarded.

An analysis of the above and many other data on Nobel Prize winners provides specialists with rich material for reflection, which does not always and not all lead to unambiguous conclusions. First of all, this concerns the attitude towards the Nobel Prizes themselves, especially in our country. Sometimes the question is even put like this: are the Nobel Prizes necessary if they are acquired mainly on financial speculation, if the prizes often reduce the creative activity of the laureates, if many of them become something like movie stars, if the prize is something like “a lifeline for a person, already standing on the shore," if?...

Joining the opinion of many science scholars and sociologists (for example, G. Diemer), I believe that the Nobel Prize is a phenomenon of the 20th century, the secret dream of every scientist, especially in the last 20-30 years), a sign of international recognition, as the laureates and other scientists themselves testify in their speeches and publications. It is a universally recognized measure of the quality of top-class works (Nobel level, according to J. Garfield), performed by "world champions" in physics, chemistry, biology, medicine ... One can hardly argue with this statement.

Another thing is that the converse assertion that every top-class work should be crowned with a Nobel Prize is not and cannot be observed. Then you will have to divide it annually into 15-20 parts for a variety of works, and the meaning of the award will be lost, and what visionary-scientist will always be able to correctly identify the most significant of the newly published works in the immense documentary stream? In addition, there are many international and national awards of high rank, however, much less honorable ones.

Publication activity of Nobel laureates

Science of science is developing so far in three quantitative sections - scientometrics, bibliometrics and informometry. New branches of these sections with a biographical basis (biosaucometry, biobibliometry and bioinformetry) make it possible to concentrate nodal document-information arrays (DIM) and flows (DIP) to create adequate models of various areas of modern science.

Nobelistics (formerly biographical informatics of Nobel Prizes and Laureates) can be seen as the most fruitful base for developing models of science. Firstly, because it contains "typical" scientific areas - physics, chemistry, biology and medicine, economics, political science, literary criticism. Secondly, because it combines top achievements in each of the listed areas. Thirdly, it has become available for various analyzes thanks to the activities of the Institute for Scientific Information in Philadelphia (USA), as well as the International Nobel Information Center (INC) in Tambov, which have accumulated colossal DIM on Nobel studies and maintain more than 20 relevant problem-oriented databases.

Publication as such and the activity of laureates in publishing their works and compositions is considered by us as the starting and central problem of the theory and technology of Nobel studies. Without publications, it is impossible to talk about a person as a scientist, writer or politician; without publications, and in common languages, there can be no Nobel Prize; without publications, it is impossible to assess the effectiveness of the activities of a particular person in history.

With the help of developed and maintained databases and knowledge, we obtained about 700 polygon curves of the publication activity of each Nobel Prize winner (excluding organizations-winners and taking into account two awards to the same person), as well as a lot of tabular data. This made it possible to derive a generalized formula for the publication activity of a Nobel laureate:

N = XFY ± Z i: a - b - c = d - e (. or;),

where N is the publication period up to the year of the Nobel Prize; XF - phase of publication activity (1F - first phase, 2F - second, 3F - third); Y - publication period (A - before the heyday of publication activity, B - heyday, C - after heyday, fading); ± ‑ direction of the polygon curve in the year of the award (+ ‑ growth, - ‑ decrease); Z i - whether there are peaks (D i) or not (L) on the polygon-curve after awarding the award (i - number of peaks); a, b, c - the number of publications per year for the entire period (a), 10 years (b) and five years (c) before the Nobel Prize; d,e - the number of publications per year for five years (d) and 10 years (e) after the award of the Nobel Prize; signs after the formula indicate the end (.) or continuation (;) of the publication activity.

The pulsating nature of the publication activity of Nobel laureates with variable amplitude and frequency has been established. Publication activity curves are generated automatically by a computer.

Bioscientometric consideration assumed a systematic approach, in which scientific productivity (or the effectiveness of scientific activity) was considered as a system containing elements (separate aspects of scientific activity, assessed indicators), their attributes, links between elements to achieve a single goal of functioning, i.e. presence of all signs of scientific activity. The systemic bioscientometric indicator of scientific activity of a scientist P 1 was determined by the formula:

P j =Σp i k i ,

where: p i - a separate relative indicator for a scientist; k i - coefficient of significance of the indicator; n is the total number of individual indicators. The coefficient k i was determined by the level of correlation of individual parameters with the parameter "number of publications", according to Spearman.

The polygons of the publication activity of each laureate were constructed on the basis of the accumulated DIM (in the "number of publications-years" coordinates), their analysis, and generalization in semilogarithmic coordinates were carried out using the STATGRAPHICS software package. The model curves were searched for by superimposing the original polygons and their successive convergence with a reliability of at least 90%.

The formulas for publication activity (derived automatically by computers and can be significantly expanded in the direction of a more detailed description of the curves) indicate in most cases that there is practically no decrease in the scientific productivity of laureates, often mentioned in the literature, immediately after receiving the Nobel Prize. For example, the average empirical model of publication activity (if here averaging is generally justified) for all the data obtained for 53 chemist laureates has the form: 30 = 3F - D 1: 7 - 9 - 9 = 9 - 9; That is, being in the third phase of his publication activity, publishing an average of seven papers per year for 30 years, the laureate in chemistry ten years before and after the award of the prize raises his activity to nine papers per year, having basically one peak publication activity after receiving the Nobel Prize, although the number of publications more often decreases in the year of the award. This picture of the publication activity of Nobel laureates does not coincide with the phase dynamics of the scientist's scientific activity, noted in the scientific literature.

A new regularity in the dynamics of documentation flows

As a result of the analysis of the dynamics of the complete statistical sets of DIP of various thematic orientations (works and essays of all Nobel Prize winners in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature, economics - about 600 people in total, who are the authors of about 250 thousand works and essays, more than 300 thousand publications in various languages) installed new pattern. Its essence lies in the fact that the DIP develops over time, regardless of socio-historical processes in society, as it was previously thought, but is conditioned by internal and external social and informational processes that characterize the DIP itself as a phenomenon. We are talking about the form of empirical dependence: the number of documents in a given scientific area (function) - time in years (argument).

The manifestation of this pattern begins with a time interval of 15-20 years; on a narrower time interval, socio-historical processes act on the flow to a greater extent. The model curves of the dynamics of the DIP show first a slow increase in the volume of the DIP, then an acceleration of growth to a peak, a decrease again, then a slow and accelerated growth. Thus, on a 150-year time interval, the DIP is modeled by a sinusoidal curve with a pulsating amplitude and frequency; this sinusoid is inclined to the x-axis at a positive angle of 15-20 o.

The independence of the established regularity from the scope and subject matter of documents (physics, literature, chemistry, etc.) allows us to assert the discovery of a new regularity in the dynamic development of DIP.

The "experimental purity" of the established regularity is quite high not only because of the powerful volume of the documentary flow, but also due to the fact that the entire DIP (both in each direction and in their sum) with an accuracy of 5% fits into a typical hyperbole in dynamic coordinates. The practical significance of this discovery has yet to be realized, but it is already completely clear that the authors' artificial orientation towards the socio-historical process only reduces the value of the work (scientific, literary or otherwise).

The award was received by 743 men. Women make up 4.4% of the total.

Bibliographic link

Tyutyunnik V.M. NOBEL LAUREATES: SCIENTOMETRIC RESEARCH // Fundamental Research. - 2008. - No. 5. - P. 10-13;
URL: http://fundamental-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=3013 (date of access: 04/05/2019). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"

In 1915, Australian physicist Sir William Lawrence Bragg was awarded the Nobel Prize "for his services to the study of crystals by means of X-rays." In the entire history of the award, he is known as the youngest laureate - at the time of receiving it, he was only 25 years old.

While 17-year-old Malala Yousafzai won the Peace Prize last year, Bragg is still the youngest winner in science, and there's little chance that things will change in the future.

Over the past hundred years, Nobel laureates have been getting older: when Bragg received his award in 1915, the average age of discoverers in fields such as chemistry, physics and medicine was no more than 40 years old. Today it is equal to 71 years: scientists are waiting for the award longer, and it is becoming more and more difficult to achieve serious achievements in science.

The average age of Nobel Prize winning scientists at the time of their award: physiology (blue), physics (orange), and chemistry (red).

Waiting for a call from the Swedes

In general, when it comes to discoveries and inventions, it is customary to associate these achievements with the spirit of youth. It is believed that young minds are more likely to question and question what others take for granted: in other words, think outside the box.

Paul Dirac, also the winner of the Physics Prize for discoveries in the field of quantum mechanics, even wrote a poem about this:

Age is, of course, a fever chill
that every physicist must fear.
He is better dead than living still
when once he is past his thirtieth year.

(Oh, the fever of time and the chill of age,
What every physicist has to be ashamed of:
He's not dead yet, but it's better to go straight to the coffin -
How to live when he is thirty.)

It is not known whether he actually experienced something similar when he was thirty, but one thing is clear: if Dirac had not lived to this age, he would never have received the award - the Nobel Prize is not awarded posthumously.

He shared it in 1933 with 46-year-old Erwin Schrödinger; Dirac himself was only 31 at the time. However, to do justice to his poem, it is worth saying that Dirac made his discovery at the age of 26.

This break in time - between scientific discovery and its recognition - is part of the tradition, but according to the authors of the article entitled "Waiting for the Nobel Prize" ( The Nobel Prize Delay, 2014) every year this period becomes longer and longer, and its growth occurs non-linearly:

Break between discovery and award: y-axis - waiting time (in tens of years), abscissa - year of receipt of the Nobel Prize (physics - blue, chemistry - green, medicine - red). Source: Becattini et. al.

The researchers note that long waits, sometimes exceeding a period of 20 years, occur in each of the three areas, however, the largest gap is observed in physics:

“Instances that the waiting time between opening and receiving an award exceeds tens of years are gradually becoming the norm for all exact sciences: about 60% of awards in physics, 52% in chemistry and 49% in medicine were received with a gap of more than 20 years ".

The longest awaited Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Peter Higgs and François Englert, who were eventually awarded for a theory predicting the existence of bosonic particles (1946). However, the very discovery of the Higgs bosons took place no earlier than in 2013: scientists have been waiting for the award for 49 years.

(Higgs, 84, did not have a cell phone and was having lunch at the hour the announcement was made. He was unaware of what had happened until a passing driver stopped him and congratulated him on the good "news". Higgs later admitted on the BBC: "" What, what other news?' I said then).

We decided to figure out in which countries the smartest people live. But what is the main indicator of the mind? Perhaps the human intelligence quotient, better known as IQ. Actually, on the basis of this quantitative assessment, our rating was compiled. We also decided to take into account the Nobel laureates living in a particular country at the time of receiving the award: after all, this indicator indicates what place the state occupies in the intellectual arena of the world.

place

ByIQ: administrative region

In general, far from one study has been conducted on the relationship between intelligence and peoples. So, according to the two most popular works - "Intelligence Quotient and Global Inequality" and "Intelligence Quotient and Wealth of Nations" - East Asians are ahead of the planet.

Hong Kong has an IQ of 107. But here it is worth considering that the administrative region has a very high population density.

The United States leads other countries in the number of Nobel Prize winners by a huge margin. 356 laureates live (and lived) here (from 1901 to 2014). But it is worth saying that the statistics here are not entirely related to nationality: in institutes and research centers, scientists from different countries receive very good support, and they often have much more opportunities in the States than in their native state. So, for example, Joseph Brodsky received a prize in literature, being a citizen.

place

IQ: South Korea

South Koreans have an IQ of 106. However, being one of the smartest countries is not easy. For example, the education system in the state is one of the most technologically advanced, but at the same time complex and strict: they graduate from school only at the age of 19, and when entering a university, there is such terrible competition that many simply cannot withstand such mental stress.

Number of Nobel laureates:

In total, the British have received 121 Nobel Prizes. According to statistics, residents of the United Kingdom receive awards every year.

place

By IQ: Japan

The Japanese have an IQ of 105. And, perhaps, this is not surprising, since this is one of the most hardworking nations. As a result, Japan has gone far in the development of high technology, and the quality of their products is always on top. The University of Tokyo is included in the list of the best universities in the world, and the Japanese literacy rate is 99%.

Number of Nobel laureates:

Well, as for the winners of the prestigious award, it is in third place. It is home to 104 people who have received awards in various fields.

place

By IQ: Taiwan

In fourth place is again an Asian country - Taiwan, an island controlled by the partially recognized Republic of China. A country known for its industry and productivity, today it is one of the main suppliers of high technology. The local government has great plans for the future: they want to turn the state into a “silicon island”, an island of technology and science.

The average IQ level of residents is 104 points.

Number of Nobel laureates:

There are 57 people in France who have received the Nobel Prize. First of all, they are leaders in the humanities: there are a lot of laureates in philosophy, literature and art in the country.

place

The average IQ of the inhabitants of this city-country is 103 points. As you know - one of the advanced commercial centers in the world. And one of the most prosperous and wealthy states, even the World Bank called the best country for doing business.

Number of Nobel laureates:

Well, finally, the birthplace of Nobel himself got into the rating. There are 29 people who have been awarded awards in various fields.

place

Three countries at once have an average IQ of 102 points. Well, there’s even nothing to say here: in Germany there has never been a shortage of philosophers and scientists, in Austria there is a very disciplined and well-developed education system, but the geniuses of Italy can be counted from the time of Ancient Rome.

Number of Nobel laureates:

Switzerland accounts for 25 Nobel Prizes, mostly in the field of exact sciences. The country is known throughout the world for its private schools and universities with excellent indicators of the level of education.

place

And again, only now for IQ, which is 101 points. The state is one of the leaders in terms of the number of citizens with higher education. And, of course, it is one of the most prosperous countries.

By number of Nobel laureates: Russia

In Russia (together with the USSR) there are 23 Nobel laureates who received awards. The first prize was brought to Russia by the physiologist Ivan Pavlov. Well, if we talk about laureates who were born on the territory of the Russian Empire and the USSR or did not have Russian citizenship at the time of receiving the award, then the number will increase to 38.

The average IQ of the inhabitants of Russia is 97 points (11th place, shares it with the USA, Finland and the Czech Republic).

What factors can predict future performance? One of the most common hypotheses is the concept of a direct relationship between the level of intelligence and human achievement. Like, he showed an IQ of 170 points in the test - that's it, get ready to receive the Nobel Prize.

A prominent representative of the scientific school that supported this theory was Stanford University psychology professor Lewis Terman. In 1921, the scientist was lucky to receive a solid grant. As a result, a team of specialists was assembled who tested the intellectual development of children. Among 250,000 students in primary and secondary schools in America, 1,470 children were identified, whose IQ ranged from 140 to 200 points. This group of young geniuses became known as the Termites and became the subject of one of the most famous psychological studies in history.

Terman, like a mother hen, did not take his eyes off his wards until the end of his life. He tracked their life path, tested, measured and analyzed, noted academic achievements, monitored the development of family relationships, collected information on all diseases, recorded the state of psychological health, diligently documented any promotion and job change.

Lewis Terman

« There is nothing more important in a person than the level of his intellect, except perhaps morality." Terman once said. He was convinced that it was people with high IQ who were "capable of advancing science, the arts, education, public administration and social well-being in general." When Terman's students were still in high school, he enthusiastically wrote: "Read any newspaper article about any competition that was held in California, and in the list of winners you will definitely see the names of one or more members of our talented group." He invited literary critics to compare the samples of literary works of his creatively gifted little "termites" with the early works of famous writers. And they could not find at least some significant differences. All signs pointed to a group with the potential of a "heroic character". Terman was convinced that termites were destined to become the future elite of the United States.

And 50 years later, it became clear that Terman was wrong. Some of his geeks have written books, scientific papers, or gone on to business success. Several people have held public office. Among them were two Superior Court judges, one municipal court judge, two members of the California Legislature, and one senior official. But few have become national figures. Many received a decent income - but not fabulous profits. The careers of most of them can be considered quite ordinary, and surprisingly many former termites even Terman himself recognized as failures.

Among such carefully selected geniuses, not one won the Nobel Prize. Interestingly, Terman's colleagues once tested two future Nobel laureates, then elementary school students William Shockley and Luis Alvarez, and rejected both. They didn't have a high enough IQ.

In his devastating critique, the sociologist Pitirim Sorokin concluded that if Terman gathered a group of randomly selected children from the same families as the termites and did not assess their IQ, then the representatives of this group would achieve no less impressive results, than carefully selected geniuses.

At the conclusion of the fourth volume of The Genetic Study of Geniuses, the word "genius" disappeared. A more than disappointed Terman wrote: We are convinced that intelligence and success are not interconnected at all.».

Sad result ... Or vice versa? 🙂 It turns out that people with an IQ slightly above average are no less likely to succeed than those whose indicators are rushing to exorbitant heights? Or maybe even more… But what determines this very success? Does anyone have versions? 🙂 Write! And a little later I will give the opinions of world-class experts on this matter.