Is my science of a level consistent with other people who have gotten the Nobel? Yes.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
You need to be curious, competitive, creative, stubborn, self-confident, skeptical, patient and be lucky to win a Nobel.
Science today is a highly collaborative exercise, and to convert it into a contest, as the Nobel does, is a bad way to look at science.
The truth is that anyone, almost anyone, who receives the Nobel Prize has some indirect knowledge of one sort or another that they may be a candidate.
It is disappointing and embarrassing to the science profession that some Nobel Laureates would deliberately use their well deserved scientific reputations and hold themselves out as experts in other fields.
The Nobel awards should be regarded as giving recognition to this general scientific progress as well as to the individuals involved.
Some things tend not to work so well for science - things that rely on substantial written contributions by key experts are a case in point - but even there I tend to keep an open mind, because it may just be a case of finding the right formula.
The tremendous honour of the Nobel Prize is of the strongest incentive to me in my work, while the amount of the Prize will greatly simplify my task and provide me with much valuable help in my work.
I think it's fair to say that the Nobel Prize is the highest honor any scientist or artist can achieve.
I've always felt that the Nobel Prize gives me nothing as far as science is concerned.
I think it is a mistake to judge science by Nobel Prizes.