Why is there no Nobel Prize in Mathematics? brought to you by The Nobel Prize Internet Archive

Six Nobel Prizes are awarded each year, one in each of the following categories: literature, physics, chemistry, peace, economics, and physiology & medicine. Notably absent from this list is an award for Mathematics. The reason for this conspicuous omission has been subject of extensive speculations, some of which are discussed below.

We have also included our visitors responses and commentaries and why they believe Mathematics was not included as a Nobel category. If you want to post your opinion, feel free to post your opinions.
[ Particularly insightful essays may be included on this page. If you do not want your response published, please note so in the feedback form. ]

Afterword: Not to be left out of the Big Award movement, mathematicians of the world decided to fight back. At the 1924 International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM) in Toronto, a resolution was adopted that at each ICM, two gold medals should be awarded to recognize outstanding mathematical achievement. A hyperlinked list of all Fields medal laureates is presented here.

In 2002, the Niels Henrik Abel Memorial Fund was established to award the Abel Prize for outstanding scientific work in the field of mathematics. The prize amount is 6 million NOK (about 750,000 Euro) and was awarded for the first time on 3 June 2003. It is awarded yearly by the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters in March or April.

The storie continues...

The following information is courtesy the sci.math newsgroup's FAQ list which can be found in its original form here.

Nobel prizes were created by the will of Alfred Nobel, a notable Swedish chemist.

One of the most common -and unfounded- reasons as to why Nobel decided against a Nobel prize in math is that [a woman he proposed to/his wife/his mistress] [rejected him because of/cheated him with] a famous mathematician. Gosta Mittag-Leffler is often claimed to be the guilty party.

There is no historical evidence to support the story.

For one, Mr. Nobel was never married.

There are more credible reasons as to why there is no Nobel prize in math. Chiefly among them is simply the fact he didn't care much for mathematics, and that it was not considered a practical science from which humanity could benefit (a chief purpose for creating the Nobel Foundation).

Further, at the time there existed already a well known Scandinavian prize for mathematicians. If Nobel knew about this prize he may have felt less compelled to add a competing prize for mathematicians in his will.

[...] As professor ordinarius in Stockholm, Mittag-Leffler began a 30-year career of vigorous mathematical activity. In 1882 he founded the Acta Mathematica, which a century later is still one of the world's leading mathematical journals. Through his influence in Stockholm he persuaded King Oscar II to endow prize competitions and honor various distinguished mathematicians all over Europe. Hermite, Bertrand, Weierstrass, and Poincare were among those honored by the King. [...]

Source: "The Mathematics of Sonya Kovalevskaya" by Roger Cooke (Springer-Verlag, New York etc., 1984, II.5.2, p. 90-91:

Here are some relevant facts:

1. Nobel never married, hence no ``wife''. (He did have a mistress, a Viennese woman named Sophie Hess.)

2. Gosta Mittag-Leffler was an important mathematician in Sweden in the late 19th-early 20th century. He was the founder of the journal Acta Mathematica, played an important role in helping the career of Sonya Kovalevskaya, and was eventually head of the Stockholm Hogskola, the precursor to Stockholms Universitet. However, it seems highly unlikely that he would have been a leading candidate for an early Nobel Prize in mathematics, had there been one - there were guys like Poincare and Hilbert around, after all.

3. There is no evidence that Mittag-Leffler had much contact with Alfred Nobel (who resided in Paris during the latter part of his life), still less that there was animosity between them for whatever reason. To the contrary, towards the end of Nobel's life Mittag-Leffler was engaged in ``diplomatic'' negotiations to try to persuade Nobel to designate a substantial part of his fortune to the Hogskola. It seems hardly likely that he would have undertaken this if there was prior bad blood between them. Although initially Nobel seems to have intended to do this, eventually he came up with the Nobel Prize idea - much to the disappointment of the Hogskola, not to mention Nobel's relatives and Fraulein Hess.

4. According to the very interesting study by Elisabeth Crawford, ``The Beginnings of the Nobel Institution'', Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984, pages 52-53:
   Although it is not known how those in responsible positions at the Hogskola came to believe that a large bequest was forthcoming, this indeed was the expectation, and the disappointment was keen when it was announced early in 1897 that the Hogskola had been left out of Nobel's final will in 1895. Recriminations followed, with both Pettersson and Arrhenius [academic rivals of Mittag-Leffler in the administration of the Hogskola] letting it be known that Nobel's dislike for Mittag-Leffler had brought about what Pettersson termed the `Nobel Flop'. This is only of interest because it may have contributed to the myth that Nobel had planned to institute a prize in mathematics but had refrained because of his antipathy to Mittag-Leffler or -in another version of the same story- because of their rivalry for the affections of a woman....

   However, Sister Mary Thomas a Kempis discovered a letter by R. C. Archibald in the archives of Brown University and discussed its contents in "The Mathematics Teacher" (1966, pp.667-668). Archibald had visited Mittag-Leffler and, on his report, it would seem that M-L *believed* that the absence of a Nobel Prize in mathematics was due to an estrangement between the two men. (This at least is the natural reading, but not the only possible one.)

5. A final speculation concerning the psychological element. Would Nobel, sitting down to draw up his testament, presumably in a mood of great benevolence to mankind, have allowed a mere personal grudge to distort his idealistic plans for the monument he would leave behind?

However, the story of some rivalry over a woman is obviously much more amusing, and that's why it will probably continue to be repeated.

References:

Sci.math USENET newsgroup's FAQ list.

Mathematical Intelligencer, vol. 7 (3), 1985, p. 74.

The Beginnings of the Nobel Institution. Elisabeth Crawford. Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984.

What's your opinion? We'll like to know!
[ Particularly insightful essays may be included on this page. If you do not want your response published, please note so in the feedback form. ]

On Oct 10 09:15:56 EDT 2007 Mary wrote:

The explanations offered here and on the linked Urban Legends Reference Pages for why there is no Nobel prize in mathematics are a good demonstration of the practical importance of mathematics. In fact, they are excellent examples of circular logic and inadequate reasoning.

They take the line from Nobel's bequest, that the prizes should be given "to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind", to indicate that Nobel's interest lay in practical developments, and so mathematics would not qualify. Yet all this boils down to is the circular thesis that there is no Nobel prize in mathematics because Nobel constructed his will in such a way that there should be no Nobel prize in mathematics. The contention that any sort of dispute with Mittag-Leffler would be an unlikely reason to leave mathematics out, simply because there were other mathematicians who might win the prize before him, is also inadequate in its reasoning: even if other mathematicians would get it first, that doesn't mean that Mittag-Leffler would not have eventually gotten it, and perhaps in short order.

As for the speculation that Nobel would not want to taint such an idealistic endeavour with a personal grudge: from the subjective perspective of the person making the bequest, that is just as good a reason for leaving the mathematics prize out, as it would be, from the external perspective, for putting it in. So, apart from the partisan complaints of Arrhenius and Pettersson at the time, the only historical evidence bearing on the matter that seems to have been found thus far is the written testimony of Archibald, that Mittag-Leffler at least believed that he and Nobel were estranged.

For the time being then, the truth still lies buried with Nobel. The real mystery is not why there is no Nobel prize in mathematics, but why there is one- or at least, one administered by the Nobel Foundation- in economics.

On Tue Jul 1 05:00:17 2003 S.Maheswaran wrote:

My opinion is that the subject "Mathematics" may be the Assisting tool for Science and Technology that is for the banches of Science subjects like Physics and Chemistry, the maths can "help" in calculation for findings or inventions or discoveries. The maths alone, as per the wills of Nobel, may not discovering anything new for the society. The ancillary part of maths like statistics or probabily are helped in Economical analysis only, there also mathematics is acting as a calculating tool only.

The above reasons may be thought for NOT including in the Nobel Prize category.

On Tue Jun 3 00:46:44 2003 Norman Blakley West II wrote:

Forget the gossip

I feel that Math is the universal language, and contributes to all the fields for which nobel prizes are awarded. Math is pure, even in it's highest forms. It is either right or wrong and applies correctly for only some applications. Math unlike literature doesn't evoke emotions, but a useful general tool for solving problems. As long as people push and challenge themselves as well as others to be inventive for the greater of mankind may the world grow together.

On Tue Apr 8 15:01:28 2003 James Barclay wrote:

The past arguments against a Nobel in Math have already been outstripped due to the very nature of advances in mathematics themselves. I don't think Nobel particularly hated math, though he despised statisticians and accountants.

To me, Wiles' solution to the Fermat deserved a Nobel as did Witten and Greenburg's application of Conformal and Lie Algebras. Tanayama and Shimura should have gotten one, Venn should have, too. New mathematical models for use in a whole range of applications should be recognized. Pure mathematics is a thing all its own and may even be thought of as an art. Mandelbrot sets are an example.

It may be right to note that Symbolic Logic, once a part of Philosophy, is now a branch of mathematics all its own.

Then, there are people like Douglas Hofstadter and Martin Gardner that have opened the universe of the love of pure mathematics to millions.

Lets just give the entire Princeton University Dept. of Theoretical Math a couple of Nobels.

Well, I just want to say that Mathematics is the mother of all sciences.I am just a boy of 16 years old.I want the world to know that Mathematics is the science that is with us 24 hours aday.I myself believe in numbers.I don't know why I always feel that Mathematics is everything.I always believe that one's honour is in one's self.It doesn't mean that if a person has not win a Nobel prize, although he has done alot in mathematics,he should be embrarassed.I want to be a mathematician and I don't care to win a Nobel prize.I want to inform the world that " whatever a person is .... he is himself ".A person doesn't need to show himself infront of the world that he has won a Nobel prize.I want people to feel their existence.I want them to think just how do they feel themselves being alive,their sensations,their existence ? I believe in what I believe....and as Einstein said "Imagination is more important than knowlegde".I don't know why sometimes I feel myself to be ....I can't explain it.Thank you very much for reading all this.

On Wed Dec 18 17:30:41 2002 George Petts wrote:

Assuming that it was not a simple oversight I believe that Nobel did not include a prize for mathematics for possibly two reasons: a)He did not understand the importance of mathematics in the developement of useful technology. b)He realized that the mathematics required for most technological developement, rarely more complex than elementary calculus, is trivial and not worthy of recognition.

Andrew Wiles, having proved Fermats "last theorem," is obviously a remarkable number theorist. Fermats theorem, and the math used in Wiles proof will probably never prove beneficial in any practical application.

Today, if technology requires a mathematical solution that doesn't yield quickly to analytic methods, numerical methods and fast computers are employed.

On Mon, 9 Oct 2000 Karl Hao wrote:

This more of an editorial concering the article 'Why no math?'. This article supposes that Nobel didn't include Mathematics as a winnable category for reasons including bad relationships or maybe Nobel just didn't like mathematics. It seems that this article is missing the most reasonable, if not obvious, excuse for not including 'good ol' arithmetic': because mathematics is the base field. It is a gateway to understanding in each of the 6 fields a prize is given. Math is inherently present in Physics, Chemistry, Economics, and Medicine. Maybe not as seeable, but included if you take a closer look, is Mathematics in Literature and definitely a degree of math in the business of Peace as well. I hope that in the future a broader band of opinion and speculation is given. For simple logic, as this is, tends to be the most viable and in actuality is more often, mathematically speaking, the truth.