h Index of Donna Strickland

This is only h = 19, with a total of 8,983 citations compared with my conventional h = 50 and 13,413 conventional citations. Her citations are from Google Scholar: 4677 (with Mourou), 1215, 774, 638, 366, 239, 195, 184, 162, 119, 162, 74, 56, 75, 34, 31, 30, 56, 67,15,15,13, 3, 3, ….. . So there are only 19 publications with more than 19 citations, and only 24 publications that I can find. maybe two or three more. Mourou is much more impressive. This compares with my total now of well over two thousand publications generating three million hits a year with modern scientometrics, at all the best universities and all the countries of the world. This dismal pattern is about the same as that of Jocelyn Bell. With judgement like this who needs chaos? Both the Nobel Prize and Milner Prize have become politicized and are given in a completely random way. So I suggest analyzing Nobel and Milner Prize recipients in this way. There are thousands of people more deserving than Strickland and Bell when things are done objectively. Peter Higgs’ h index is abysmal and the existence of the Higgs boson is terminally dubious (e.g. UFT225) . Prizes should be given for the candidates with the largest number of publications, provided that these are publications that make an impact that is measured with modern scientometrics, and all kinds of other measures: hits, visits, distinct visits, page views, gigabytes downloaded, h and g index, opinions of colleagues who are truly competent, and so on. The most important measure is total number of publications and evidence of how many times each one has been read in the professional lifetime of a candidate. Objectively, I burn off all opposition as we say in athletics. Any assessment should be a blind assessment so that the name of a candidate is not known, so the claim of gender prejudice cannot be made. I come from a mixed Grammar School and from an undergraduate class of 1971 where there were three first class degrees. I was the top first and the second and third were women from the South Wales Valleys who did not want to become graduate students. They could if they had wanted. There was no gender prejudice of any kind. Men and women had exactly the same opportunity and Principals of that time were great scholars fluent in Welsh, not inert bureaucrats. Then we will get some truly worthy Nobel and Milner Prize winners. Finally the Prize must be awarded for the best work done in the previous year, not for lifetime achievement. This is stipulated very clearly in the Will of Alfred Nobel. In the past fifteen years, ECE has made important discoveries each year, and has a huge readership that is not controlled by the standard modellers. So they are desperately trying to stop the award of a Nobel or Milner Prize to AIAS / UPITEC. Marie Curie was obviously a great scientist who was fully recognized at the 1927 Solvay Conference.

LIST_OF_THE_MOST_PROLIFIC_CHEMISTS_AND_PHYSICISTS.pdf


%d bloggers like this: