By Ron Iscoff, Editor The presentation of this year's Nobel Prize in Physics by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences should outrage anyone who has ever worked in the semiconductor industry or benefited from an IC. In their infinite wisdom, the Nobel Committee awarded one-half of the prize to Jack S. Kilby, "for his part in the invention of the integrated circuit." The other half was given to a Russian, Zhores I. Alferov, and Herbert Kroemer of the University of California, Santa Barbara. Messrs. Alferov and Kroemer earned the Swedes' recognition for "developing semiconductor heterostructures used in high-speed and opto-electronics." What's wrong with giving the prize to Kilby, formerly of Texas Instruments? I'll tell you what's wrong: It's appalling that it took the Nobel Committee more than 42 years to decide that the integrated circuit, among the greatest inventions of the 20th century, was worthy of the prize!
Why a Shared Prize? It's also mystifying why the Nobel Committee felt the physics prize had to be shared by two scientists for their work on heterostructures! Now, don't get me wrong. I have nothing against hetero-structures-in fact, I barely understand what they are. But the global impact of heterostructures is light years away from the dramatic advances in humankind created by the IC. We think that Jack Kilby, whom we don't know personally, got a raw deal. We also think that the late Dr. Robert Noyce, a co-founder of Intel Corp., received a raw deal for not being recognized by the Academy for his part in the IC's invention. What part did politics play in the selection of others to share in the prize with Kilby? Will your next cell phone or PDA contain a billion heterostructures? And what are the reasons for the Academy's nearly 43-year delay? Why the long delay? We'd like to know, but we don't. However, in the year 2000, Dr. Noyce's role, at least in terms of the Nobel, is moot. Dr. Noyce died suddenly in 1990, and the Academy does not award its coveted prize posthumously.
If we could turn the clock back to 1963, five years after the IC was invented-rather than 10 years after Dr. Noyce's death-we can imagine a far different scenario, one in which both men would share the prize.
But let's take the global view. This is a case in which the invention itself far overshadows its inventors. The IC is an enabler, a premier building block that paved the way for the incredible products we now take for granted, such as the cell phone and laptop computer. Upon hearing of the award, a well-known industry leader, who is also a pioneer in IC packaging, and the holder of numerous patents, put it this way: "In my view the physics prize selection is a scandal that says more about the Nobel Prize and its bureaucratization that it does about either Kilby or Noyce. "As in any bureaucracy, the Nobel organization continues long after its vitality has been dissipated. A Place in History "Both men have earned a prominent place in the history of civilization, while Kilby's co-winners in this year's Nobel lottery will soon join the arcane names of past years who are long forgotten in dusty obscurity. "The Nobel Committee, with unbelievable ineptitude, has failed to properly recognize a contribution that is profoundly reshaping every civilization on earth." Still, despite the lateness of the recognition and since it's finally a done deal, we belatedly congratulate Jack Kilby. And to the Nobel Committee we say, it's about time!
|
