Rachel Feltman is arguing Nobel Prize for scientist Vera Rubin.

Washington Post columnist, Rachel Feltman, is arguing a Nobel Prize for Vera Rubin.
By Aaron Sims | Oct 03, 2016
Washington Post columnist, Rachel Feltman, is arguing a Nobel Prize for Vera Rubin.

"What's the Holdup, " read the headline of a piece written by Feltman, an online science columnist.

"[Vera] Rubin and her colleague Kent Ford provided the first real evidence of dark matteryes, dark matter, the unseeable, unknowable, mysterious stuff that makes up more than a quarter of the universe, which is kind of a big dealdecades ago. Her time in the Nobel spotlight is overdue," read the article, which argued for popular Nobel Prize candidate, Rubin, to finally be recognized by the Royal Swedish Academy for her work.

The 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics went to the work of three men surrounding the discovery of exotic phases of matter. Media sites criticized the Nobel Prize committee for their lack of female inclusion in winners. Rubin, if she were to win, would join only two other women, Marie Curie and Maria Goeppert-Mayer, to ever receive the Nobel Prize in Physics. There is an argument against Rubin having received the 2016 award, but Feltman argued down that dissent as well.

"Some might argue that Rubin, an obvious and timely Nobel candidate, should have to wait until dark matter is officially detected until she is given her due," explained Feltman. "But Rubin is in her late 80s, and the Nobel Prize cannot be given posthumously. Her work on dark matter has spawned entirely new branches of scientific inquiry, and time is running out. This should have been her year."




Have something to say? Let us know in the comments section or send an email to the author. You can share ideas for stories by contacting us here.

Comments should take into account that readers may hold different opinions. With that in mind, please make sure comments are respectful, insightful, and remain focused on the article topic.