Skip to main content

Who are the fellows?

 American Physics Society Fellows Announced Today.


3 LLNL
3 LANL
0 Sandia

Back in 2000 the old days it use to be like 7-10 LANL, 5-7 LLNL, 3-4 Sandia. Heck even 5 to 10 years ago it would be like 5 or 7 at each lab.

So the decline continues. It is particularly stunning because all the labs are the largest they have ever been in terms of the number of people with Sandia having the most people.

One point is that I did recognize like 8 names of former staff/postdocs from LANL and LLNL who became APS fellows this year. These people who left before 2012. Seems like a correlation with transitions in LLNS and LANS. Kind of telling.

Comments

Anonymous said…
One year of low numbers of this sort is not very statistically significant based on the numbers cited, what is the complete time series of past results, and does that support the downhill trend claimed here? Also, the composition of the selecting committies, and the number of overall awards changes over time -- I believe in 2015 there were 257 fellows, and in 2021 only 155 were chosen, although again the entire time series would require research which isn't presented in this post.
Anonymous said…
"I believe in 2015 there were 257 fellows, and in 2021 only 155 were chosen"

Good point. I am not sure why it is less this year, maybe Covid.
Anonymous said…
The selection of learned society fellows offers an insight into the social-psychology of the meritocracies of the DOE/NNSA labs. Drawing conclusions without full information, like who nominates who, and who provides supporting references for who, can lead to completely erroneous conclusions.
Anonymous said…
10/17/2021 3:44 PM

Which brings into question the mere search for such conclusions. Why not just accept what is?
Anonymous said…
Why not just accept what is?

10/18/2021 5:33 PM

It is hard to believe that anyone working at a national lab would ask that question. In public, no less!
Anonymous said…
10/19/2021 5:06 PM

Why?

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!