I think that the developments of the 20th century history had a lot to do with it. The migration of many physicists to the US to escape the war had a lot to do with this (as Qasim pointed out) phenomena. Also the Internet era and how it evolved within the US first has a lot to do with it (greater dissemination in the early Internet throughout universities that were in a  strongly connected web of researchers).

It also remains to be seen if this trend can hold up as scientific priorities shift to other areas were other countries are very competitive and the Internet penetration culminates in other parts of the world.

Just a thought.

I think there are many reasons for the largest number of Noble Prize winners from USA.

1) Provide infrastructure for scientific research.

2) Migrate a large number of scientists or researcher to the United States.

3)  Provide media coverage of the achievements which are realized.

4) A strong media publish and adapt the achievements, research and creative of scientists and researcher.

I think that the developments of the 20th century history had a lot to do with it. The migration of many physicists to the US to escape the war had a lot to do with this (as Qasim pointed out) phenomena. Also the Internet era and how it evolved within the US first has a lot to do with it (greater dissemination in the early Internet throughout universities that were in a  strongly connected web of researchers).

It also remains to be seen if this trend can hold up as scientific priorities shift to other areas were other countries are very competitive and the Internet penetration culminates in other parts of the world.

Just a thought.

Dear All,

Arturo is simply right: one should take into consideration the rate of emigrant scientists most of them made studies and established their inventions in their original countries.

The question contains the answer. All is true. The most important is the science and the scientific development. Who leads the science leads the world.

When a man makes a huge success in something, the Englishmen will say:He played his cards right. U.S.A played its cards right particularly in universities after WW2. Universities have been divided into teaching, research, and mix of both. The research universities have been supported very well in R&D by the government & others. In such places, there is a free environment which encourages research. An old American professor told me that if a scholar comes with a new idea, it is never ridiculed & such person is given the resources to proceed. American universities have attracted "brains" from all over the world & gave them good salaries & incentives to "produce". Other countries tried to imitate the American universities' systems but have not done well. So it is not strange to see the high outcome in terms of advances in sciences & in winning many Nobel prizes by scholars of that country.

Indeed the United States conceal quality researchers to the many theories that have the biggest distinctions. I think in my humble opinion that this is related to their environment looking financially consequently the means available to them but also to their socio-economic environment that allowed the emergence of this elite

Indeed the United States conceal quality researchers to the many theories that have the biggest distinctions. I think in my humble opinion that this is related to their environment looking financially consequently the means available to them but also to their socio-economic environment that allowed the emergence of this elite

Dear @Khaldoon, I was not aware about fact that the largest number of Nobel Prize winners comes form US. Never mind, it is just about two important things, MONEY-Research Funds and Huge number of non-US researchers who cam to US- research diaspora of different countries!

Absolutely.

 All is true. The science and the scientific development is the objective..

Dear Nizar Matar,

You have composed fine the essence of American university and research system. If only policy makers and university leaders in Eastern Europe understood and tried to copy it, instead to cultivate the politically influenced authoritarian principle.

Dear Ljubomir,

Yes, money and research funds are important. But there is still something important what Nizar Matar expressed well: the spirit. I think that if very important research funds were offered by a normal and not over bureaucratic way in Eastern European countries, unfortunately, the scientific performance would not be increased parallel with the funds because of the very unhealthy social relationships, the deformed spirit of society and the common enviousness.   

Thank you very much all for your answers. 

I still think it is the culture more than the other issues mentioned. I agree there is a part of it due to immigration and a part of it due to infrastructures, however it feels it is more related to the scientific culture.

To touch on the immigration issue, there are 350 Nobel Prize Winners that are US citizens. Even if half of those were born outside US, the renaming is higher than the second country in the list: UK has only 123. I agree that being supervised by good professors have a great impact, however it feels there is more than immigration into it.

The other issue mentioned was the infrastructure. I agree that research facilities are better in US, but they are not much different from those in Europe and in developed countries -I think-. Add to that, a great deal of the theories developed that are pure theoretical in physics, mathematics, economics ..etc which do not really require infrastructure. 

Also, it was mentioned funds and money spent on research. I do not really think developing countries are spending less on research than US. I think there is a great deal of money being spent in Europe on research. The distribution of money is a different topic (more into managing the research). 

I think the most impacting factor is the scientific culture. The culture promotes new ideas and promotes challenging. The teaching process since young age in US is a student can and should ask questions and challenge what a teacher is saying. This by itself an issue in other cultures. I have once read in a students' forum students were discussing that in few countries if they ask the professor and he/she does not know the answer, he/she shouts at them or tells them to leave the class. Another professor says take the subject as it is, do not ask me anything and if you have a question leave the class. Another story was a professor tells students you are here not to learn but to pass exam so listen to me you can pass and if you want to learn: watch YouTube, search Google or go to a library. Some professors as was mentioned even took it to the extreme that they humiliate students to make them avoid asking the professor and/or come to his/her office as a strategy in order to save time/avoid questions..etc I guess you can find a lot of these sad stories online in some students' forums. Unfortunately, it is not case by case and it is popular in some regions than others. Just by thinking of such a scientific culture, I doubt any of these students will be able to generate a new idea or a theory. Worse than that, these students will follow the same approach when they grow up in their lives and work.

Let us admit it, the world is changing and the technology these days enables us to read, learn, communicate with each other easily. The books, papers, journals .. etc available to students in US are available to everyone, but I think the approach students take is different in different regions. 

I agree with all of what you have mentioned: it is a combination of issues. Also, I agree that if technology is the issue, then in the next few years when internet will become available in many countries we should see different results. If the issue is resources and not the scientific culture then we should expect new theories and more Nobel Prize winners from other regions.

Many thanks again for your answers. 

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/facts/

Dear Dr. Brenda,

Very good point you raised here. The number of Nobel Prizes/Population. In this same principle, Faroe Islands (1 winner), Saint Lucia (2 winners), Luxembourg (2 winners) come much ahead of US.

I think this means that US population is high compared to Canada. Also, by the same principle I think that China, Russia and India will never catch up with Faroe Islands, Saint Lucia, Canada by winner/population principle. Although China has 8 winners, India has 11 and Russia has 23 (one more than Canada). 

By looking at the facts above. It does not mean the higher the population the more the Nobel Prize winners (China has only 8). Also, it does not mean the lower the population the less possibility of Nobel Prize Winners: Faroe Islands has 1 winner with population of 50k while Venezuela for example has one winner for population of 31 million people. 

I think the best comparison will be if we are able to prepare data about the number of people who revolutionized their fields, developed new ideas, won prestigious prizes (including Nobel Prize), stated theories, developed laws .. etc and compare that to the number of people who graduated from universities (i.e make a ratio). This will be a much interesting data to judge based on. Still, I am pretty sure that US will rank pretty high if not at the top of that list.

Thanks a lot again for your comment and discussion point. Appreciate you brought this to our attention.

I do not think that calculations related to populations are always strong points of bringing about an evidence. We, in Palestine, have the largest number of university graduates/population in the world but this does not mean that we have a good state of affairs with respect to education, science, research , and technology. The U.S.A  is number one in science, research, and technology thanks to the prevailing environment which "truly" encourages, supports, and rewards such worthy activities. This country has become a garden which produced quality flowers & Nobel prizes came to appreciate these flowers, as simple as that. The "odd" cases in some other countries are similar, in my opinion, to our case in Palestine!

I attend a short url, where you all can find the statistics till 2014. US listing is really imposing. And I agree with the comments, it´s money, will, funding and promotion.

http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/2022/umfrage/physik-nobelpreistraeger-nach-nationen-seit-1901/

Dear Colleagues,

Good Day,

"The United States owes much to its commanding lead in scientific research, including technological advancement, prosperity and security. Whether it will be able to retain that lead is an important question whose answer depends on whether the country is willing to maintain its warm embrace of science: generous government support in the form of research grants and measures to make higher education accessible; reasonably open borders that make it possible to bring in the world’s best minds; and rich universities and foundations that support long-term theoretical research.

The United States is also unique in the scale on which it attracts human capital: of the 314 laureates who won their Nobel prize while working in the U.S., 102 (or 32%) were foreign born, including 15 Germans, 12 Canadians, 10 British, six Russians and six Chinese (twice as many as have received the award while working in China). Compare that to Germany, where just 11 out of 65 Nobel laureates (or 17%) were born outside of Germany (or, while it still existed, Prussia). Or to Japan, which counts no foreigners at all among its nine Nobel laureates."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/11148871/Nobel-Prize-winners-in-peace-literature-physics-chemistry-economics-mapped-gender.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/05/nobel-prizes-and-american-leadership-in-science-infographic/

Newtonian Mechanics, Faraday Induction, Electrolysis,, Maxwell Equations, Special and General Relativity, Mendeleev Periodic Table, Quantum Mechanics, The theory of Atomic Nuclei dissociation (simultaneously by Jacob Frankel of Russia and Niels Bohr of Denmark), First Radio transmissions by Marconi and Popov, SPUTNIK, YURI GAGARIN, etc., did not come from US. Even BELL was a Canadian. So, in the sense of real discoveries  US is just a pygmy, capable to polish ideas, which came from other countries.. Money help, but are incapable to create real talent. Nobel Prize means nothing, that is just promotional move, to which the Nation of MERCHANTS is most capable. 

We discuss the Nation of Merchants, who robbed entire world, and is most militaristic as on today, putting their nose where they don't belong. I only hope, that Russians will make this nose bloody. 

Yes dear Brenda,

Nobelprices are really not only a chance of big population and of a lot of many. You must find, encourage and promote them. And all the immigrants just show that these persons had no chance or no possibilty to do research also because of political systems they cannot tolerate.. 

In my opinion:

US is a nation that deserves a huge respect. They have moved a long way compared to many countries that were developed for much longer time. Look at the history of US. Although it is a young nation, I believe they made huge accomplishments in science and technology. I agree with the names of the scientists you have mentioned and I agree that some Nobel Prize Winners/Awards winners were not born in US, however if I may ask the following question: would have they been able to develop their theories/achieve what they have achieved without the scientific culture and environment US had provided them? My answer is no and I would love to hear your answer to that. Another question that I would like to ask: if a nation is smart to attract the smart people and develop them does that make it a good or a bad nation? What are the reasons for which these scientists have chosen US to immigrate to?  

At the end, let us not forget that it is not only the Nobel Prizes as was mentioned, but the number of books, the number of journals, the number of papers, the number of new discoveries,.. etc.

I think we should give US a reasonable credit for what the human race has accomplished in science and technology till this date.

No major theory in Physics, the King of Natural Science, has been developed by born in America person. And US sucks the blood from other nations economically, instigates chaos and civil wars, like Arab springs, jeopardize other countries, takes direct offence against people of Afghanistan and Iraq, heading indirect offence against Russia, but don't dare to start the real war, as Russia has more advanced ICBM, and best air defence system in S-400 and S-500. In the case of direct war, Russia has the will and the means to nuke US, reducing them to dead land, liberating the mankind from this cancer the aggressor.

 Alexander J. Babchin, where your hatred come from?

Thierry W. LEVI-FAICT: I am just stating truth, and truth can't be labelled as hatred. 

Modern History witnessed 2 major Aggressors, Bonaparte and Hitler. These war criminals enslaved entire Europe, before jumping on Russia, Russia defeated both of them, liberating  Europe. ,

US is a new type of aggressor, as no Country before tried to enslave the entire world. Some time they use small continental wars as in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing enormous sufferings to population., But largely they go for complete destabilization of entire region, as we see in Middle East and Arab Springs, encouraged by them. Sure, it is easy to rule over chaos, but the aggressor did not learn how to do it yet. 

So, they keep destabilising other Countries, Ukraine is their new victim, they already caused Civil War and influx of Ukrainian refugees into Russia. Now, all depends on stupidity of US leaders. If they decide to go with Continental War against Russia, as Bonaparte, as Hitler, the result will be the same.

US lost the Continental War against North Vietnam. One only can imagine their fighting against Russian troops on the planes of Northern Ukraine at - 40 C.   

The oppressor will be heavily bitten and infamously  dispersed. World will see that Chairman Mao  was correct , ranking US as a PAPER TIGER. The WORLD will be LIBERATED.  

Thanks for ur answer... I do understand even if I do not agree with your statement. Do u really think that things are much different regarding Russia or some other countries all around the world, Iran for example. What should we then think about these thousands of young AMERICAN soldiers who died in Europe to free this old continent from nazis?

Your young American Soldiers came to take part of Europe, when Germany was already beaten, Russian troops were in Poland, Romania quit the war, etc. It would just take for STALIN additional 6 month of war, liberating entire Europe. But Stalin still insisted on the Second Front by US and UK, for the same reason, TRUMAN pressed STALIN to open the continental front against Japan, even after Atomic Bombardment, which was not sufficient alone for unconditional Japanese surrender. Each Leader did his best, in saving lives of his soldiers.

I completely agree with your opinion regarding Iran. Nukes are extremely dangerous in the hands of religious fanatics.  ,

ANAHNU MEDABRIM IVRIT !

Besseder, email sheli [email protected]; mamtin lekha

Iom naim

Toda v Erev Tov, ani ehtov lecha e-mail.