For contributions I noted in my comment. I wouldn’t say he didn’t deserve it (he was a good popular expositor).

You should not neglect the role of politics and presentation in academia.

As science became increasingly a valuable commodity, it attracted a lot of people with perverse incentives: politicians, administrators, research managers, status-hungry individuals etc. I see what’s happening and it’s not pretty.

Frankly, I think it’s not a healthy environment and this academic system would not last too long. Smart people will leave, as they realize this has become an industry not different from banking or any other, except the currency is fame and reputation, and stakes are so low. It’s no longer like 1930s, and people like Feynman helped set the stage for a new eta.

And it’s not surprising at all, once you learn that politics and showmanship actually pay off.

There are a lot of politicians, administrators and managers in academia. To say that Feynman is responsible for them, is pretty ridiculous. And to say that Feynman wasn't a great physicist makes words basically meaningless.

Without looking it up, can you name the other two people who won the Nobel with him? Were they lesser physicists than Feynman? If not, why so much focus on his life but not theirs?

S. and T., didn't take half a second's thought.

Being a showman doesn't mean that Feynman was only a showman. Indeed, one can hardly be an effective educator without a strong touch of showmanship in presenting ideas.

You don't normally win a Nobel for being an effective educator or communicator either - and nominally he didn't.

Do you believe that all Nobel prizes are equivalent ?

Wouldn’t be the first. Bob Dylan, Winston Churchill, Barack Obama etc

It seems reasonable to hold Nobel Prizes in advancing science to a different level than Nobel Prizes in influencing people. Though both are valuable for society, the latter essentially must include elements of showmanship.

Henry Kissinger

There is a tendency for such awards to go to those in the top 10% of both the field in question and the top 10% of ability to sell themselves, rather than those in the top 1% of the field in question.

That can be true for Literacy or Peace Nobel's but not for physics.

The amount of cynical consipratory thinking in HN horrifies me.