Comments on: Green sits in Hawking’s chair

By: Joey

Joey — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:08:58 +0000

I vote for Daniel Holz (and Sean Carroll as a back up).

By: Sili

Sili — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:28:57 +0000

Why is the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics traditionally a physicist? Why don’t they change the name of the chair, or appoint a mathematician?

Well, the common complaint is that String Theory is all Mathematics and no Physics.

You can’t have it both ways.

By: Christina Viering

Christina Viering — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:40:19 +0000

Sounds like a dilemma.

By: C. Oward

C. Oward — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:49:52 +0000

@Ben Martin and others

Barrow is on the ground floor. Gibbons one above.

And did Ben Martin surely meant it is already decided? I can’t think of anyone besides T., and he too would have to do something bit more extraordinary than to date.

By: Clare

Clare — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:49:52 +0000

“Aren’t there any young whippersnappers worthy of the seat?”

Maybe young wippersnappers don’t want to move to the UK?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:38:54 +0000

Why is the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics traditionally a physicist? Why don’t they change the name of the chair, or appoint a mathematician?

By: Eunoia

Eunoia — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:42:49 +0000

If I remember correctly ,the paper was titled ‘Black holes have no hairs’ because that gives an exceedingly vulgar translation into Russian

By: boreds

boreds — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:06:05 +0000

MBG is an excellent choice, as one of the leading theoretical physicists of his generation, and someone who clearly can cope well with the pressures of following Stephen. In four years time, the potential pressure on a younger physicist will have dissipated I would imagine, allowing him or her simply to get on with the job and do some (hopefully) outstanding research.

@Ben Martin, I am intrigued as to who is the Lucasian-elect. Any clues? Second floor? If it is someone young, does that mean HR or DT? Interesting.

@Timon. Gary Gibbons is a few months younger than Michael. As much as he would be a worthy choice, if a tenure of four years is being criticized, anything less than that seems unlikely.

By: Ellipsis

Ellipsis — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:44:35 +0000

They might not have the money right now for a completely new hire (plus keeping Green in his current/past professorial position). Such concerns often trump “what would be best.”

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:35:40 +0000

@Phillip Helbig

You’ve GOT to be kidding about Barrow…. he’s a superb writer about science for the public, but hardly done anything groundbreaking in his own research. Paul Townsend has got to be in the frame though….basically got to M-Theory about the same time as Witten.