The Nobel Prizes have long stood as a symbol of the pinnacle of scientific achievement, yet questions arise about their relevance in today’s scientific landscape.

Mythology surrounds the Nobel Prizes — they are often seen as recognizing the finest intellects or acknowledging every groundbreaking discovery. Attending the prestigious dinner in Stockholm’s Blue Hall, where the King of Sweden toasts the winners, it’s easy to view this as the ultimate celebration of scientific endeavor.

Every December 10, on the banks of Riddarfjärden, an exclusive gathering occurs, where only a few dignitaries sit at the Table of Honour. However, the process of determining the honorees is governed by intricate rules established over a century ago, when scientific exploration was a more solitary pursuit. This system is prone to the biases of human judgment, leading to some deserving individuals being overlooked while others may receive accolades they don’t merit.

A prime example of this complexity is the award given for the discovery of the Higgs boson, which I witnessed in 2013. The prize was shared between Peter Higgs from Britain and François Englert from Belgium, who in the 1960s theorized the existence of a particle essential for giving mass to matter — a fundamental aspect of the Standard Model of particle physics. Their findings showcased the potency of theoretical physics, akin to the groundbreaking work of Albert Einstein.

Despite this achievement, the award also raises concerns regarding the selection process of the Nobel Committee, particularly how it chooses its recipients.

Peter Higgs himself is somewhat elusive, resembling the particle he is known for. Though he may seem withdrawn, his presence draws attention, particularly during the Nobel festivities. Meeting him prior to the ceremony, he was dressed formally and spoke candidly about his work, despite some challenges associated with aging.

The journey towards discovering the Higgs boson was lengthy. Higgs and Englert, along with Robert Brout, introduced their theory in 1964, predicting a subatomic particle that interacts with others to confer mass. However, it wasn't until 2012 — thanks to the colossal Large Hadron Collider at CERN — that the Higgs boson was finally observed.

Initially, the theory faced skepticism and was largely ignored. Higgs recalled a “deafening silence” following its introduction, which was somewhat justified given that the theory struggled to find its proper application until later developments in particle physics.

The Higgs boson’s discovery was not only significant for theoretical physics but also for its implications in the broader scientific community. Yet, the Nobel rules stipulate that no more than three individuals can share a prize, which leaves out many significant contributors, such as Gerald Guralnik, Carl Hagen, and Tom Kibble, who also played crucial roles in developing the Higgs field theory.

The Nobel Prize’s limitation to three recipients highlights a perception that scientific breakthroughs come from solitary geniuses rather than collaborative efforts. This perception is increasingly outdated, as cutting-edge research often involves numerous scientists working together.

At CERN, the Higgs boson was uncovered through extensive collaborations, with thousands contributing to the research. The paper announcing its discovery included nearly 3,000 authors, a testament to the collaborative nature of modern science.

Interestingly, while the Nobel statutes originally permitted multiple recipients, they were amended in 1968 to limit recognition to three individuals. Moreover, the prizes are awarded only to individuals, not institutions, which contrasts with the Nobel Peace Prize that has recognized organizations.

The 2013 announcement of the Nobel laureates was notably delayed, suggesting potential debates within the committee regarding the inclusion of additional recipients. Speculation surrounds whether Kibble or CERN might have been considered for recognition alongside Higgs and Englert.

Another debated rule states that only living individuals can receive awards, a relatively recent amendment. This policy has excluded deserving scientists, such as Robert Brout, who passed away shortly before the Higgs boson was confirmed.

Lars Bergström, who served as the Secretary of the Nobel Committee for Physics during the 2013 award, acknowledged the complexities involved in the nomination and selection processes. Nominations are solicited from a wide range of physicists, but the committee's decisions are often subject to debate and scrutiny.

The process, while rigorous, does not guarantee that every remarkable contribution to science is recognized. For instance, the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics sparked controversy as many believed Nicola Cabibbo should have been honored alongside the winners.

Moreover, the underrepresentation of women among Nobel laureates in physics is a significant concern. Of the 210 winners, only three have been women, highlighting ongoing disparities within the scientific community.

Bergström recognizes the historical bias favoring male scientists, noting that many deserving women were overlooked in previous decades. Nonetheless, he expresses hope for a more inclusive future.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, with its storied history and traditional practices, is now considering adapting its Nobel Prize processes to better reflect contemporary scientific collaboration.

As the awards ceremony approaches, Bergström anticipates the celebration while acknowledging the ongoing challenges within the Nobel system.