诺贝尔奖评委会亏待了吴健雄吗?

Did the Nobel prize committee really treat chienshiung Wu unfairly?——some queries to the article Chienshiung Wu——a Chinese female scientist being unfairly treated by the Nobel prize Committee

在发现"弱作用中宇称不守恒"的过程中,杨振宁、李政道的贡献是第一位的,吴健雄不可等同,更不应高于杨、李。吴健雄并非"唯一"最早认识杨、李假说的意义并着手进行实验检验的科学家;三组科学家的实验殊途同归,同时完成,并于同一天将实验报告寄达《物理评论》,所以吴健雄无权独占优先权。用最先"开始实验"和"得出初步结果"为吴作优先权辩护,是有违科学共同体公认的标准的。吴健雄未获诺贝尔奖,也并非由于诺贝尔奖评委会"偏重理论方面"和搞"性别歧视",而是由于其实验的原创性价值不高,以及未能先于他人做出结果并予以发表。

In the process of discovering the law ＂the Parity Nonconservation in Weak Interactions＂, Chenning Yang and Tusingdao Lee＇ s most original and important achievements could not be denied undisputably, while Chienshiung Wu＇ s achievements could not equate or even surpass those of Yang and Lee. Wu was not the only person who recognized the significance of Yang and Lee＇ s hypothesis and prepared to perform experiments to verify it. In fact, three scientist groups had verified the hypothesis at the same time through different experiments, and their experiment reports were sent to Physics Review at the same day. Therefore, Wu should not monopolize the priority in the process of the experimental verification. It is not objective and rational enough to jump to a conclusion that the Nobel prize Committee has partiality for experimental or theoretical science by the difference between percentage or the increase in percentage of the Nobel prize in experimental and theoretical field. The reason that Wu had not be given the Nobel Prize was not that the Nobel prize Committee had partiality for theoretical achievements and discrimination against women, but that her experiment isn＇ t original and fast enough.