Nobel Prizes in physics may have a limited lifetime. Awarded theoretical work may become subject to wide-spread, well-founded critique and specific theories may be outright ruled out or eliminated by subsequent studies. Methodological advances awarded prizes may become outdated or surpassed by later advances increasing spatial or temporal resolution. In this pilot study, mean and medium selected physics Nobel Prize lifetimes were found to be 51 and 59 years respectively.
All Nobel Prizes in physics were obtained (N = 144) [1]. Among many possible sources, the Journal of Binary Mechanics [2] was used to identify "decayed" or "expired" physics Nobel Prizes according to the criteria described above (N = 28) listed in Fig. 1 by Year, Recipients and Topic. Note that work (Topic) was done by Recipients before Prize Year (Fig. 1 left). The first of possible multiple Recipients and brief Topic description are visible in Fig. 1.
Thus, the Lifetime of 19.4% of physics Nobel Prizes was limited.
For each Nobel Prize, a JBinMech paper and its publication Year represent one or more publications pertinent to determining prize Lifetime in years, equal to {Year of publication} minus {Year of Prize award}. Lifetime varied from 96 years to -7 years. The two cases of negative Lifetime indicate the Nobel Prize was awarded after its own expiration, according to the present analysis.
The mean and median Lifetime was 51 years and 59 years respectively.
Discussion
The data presented suggest that the Nobel Prize Committee has done well in selecting award recipients and topics over a 144 year history. This conclusion is not diminished by selection of 28 decayed or expired prizes since future developments in physics could not be known at the time of those awards. Indeed, a robust 80.5% of the awards remain, according to present results. This favorable outcome also reflects well for the physics community making nominations for Nobel Prizes.
The four steps in decayed prize lifetimes (Fig. 2) may reflect some changes in Committee composition, protocols, priorities, etc. However, the declining lifetime trend might indicate increasing difficulty in identifying and awarding work of enduring scientific merit.
Methodology. A potential weakness in the present methods is use of the author's publications in JBinMech. On the other hand, these papers provide unique source information based on study of the full quantization axioms of binary mechanics [3], not easily found elsewhere. Further, pursuit of the consequences of these axioms has produced noteworthy discoveries including the proton and electron cycles [4], the Keene law of motion [5], the Keene scale (replacing the Planck scale) and the derivation of the measured values of so-called "fundamental constants" from first principles alone [6].
Another weakness may be bias of the author. This bias issue may be addressed by applying the rule: authors write, but readers decide.
New Questions. The present results suggest further questions. To what extent may these results for physics apply to other Nobel Prize categories? Do the 51 year mean lifetime and 59 year median lifetime imply that it takes about two generations in years for the physics community to catch up with current discoveries? Do the two negative lifetimes (Fig. 1, lower) indicate that the Nobel Prize Committee and those making nominations for prizes are themselves less informed of recent discoveries and advances in physics?
References
[1] NobelPrize.org "All prizes in physics", 2026
[2] Keene, J. J. "Journal of Binary Mechanics", 2026
[3] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics postulates" JBinMech November, 2020.
[4] Keene, J. J. "Proton and electron bit cycles" JBinMech April, 2015.
[5] Keene, J. J. "Law of motion based on mechanism of motion" JBinMech March, 2025.
[6] Keene, J. J. "How to derive the primary and secondary physical constants" JBinMech March, 2025.
© 2026 James J Keene
