The US$3-million Fundamental physics prize is indeed an interesting experiment,as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March.And it is far from the only one of its type.As a News Feature article in Nature discusses,a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years.Many,like the Fundamental Physics Prize,are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs.These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields,they say,and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.What’s not to like?Quite a lot,according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature.You cannot buy class,as the old saying goes,and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels,The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them,say scientists.They could distort the achievement-based system of peer-review-led research.They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research.They do not fund peer-reviewed research.They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism.Some want to shock,others to draw people into science,or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.As Nature has pointed out before,there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes—both new and old—are distributed.The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences,launched this year,takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include.But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize,each of whom must still be living,has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson.The Nobels were,of course,themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money.Time,rather than intention,has given them legitimacy.As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards,two things seem clear.First,most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one.Second,it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere,It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism—that is the culture of research,after all—but it is the prize-givers’money to do with as they please.It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
The Fundamental Physics Prize is seen as
事实细节根据题干中关键词专有名词“The Fundamental Physics Prize”，我们可以迅速定位到文章第一段。选项A“企业家财富的象征”，以entrepreneurs为关键词定位对应的原文“Many,like the Fundamental Physics Prize,are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs.”也就是说像基础物理学奖一样的许多奖项，是由银行账户如电话号码一般长的互联网企业家提供资金设立的，而不是企业家财富的象征，故选项A错误；选项B“可能替代诺贝尔奖的奖项”，以“the Nobel Prizes”为关键词定位对应原文“a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years.”就是说“一系列报酬丰厚的奖项加入了诺贝尔奖行列。”很明显原文是“join（加入）”而并非选项中的“replacement（代替）”，故排除B；选项C“对研究者的慷慨奖励”对应原文“they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science”即他们想通过自己的财富让人们关注那些在科学领域有所成就的人，因此C为正确选项；而选项D“银行家投资的一个例子”，原文并未提及这是一个example的相关信息，故排除。
