The US$3-million Fundamental Physics Prize is indeed an interesting experiment,
美国三百万美元的基础物理学奖的确是一项令人觉得有趣的试验，
as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year's award in March.
正如今年三月Alexander Polyakov领取本年度的基础物理学奖所说。
And it is far from the only one of its type.
而且这种类型的奖项可不止只有基础物理学奖。
As a News Feature article in Nature discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years.
正如《自然》杂志的一篇新闻专题文章论述，近年来，一系列给研究者设立的利益丰厚的奖项能与诺贝尔奖相媲美。
Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs.
许多奖项，比如基础物理学奖，其资金来自于互联网企业家们如电话号码长度般的巨额银行存款。
These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say,
这些捐助者在他们各自的领域很成功，他们说，
and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
而且他们想用他们的财富让人们注意到那些科学领域的有所成功的人。
What's not to like?
这项奖项有什么不让人喜欢的吗？
Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature.
根据新闻专题文章中的几位科学家的说法，有太多让人不喜欢的地方了。
You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels.
俗话说：有钱买不到等级。而且这些暴发的企业家们不能买到和诺贝尔奖一样的声望。
The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists.
科学家说这些新的奖项是它们的幕后人进行自我推销的操练。
They could distort the achievement-based system of peer-review-led research.
他们可能会扭曲以同行评审为导向的基于学术成就的研究体系。
They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research.
他们可能会使同行评审研究的现状凝固不前。
They do not fund peer-reviewed research. They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.
它们不资助同行评审研究。它们会让寂寞天才的神话不朽。
The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism.
奖项提供者的目标似乎如他们所受的批评一样散乱。
Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.
有些人是想要制造震惊，另一些人想要吸引人们关注科学，或者想更好地奖励那些以科研为己任的人。
As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes—both new and old—are distributed.
正如《自然》杂志此前指出的，人们关心科学奖项---无论新老---是怎样分配的，这种担心是合理的。
The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include.
今年发起的生命科学突破奖，对于生命科学所应包含内容采用了一个很不具代表性的观点。
But the Nobel Foundation's limit of three recipients per prize,
但是，现代研究所具有的团队合作性质，
each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research
早已使得诺贝尔基金对于每个奖项的获奖者不得超过三人，且每位获奖者必须在世的限制不再适用
as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson.
正如在对希格斯玻色子的发现者进行认定时，忽略谁都会不可避免产生争执。
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.
当然，诺贝尔奖本身就是当时一位有钱人设立的，在设立前他早就决定该如何处置他自己的钱。
Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.
时间，而非奖项设立的意图，赋予了诺贝尔奖的合理性。
As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear.
虽然一些科学家可能会对这些新奖项有所抱怨，但有两件事情似乎要清楚。
First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one.
首先，如果被授予这一奖项，绝大多数研究者都会接受。
Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere.
第二，把金钱和注意力倾注到科学而不是其它的地方当然是一件好事。
It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism —that is the culture of research, after all
对这一机制批评和质疑都是合理的，毕竟，这就是研究的文化，
but it is the prize-givers' money to do with as they please.
但这些钱是奖项设立者出的，随他们高兴去花这些钱。
It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
带着感激和感恩接受这些礼物是明智的。
