图灵奖获得者姚期智与诺奖获得者杨振宁李政道谁贡献大？

（注：本文发表三个月后，图灵奖获得者辛顿获诺贝尔奖，验证了本文观点。）

因为李政道先生去世，杨振宁李政道的物理成就又成为议论热点。计算机领域的人突然发问：图灵奖获得者姚期智和诺贝尔奖获得者杨振宁李政道谁贡献大？

由于IT对人类生活的深刻影响， 图灵奖也非常重要，尽管社会反响没诺贝尔奖那么大。那么比较一下获得这两个奖的中国人的贡献是有意思的。

比较是很难的，难就难在确立比较原则。

人类生活在自然界，作为智能生物，了解大自然是最根本的使命。杨振宁李政道的物理成就属于了解大自然，是根本性的工作。

姚期智提出并发明安全多方计算算法，是属于工具的发明，是解决信息安全问题，完全无关大自然，不属于根本性的工作。所以，即使图灵奖与诺贝尔奖完全相当，姚期智的工作与杨、李的工作也不在一个层面上，对人类的贡献也不能相比。

这么说吧，杨、李的工作是永存的，但姚的工作不是，如果人们不再有多方安全计算的需求，那他的工作就不会再有人提起。

似乎图灵奖获得者的工作都无关大自然，那么图灵奖的贡献是不是永远与诺贝尔不能相比呢？

不是！

2018年图灵奖获得者辛顿、杨立昆的工作就可以与诺贝尔奖相比。辛顿杨立昆因在人工神经网络方面的突破而获奖。人工神经网络在模拟神经网络，就是在模拟大自然。我们目前还不完全了解大脑神经网络，但成功地模拟是通向了解的重要一步。所以他们的工作带有根本性，是永存的。当然，辛顿、杨立昆研究人工神经网络的目的是实用，不是破解大脑的秘密，但他们的成功肯定有助于破解大脑秘密——即破解大自然的秘密。

谬误之处还请指正。

英文译文：（感谢DeepSeek 给出初译）

Dr. Tsung-Dao Lee just passed away. The scientific achievements Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee made became a hot topic once more. People working in computer science posed a question: Who made greater contributions—Turing Award winner Andrew Yao or Nobel Prize winner Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee?

Because of the profound impact of IT on human life, the Turing Award is also well known, though it may not carry the same prestige as the Nobel Prize. Thus, comparing the contributions of these Chinese winners of both awards is interesting.

However, such a comparison is inherently difficult—the real challenge lies in establishing the criteria for comparison.  

Human beings live in the universe, and as intelligent life, understanding the universe is our most fundamental mission. Work of Yang and Lee belonged to this realm——uncovering laws of the universe.

On the other hand, Andrew Yao proposed a secure multi-party computation algorithm, which is of invention of tools for addressing information security problems. This work is entirely unrelated to exploration of the universe and does not belong to fundamental research. Therefore, even if the Turing Award were considered equal in prestige to the Nobel Prize, Yao’s contribution would still not be comparable to that of Yang and Lee in terms of their impact on human beings.

In other words, Yang and Lee’s work is eternal, whereas Yao’s is not. If secure multi-party computation were not used someday, his work wouldn’t be mentioned anymore.

This raises another question. Achievements of Turing Award winners usually seem to be unrelated to exploration of the universe. Does that mean the Turing Award can never compare to the Nobel Prize?  

Not necessarily!  

The work of 2018 Turing Award winners Geoffrey Hinton and Yann LeCun can indeed be compared to Nobel-level contributions. They were honored for their breakthroughs in artificial neural networks, which simulate biological neural networks—an attempt to simulate the nature. While we do not yet fully understand the brain’s neural networks, effective simulation is a crucial step toward that understanding. Thus, their work can be considered to be fundamental and eternal.

Of course, Hinton and LeCun’s goal was applications of artificial neural networks, other than unveiling the brain’s secrets. Yet, their success undoubtedly helps unlock the mysteries of the brain—and, by extension, the mysteries of the nature. 
——————————————

这里给出DeepSeek 的译文（供比较）：

With the passing of Dr. Tsung-Dao Lee, the scientific achievements of Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee have once again become a hot topic of discussion. Suddenly, someone from the computer science field posed a question: *Who has made greater contributions—Turing Award winner Andrew Yao or Nobel laureates Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee?*  

Given the profound impact of IT on human life, the Turing Award is also highly significant, though it may not carry the same societal prestige as the Nobel Prize. Thus, comparing the contributions of these Chinese laureates from both awards is an interesting exercise.  

However, such a comparison is inherently difficult—the real challenge lies in establishing the criteria for comparison.  

Human beings live in the natural world, and as intelligent life, understanding nature is our most fundamental mission. The physics achievements of Yang and Lee belong to this realm—they represent fundamental work in uncovering the laws of nature.  

In contrast, Andrew Yao proposed and invented secure multi-party computation algorithms, which are tools designed to address information security problems. This work is entirely unrelated to nature and does not constitute fundamental research. Therefore, even if the Turing Award were considered equal in prestige to the Nobel Prize, Yao’s contributions would still not be on the same level as those of Yang and Lee in terms of their impact on humanity.  

To put it plainly: Yang and Lee’s work is eternal, whereas Yao’s is not. If secure multi-party computation were to become obsolete, his work might fade into obscurity.  

This raises another question: If the achievements of Turing Award winners are generally unrelated to nature, does that mean the Turing Award can never compare to the Nobel Prize?  

Not necessarily!  

The work of 2018 Turing Award winners Geoffrey Hinton and Yann LeCun can indeed be compared to Nobel-level contributions. They were honored for their breakthroughs in artificial neural networks, which simulate biological neural networks—an attempt to mimic nature. While we do not yet fully understand the brain’s neural networks, successful simulation is a crucial step toward that understanding. Thus, their work is fundamental and enduring.  

Of course, Hinton and LeCun’s primary goal was practical applications, not deciphering the brain’s secrets. Yet, their success undoubtedly advances our ability to unlock the mysteries of the brain—and, by extension, the mysteries of nature.