Top physicists of all time with respect to h-index

[maverick_starstrider]

Hi, I've been searching google for like an hour now and I can't seem to find a compiled lists of the top physicists of all time with respect to h-index (I'd like like top 100 but I'd settle for top 10). You'd think it'd be easy to find but I can't seem to find such a list. Does anyone know where one might be? Help is greatly appreciated.

P.S. I'd prefer this didn't turn into a discussion of the short comings of the h-index as a metric of success. I'm just looking for a list.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Here's a start:
http://dabacon.org/pontiff/?p=1066"

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Oh, I just found: http://www.mazalien.nl/weblog/archives/2006/10/01/the-h-index/

How is it possible that Dirac had an h-index of only 19?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

How is it possible that Dirac had an h-index of only 19?

It's one of the short comings of the h-index as a metric of success.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

I'm more inclined to say the stats are wrong. Feynman didn't publish a lot so I get his low value but I was always under the impression that Dirac published quite a bit (and surely most of his papers were cited many, many times). I mean Dirac probably has more than 19 things NAMED AFTER HIM so surely each of those would have been in a highly cited paper.

 

[Pupil]

Haha! Feynman = pwned by Brian Greene. Just goes to show you what really matters: publishing a lot and getting cited even more.

 

[junglebeast]

Being cited in a paper doesn't mean you had anything useful to contribute..a lot of really terrible papers get high citations just because they did were the first to approach a particular problem, so all the new and better approaches end up listing this terrible approach in their previous work section.

I think a better measure of a person's influence is measured by the prevalence of their name in the archives of the world. Thus I present the G-index,

Dirac = 2,960,000
Feynman = 2,520,000
James Maxwell = 2,260,000
Brian Greene = 338,000

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Being cited in a paper doesn't mean you had anything useful to contribute.

I found this out the hard way. I have an h-index of 93 because of all the papers citing my papers and saying "don't do it this way".