Courtesy of Italian design agency Accurat, here's a simple, attractive look at data from the Nobel Prizes. It's in Italian, but like most well-done infographics, it doesn't require too much reading to get the idea. At a glance, you can tell prize-winners in economics are older than the average age for all categories, and winners in chemistry and physics are older than they were in the early 20th century. (By contrast, the age for peace prize winners looks more erratic. Take a look at those orange circles.) There's also a look at winners by home city (New York takes the crown), and a space for university affiliation of the laureates. Check out a bigger version here.
Uhh... where is University of Chicago on here?
Actually, the enlarge button on the lower pic works a lot better than the link ( which has 2 sizes- small and gargatuan.
As for the info itself -- OK, so what. I'm not sure that there are a lot of conclusions to be drawn.
Fun fact: the economics prize is not a real Nobel prize; it's a "Nobel memorial prize" given out by the Swedish central bank to their favorite social non-scientists. The peace and literature prizes are genuine, but they're about as scientifically objective as the Oscars.
The literature prize sufferes from the fact that it is too close to the origin - it is like trying to pick out the music of a generation from a top ten station or to pick out which wine is the greatest of the year two days after harvest.
The peace prize has recently been coopted by a focus on being causitive rather than reactive in the role of promoting peace. Thus, it was even given to a US President who at the time was leading two wars, is still leading one, fought a third unofficially, assisnated people (1) in other countries with whom there is no war and (2) citizens of the US (being the first president to do so). So, this prize is rubbish.
The other prizes are easier to award well, since science is easier to quantify (and mathmatics is clearly the most objective).