Why is there no such thing as a Nobel Prize in mathematics?
Because the rewarded research can absolutely be proved.
Imagine for one moment that scientists that can be corrupted to get the public falsely influenced by obscure research get rewarded with a million bucks (and the mainstream media will get everybody to cheer them):
- the economist who suggest to kolkhoze our lives, sterilize us and pour our neighborhoods with migrants
- the doctor who gets us to be jabbed with experimental DNA altering poison
- the chemist who comes with compounds such as graphene which can be used as much for the good as for the bad
- Obama who bombed innocent people to get his million
- the atom bender who makes invisible computers from rogue molecules
But then, demonstrate something interesting regarding prime or complex numbers and you won’t get as much from the warmongers.
I typed that quite hastily so there might be more relevant examples (except Obama’s) but you get the idea…
I have never seen any Field Medalist being paraded to shape humanities future, whereas all they do with Nobel Prize winners is exactly that.
Most advances in mathematics that would win such a prize wouldn't have wide interest or general impact that an advancement in medicine or physics or chemistry may have. Those prizes are usually handed out for things that will greatly affect a wide array of technology going forward, whereas the math prize may just be someone solving a long old proof, or inventing a new form of math or something.
Depending on your worldview you will look at things like this differently.
Worldview "Nobel prize cares about humanity" - then your explanation makes sense.
Worldview "Nobel prize is a globalist tool to reshape humanity" - then the explanation will be different