On the Citation
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.
Citation says that implementation of Holography had to wait the emergence of laser twenty years later. That means: 1947+20=1967. However, the first laser was successfully constructed in 1960, and the basic ideas were indeed rewarded by the 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics. Then, my suggestion would be to modify that phrase as next: “…and had to wait the emergence of laser years later.”
Omitting 'twenty' seems a good idea to me.
Implementation of holography surely did not happen immediately the laser was invented, it only became possible then.
So perhaps the actual use of lasers to make holograms was atv some later date (that someone can tell me)?
As a corresponding member... I agree with Tony about avoiding unecessary wording that could raise conflict later... could I offer a suggestion to replace
"emergence of the laser twenty years later."
"the the future invention of the Laser."
I suggest "had to await the invention of the laser". The use of "await' implies future.
I've already given my support this nomination. If I understood it corrrectly, it recognizes a very significant, theoretical invention which was demonstrated much later. I also agree with the comments that have clarified the mention to the Laser in the citation.
My grain of sand is to point out that Denis Gabor was awarded the IEEE Medal of Honor in 1970 "For his ingenious and exciting discovery and verification of the principles of holography."
This other IEEE citation from 1970 says "discovery" and "verification" Does "discovering the principles of Holography" constitute an invention?