Search FQXi


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Mike Holden: "To David Pinyana, Thank you for your comments. I have updated my article..." in Alternative Models of...

Steve Dufourny: "I am very nice and kind, but I am parano due to human nature and my past..." in Does Quantum Weirdness...

Steve Dufourny: "And if it is possible,insert my équations ,here is one considering dark..." in Does Quantum Weirdness...

Robert McEachern: ""Have you contemplated, "what is thinking"?, "what is feeling"? Yes. A..." in Measuring Consciousness...

Shaikh Raisuddin: "Robert, Quote:"there is no evidence that aluminum, Co2 and DNA think or..." in Measuring Consciousness...

Steve Dufourny: "It was me." in Through a Glass, Darkly

Anonymous: "I reread these discussions with my friend Dr Cosmic Ray,Ray Munroe.Sad he..." in Through a Glass, Darkly

Steve Dufourny: "Dear FQXi,Mr Aguirre, Mr Tegmark,Ms Merali and friends, I am sorry for my..." in Is the Past Infinite?


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Does Quantum Weirdness Arise When Parallel Classical Worlds Repel?
Quantum mechanics could derive from subtle interactions among unseen neighboring universes

Wrinkles in Spacetime
Searching for defects in the fabric of the cosmos could help physicists home in on the correct theory of quantum gravity.

Blurring Causal Lines
Quantum experiments mix past and future on the microscopic scale—opening the door to faster computers and revising our notion of causality.

The Quantum Reality Paradox
How the search for God’s limits led to the discovery of quantum contextuality—a weird phenomenon that could provide the 'magic' needed for super-fast computing.

Quantum Cybernetics
The quest for a meta-theory of quantum control that could one day explain physical systems, certain biological phenomena—and maybe even politics.


FQXI ARTICLE
April 30, 2016

Bookmark and Share

Comment on this Article

Please read the important Introduction that governs your participation in this community. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated and posts containing such language will be deleted. Otherwise, this is a free speech Forum and all are welcome!
  • Please enter the text of your post, then click the "Submit New Post" button below. You may also optionally add file attachments below before submitting your edits.

  • HTML tags are not permitted in posts, and will automatically be stripped out. Links to other web sites are permitted. For instructions on how to add links, please read the link help page.

  • You may use superscript (10100) and subscript (A2) using [sup]...[/sup] and [sub]...[/sub] tags.

  • You may use bold (important) and italics (emphasize) using [b]...[/b] and [i]...[/i] tags.

  • You may also include LateX equations into your post.

Insert LaTeX Equation [hide]

LaTeX equations may be displayed in FQXi Forum posts by including them within [equation]...[/equation] tags. You may type your equation directly into your post, or use the LaTeX Equation Preview feature below to see how your equation will render (this is recommended).

For more help on LaTeX, please see the LaTeX Project Home Page.

LaTeX Equation Preview



preview equation
clear equation
insert equation into post at cursor


Your name: (optional)



Important: In order to combat spam, please select the letter in this menu between 'N' and 'P':




Recent Comments


Yes, my comment also mentioned that he cited Volovik and others. But this is not what the fqxi article sounds.

By the way, Universe in a Helium Droplet is a book, not a paper.

Also, I don't think he has ever mentioned quarks in his papers.


Tung, Olaf Dreyer does infact list several authors, including Volovik, see his recent paper

titled:How Things Fall.

What is new from Dreyers perspective, is that there is nothing smaller than Quarks?

There are some really interesting probabilities to consider, and Volvoliks' "Universe in a

helium croplet" is a facinating paper in itself.

Tung, Olaf Dreyer has a recent paper Why Things fall

where he certainly cites Volovik's "Universe in a Helium...


This article mentioned Dreyer's work and some possible consequences of it. I think this article does not do justice by omitting to mention that the theory so called "internal relativity" is not an invention of him. As mentioned by Dreyer in his papers, this view is already proposed by others like Grigori Volovik (see eg. his book "The Universe in a Helium Droplet"). More accurately, his work is just based on their work. Even its possible consequence on cosmological constant problem is dealt with...

read all article comments

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'E' and 'G':


Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.