Search FQXi


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Agnew: "The universe is finite and not infinite. The notion of infinity or..." in Watching the Observers

Anonymous: ""According to quantum mechanics, a vacuum isn't empty at all. It's actually..." in Manipulating the Quantum...

Lorraine Ford: "Dear Rajiv, I have already addressed your 3 points, but I will put it to..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Georgina, That is very interesting, but please remember that the..." in Watching the Observers

Peter Morgan: "An e-mail sent to me by Springer Nature today tells me that because I am at..." in Manipulating the Quantum...

munized ward: "Variety exists inside all populaces of life forms. This happens somewhat in..." in Natural Selection in...

Pentcho Valev: "Not Even Wrong Concepts in Physics: Entropy The following argument is..." in We Are All Connected

Rajiv Singh: "Dear Lorraine, Oh! I did not check your recent responses. Let me address..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.


FQXI ARTICLE
June 23, 2017

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 'F' and 'H':




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