Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Wilhelmus Wilde: on 6/25/12 at 16:11pm UTC, wrote In the reductionist way of thinking we meet all kind of problems when...

Zeeya Merali: on 6/25/12 at 15:43pm UTC, wrote A short post to highlight a discussion around one of our recent podcasts....


RECENT FORUM POSTS

adel sadeq: "Victor I think Tegmark had some theory in mind that resembles..." in What Is...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Anthony Aguirre, The mission of the Foundational Questions Institute..." in FQXi's New Large Grant...

Suhani Mahajan: "I am a attractive female for pleasurable and delight service in only on..." in Is the Past Infinite?

thuy lien: "9 THINGS WE WERE SEEN FROM RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2 TRAILER ROCKSTAR HAVE US..." in Collapsing Physics: Q&A...

Anthony Aguirre: "Our mission at FQXi has always been to push boundaries, and to try to focus..." in FQXi's New Large Grant...

John Cox: "Victor, I have reread your post and still find agreement. Realism vs...." in What Is...

Anonymous: "hello Bob" in The Complexity Conundrum

shery williams: "Office Setup is the full suite of Microsoft productivity software that..." in Are We Merging With Our...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

The Complexity Conundrum
Resolving the black hole firewall paradox—by calculating what a real astronaut would compute at the black hole's edge.

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

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


FQXi BLOGS
December 17, 2017

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: A Table-Top Test for Quantum Gravity [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Jun. 25, 2012 @ 15:43 GMT
A short post to highlight a discussion around one of our recent podcasts. In the April edition of the podcast, I chatted with FQXi’s Markus Aspelmeyer about a proposal for a table-top test for quantum gravity that he and his colleagues had outlined in Nature Physics. The idea is to look for modifications to Heisenberg’s Uncertainty principle due to quantum gravity models, using microscale mirrors in the lab.

During the podcast, we mentioned that Sabine Hossenfelder was quite sceptical about this -- she blogged her concerns that the team failed to address the question of Lorentz-invariance here.

Now one of the paper’s co-authors, Caslav Brukner, has written a response, so I’m inviting you to head over to the podcast thread (and over to Sabine’s Backreaction blog where the same comment has been posted) to discuss that.

report post as inappropriate


Wilhelmus de Wilde wrote on Jun. 25, 2012 @ 16:11 GMT
In the reductionist way of thinking we meet all kind of problems when reaching the Planck scale. Try the "emergence" way, and a lot of things become easier to understand but also to explain.

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

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.