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 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
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

Eckard Blumschein: on 2/12/13 at 4:37am UTC, wrote I will not buy the article concerning sound because the problems are known...

John Merryman: on 2/7/13 at 0:19am UTC, wrote Robert, It's good to hear from you. May I suggest you send Zeeya a note...

Robert McEachern: on 2/6/13 at 23:20pm UTC, wrote John, This is hardly "the first time..." I published numerous papers on...

Zeeya Merali: on 2/6/13 at 16:39pm UTC, wrote Thanks James. I hadn't heard of that relationship for sound before. I've...

John Merryman: on 2/6/13 at 2:10am UTC, wrote An interesting and related finding on hearing: "(—For the first...

Domenico Oricchio: on 2/5/13 at 19:05pm UTC, wrote I tried, some time ago, an Innocentive challenge to detect the sick...

Zeeya Merali: on 2/5/13 at 14:05pm UTC, wrote Another discussion thread for January’s podcast, this time on quantum...


Alvina Amanda: "That's a very good concept of technology i think it's help for Write My..." in Hyung Choi and the nature...

Ajay Pokhrel: "Hello Everyone, I had posted a draft on "Exceeding the..." in Alternative Models of...

Eduardo Morris: "Raise public awareness and interest in theoretical physics and cosmology! ..." in Multiversal Journeys —...

Eduardo Morris: "Fantastic! An impressive list of topics! Visit this website for instant..." in 80 Years of EPR —...

Eduardo Morris: "Our junk DNA already has been turned to this purpose. json formatter..." in Are We Merging With Our...

lynn libbrecht: "You have posted a very detail document. I read all of your article and I..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Mike Witot: "Great. Thanks a lot for posting that info! click here" in A Self-Gravitational...

Mike Witot: "I really like to read this informations click here" in Dimensional Reduction in...

click titles to read articles

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.

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.

October 19, 2017

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Quantum Biology: Flight and Sniffery [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Feb. 5, 2013 @ 14:05 GMT
Another discussion thread for January’s podcast, this time on quantum biology. This item also deserves a thread of its own because its been in the news quite a bit over the past few weeks.

To recap, in last May’s podcast, I chatted to Luca Turin, who has proposed a controversial quantum model for our sense of smell. The idea is that the our nose differentiates smell based on a molecule’s vibrations, rather than (as conventionally believed) its shape. In that interview, Turin alluded to some tests he was running on humans to see if their noses could pick out a difference in the smell of two molecules with the same shape, but different vibration frequencies. Last week, his work was published in PLoS ONE. The answer is "yes".

I just want to point you to some nice coverage of Turin’s work, as well as of quantum biology in general, over at the BBC, by Jason Palmer. Here’s his article on the new smell result, and another, co-written by Alex Mansfield, on the whole emerging field of quantum biology. The article also describes models that suggest that some birds use quantum effects to navigate. You can also hear the researchers talking to reporter Carinne Piekema about quantum birds in our own January podcast.

For those of you that enjoy listening to scientists speaking in their own words, I must also draw your attention to this nice edition of the BBC World Service’s Discovery programme (here: January 28 edition) because it opens with a snippet from Erwin Schroedinger. We can’t compete with that on the FQXi podcast!

this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate

Domenico Oricchio wrote on Feb. 5, 2013 @ 19:05 GMT
I tried, some time ago, an Innocentive challenge to detect the sick passengers in airport: as always I lost.

The interesting thing is that I try to build a little spectrograph to analize the interferons in the air.

Each molecule emit some infrared thermical emission with functional groups.

The idea was to built little solar cell, with doping to obtain the right light absorbment: one for u_1 frequency, and the other for u_2 frequency; if connected in opposite direction (pass band infrared filter), there is a mean activation only for frequency intervall [u1,u2].

I think that the noise work in a similar way: there is an activation for a right range of frequency, to detect the functional group; this is the only information that is useful for the life, and it is similar to the vision.

I think that the first sense is olfaction: virus chemical identification of the chemical environment.

I don't think that the evolution thrown away nothing that work, so that if the olfaction is one of first sense, then the other must use similar mechanism (the visual perception like olfaction of the light?Have they similar genetic?)

I read the Turin idea of the chemosensor, his idea is similar, but use the tunneling: there is contact.

If the olfaction work without contact, then there is an infrared recognition (I think that can be verified with in vitro chemosensor with physical separation to avoid tunneling).

Quantum biology is an interesting topic, because is the intersection between physics, biology and nanotechnology; it is so boring to study a single topic!



report post as inappropriate

John Merryman wrote on Feb. 6, 2013 @ 02:10 GMT
An interesting and related finding on hearing:

"(—For the first time, physicists have found that humans can discriminate a sound's frequency (related to a note's pitch) and timing (whether a note comes before or after another note) more than 10 times better than the limit imposed by the Fourier uncertainty principle. Not surprisingly, some of the subjects with the best listening precision were musicians, but even non-musicians could exceed the uncertainty limit. The results rule out the majority of auditory processing brain algorithms that have been proposed, since only a few models can match this impressive human performance."

report post as inappropriate

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali replied on Feb. 6, 2013 @ 16:39 GMT
Thanks James. I hadn't heard of that relationship for sound before. I've tweeted that article now -- some nice sound clips on it too.

report post as inappropriate

Robert H McEachern replied on Feb. 6, 2013 @ 23:20 GMT

This is hardly "the first time..."

I published numerous papers on this subject twenty years ago.

See for example:

"Hearing it like it is: Audio Signal Processing the Way the Ear Does It", DSP Applications, February, 1994

"Hearing it like it is Part 2: Sound Demodulation via Parallel Filter Banks", DSP and Multimedia Technology, May 1994.

Those papers also give references to my earlier papers and patents on the subject.

You may recall that the Fourier uncertainty principle, and how to get around it, was also discussed in my essay submitted to the last FQXI essay contest.

Rob McEachern

report post as inappropriate

John Merryman replied on Feb. 7, 2013 @ 00:19 GMT

It's good to hear from you. May I suggest you send Zeeya a note suggesting it as a topic. There are many aspects of physics which are being ignored, or overlooked and your contest entry was very enlightening. The more voices and subjects raised, the more likely the science media, of which Zeeya is a member, will begin to realize physics has been sidetracked by a somewhat dubious canon.

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.