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

Zeeya Merali: on 1/14/14 at 21:18pm UTC, wrote Depending on how familiar you are with FQXi, you may know that we like to...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steven Andresen: "James I am wondering if you will respond to my concept for inertial mass?..." in Alternative Models of...

Steven Andresen: "Jose You said "Did what I wrote appear as if I am referring to a previous..." in Alternative Models of...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, BTW, it is the community vote that matters ... not the public vote...." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Gary Simpson: "Ted, You statement regarding your score does not make any sense. You..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Algernon kk: "Steve Agnew is a legend for doing that. A lot of people at custom..." in Weinberg: Why quantum...

Steve Dufourny: ":) it is fqxi which merits these thanks, me I just share this information. ..." in 2016: The Physics Year in...

Bishal Banjara: "thank you once again .....thank you!!" in 2016: The Physics Year in...

Roger Granet: "Hi. Interesting article! This actually makes sense to me and sounds..." in Quantum Replicants:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

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.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)

Rescuing Reality
A "retrocausal" rewrite of physics, in which influences from the future can affect the past, could solve some quantum quandaries—saving Einstein's view of reality along the way.


FQXi BLOGS
February 27, 2017

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: String theory vs Loop Quantum Gravity: Bousso and Rovelli FIGHT (backwards) [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Jan. 14, 2014 @ 21:18 GMT
Depending on how familiar you are with FQXi, you may know that we like to cause a little mischief at our conferences. Knowing that we had famed string theorist Raphael Bousso and Carlo Rovelli, one of the originators of loop quantum gravity, in the same room, we couldn't resist asking them to debate these rivals routes to a theory of quantum gravity.

Both men are passionate about their work and fierce defenders of their own theories. So, of course, we turned the debate upside down and asked them argue the *reverse* position.

So here's LQG proponent Carlo Rovelli explaining why anyone with any sense would be a string theorist, while string theorist Raphael Bousso staunchly defends LQG as the superior theory:



And if you liked that, here are some of our classic mock debates from our previous meeting.

Julian Barbour and Tim Maudlin reverse debate the reality of time:



And David Albert and David Wallace switch positions on the Many World's Interpretation of quantum mechanics:



this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'R' and 'T':


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