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.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

Previous Contests

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author 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

W. Wharton: on 10/31/09 at 15:44pm UTC, wrote Alfred, I finally read your essay and like it a lot. It gives a broad...

Jeffrey Nicholls: on 10/28/09 at 2:37am UTC, wrote Dear Alfred, I was pleased to see you write 'It is conceivable that...

Alfred Tang: on 10/12/09 at 8:59am UTC, wrote Dear Stefan, Thank you for your detailed response. As far as prime...

Terry Padden: on 10/12/09 at 8:33am UTC, wrote Alfred A very interesting and brave essay - but a bit too ambitious for...

Alfred Tang: on 10/8/09 at 8:57am UTC, wrote Dear Arjen, You are certainly welcomed to quote my paper. Alfred

Arjen Dijksman: on 10/8/09 at 8:49am UTC, wrote Dear Alfred Tang, I find it an inspiring essay with fresh perspectives. I...

Steve Dufourny: on 10/1/09 at 9:56am UTC, wrote Hello Mr. Alfred Tang , One of my favorites ,very relevant. ...

Stephen Brenner: on 9/30/09 at 4:20am UTC, wrote Hi Alfred, I enjoyed your essay and agree about the narrow realm that...


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 FORUM
June 23, 2017

CATEGORY: What's Ultimately Possible in Physics? Essay Contest (2009) [back]
TOPIC: Ignoramus and Ignorabimus by Alfred Tang [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Alfred Tang wrote on Sep. 29, 2009 @ 12:12 GMT
Essay Abstract

The limit of physics is not the same as the physics of limit. Limitology is partially physical in nature but is not reduced to physical materialism. The most important source of the limit of physics is the neglect of the supernatural. The question of the limit of physics cannot be answered a priori. The integration of science and theology is mutually beneficial and will push back the limit of physics to some extent.

Author Bio

I am a nuclear and particle physicist. I received my Ph. D. in theoretical physics and two master degrees in theology. I am currently visiting the Chinese University of Hong Kong. My currently research focuses on supercomputing and neutrino physics.

Download Essay PDF File




Joe Fisher wrote on Sep. 29, 2009 @ 21:41 GMT
This is by far the most cogent essay submitted in the competition. The only quibble I have with it is the assertion that mathematics is a precise measuring tool. Theoretically true. Pragmatically not so. Mathematics is merely the most extensive postulated fixation men are capable of indulging in.

report post as inappropriate


Stefan Weckbach wrote on Sep. 29, 2009 @ 23:55 GMT
Dear Alfred Tang,

Very good compilated essay!

Your statement, that the limit of physics isn't the same that the physics of limits is well done.

Defining the limits of physics from outside the physical universe with the help of the inside-physics cannot work due to Gödel's findings.

But, defining the physics of limits can be done with the inside-information via Gödel...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Stephen Brenner wrote on Sep. 30, 2009 @ 04:20 GMT
Hi Alfred,

I enjoyed your essay and agree about the narrow realm that modern physics has focused on. I propose in my essay that the ultimate trinity is Body, Mind & Soul and that we can expect physics to eventually describe those terms in the language of physics.

Steve

report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Oct. 1, 2009 @ 09:56 GMT
Hello Mr. Alfred Tang ,

One of my favorites ,very relevant.

Congratulations and Godd luck for the contest .

Best Regards

Steve

report post as inappropriate


Arjen Dijksman wrote on Oct. 8, 2009 @ 08:49 GMT
Dear Alfred Tang,

I find it an inspiring essay with fresh perspectives. I never thought of Nature as a revelation for physicists, but you're right, theologians and physicists handle the same "revelation". The scope of theologians or religious searchers is broader because they have other revelations at their disposal (scriptures, testimonies...). Physicists focus only on nature and therefore too often forget that there is more from which they could learn (attitudes, methods, thinking process...). May I quote some of your phrases on my twitter profile or blog, linking to your essay?

Regards,

Arjen

report post as inappropriate


Alfred Tang wrote on Oct. 8, 2009 @ 08:57 GMT
Dear Arjen,

You are certainly welcomed to quote my paper.

Alfred

report post as inappropriate


Terry Padden wrote on Oct. 12, 2009 @ 08:33 GMT
Alfred

A very interesting and brave essay - but a bit too ambitious for this reader.

I am especially intrigued by the numerology towards the end, which is also featured in the concluding part of my essay - but without any supernatural or religious connotations.

report post as inappropriate


Author Alfred Tang wrote on Oct. 12, 2009 @ 08:59 GMT
Dear Stefan,

Thank you for your detailed response. As far as prime numbers 2, 3 and 5 in the Pythagorean triangle are concerned, isn't it really 32+42=52? Regarding your comment on selection, mutation and reproduction in evolutionary biology, I think that the first two factors are environmental in nature and therefore different from the last one in character. As a side comment, I am not sure if we can use evolutionary biology as a source of data because it is just an interpretative scheme for fossil record. However the points of your post are well taken.

Alfred




Jeffrey Nicholls wrote on Oct. 28, 2009 @ 02:37 GMT
Dear Alfred,

I was pleased to see you write 'It is conceivable that theoretical breakthroughs can be made when new ideas in physics are shaped by old ideas in theology.'

It gives me a little confidence in my notion that if we identify the initial singularity with the monotheist God ('omnino simplex') we can use the psychological theory of the Trinity developed by Augustine and Aquinas (no longer limited to three Persons and updated with the quantum idea that observation takes place in the product space of observer and observed - God the Father and The Word of God) to explain the differentiation of the initial divinity into the current divine universe.

Thankyou,

Jeffrey

report post as inappropriate


W. Wharton wrote on Oct. 31, 2009 @ 15:44 GMT
Alfred,

I finally read your essay and like it a lot. It gives a broad view of knowledge and helps break down the false barrier between science and theology. Good work!

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.