Search FQXi

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: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Previous Contests

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest
December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020
Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

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

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 5:23am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/2/12 at 7:56am UTC, wrote After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I...

Hoang Hai: on 9/19/12 at 15:06pm UTC, wrote Dear Very interesting to see your essay. Perhaps all of us are convinced...

Benjamin Dribus: on 9/18/12 at 3:05am UTC, wrote Dear Tirthabir and Anupam, I really enjoyed your essay! A couple of...

Sergey Fedosin: on 9/9/12 at 10:54am UTC, wrote Dear Tirthabir and Anupam, In my opinion we can include gravity in quantum...

Anton Vrba: on 9/3/12 at 22:53pm UTC, wrote Hi Tirthabir and Anupam  Heavy reading indeed. Could you explain what...

tirthabir biswas: on 9/3/12 at 14:10pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract In this essay we argue that a ghost-free non-local...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Lorraine Ford: "P.S. Clearly, a situation symbolically representable as: ..." in The Present State of...

Lorraine Ford: "So, in reply to the posts by Stefan Weckbach and Steve Dufourny above,..." in The Present State of...

Georgina Woodward: "If considering existence rather than appearances, the time dimension..." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Georgina Woodward: "That is about the 'anatomy"" of spacetime." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

Steve Dufourny: "Hello Jim, yes indeed in a sense we have these motions and we have invented..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Jim Snowdon: "Hi Steve, Clearly we have motion in our Universe. It is not..." in The Quantum Clock-Maker...

Georgina Woodward: "Thank you. Good luck." in The Nature of Time

Lorraine Ford: "Rob, As you have not replied, I take it that you now concede that the..." in 16th Marcel Grossmann...

RECENT ARTICLES

The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI
Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel
'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

Can Choices Curve Spacetime?
Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

The Quantum Engine That Simultaneously Heats and Cools
Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

The Quantum Refrigerator
A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

FQXi FORUM
September 17, 2021

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Non-Local Non-Singular Gravity and Its Consequences for Cosmology and Black Hole Physics by Tirthabir Biswas and Anupam Mazumdar [refresh]

Author tirthabir biswas wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 14:10 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this essay we argue that a ghost-free non-local higher derivative extension of General Relativity may be able to render gravity asymptotically free in the deep ultra-violet, while recovering the Newtonian gravitational potential in the far infrared. Such a construction has fundamental consequences for the way we think about gravity at short distances and times -- we will show how in such models cosmological and blackhole singularities could be resolved providing us with encouraging signs for a possible consistent ultraviolet completion of gravity.

Author Bio

TIRTHABIR BISWAS • Total Number of published papers: 34 • Average Citations: 32 • Number of Publications in Physical Review Letters: 2 Anupam Mazumdar • Total Number of published papers: 104 • Average Citations: 43 • Number of Publications in Physical Review Letters: 13

Anton Lorenz Vrba wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 22:53 GMT
Hi Tirthabir and Anupam

Heavy reading indeed. Could you explain what you mean by "ghost-free".

You support the common view "General Relativity (GR) has been extremely successful in explaining some of the most intriguing physical phenomena such as the perihelion shift of mercury, ..." But GR is not the only explanation, in my essay I show how the perihelion shift can be derived without resorting to GR.

In addition, could you please give comment to the paradox described section 2.3 in my essay Rethinking Geometry and Experience; it has relevance to your topic.

Regards

Anton

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Sep. 9, 2012 @ 10:54 GMT
Dear Tirthabir and Anupam,

In my opinion we can include gravity in quantum mechanics taking the Lorentz-invariant theory of gravitation (LITG) and changing the gravitational constant by Strong gravitational constant. So we take away some problems of general relativity in quantum gravity.

Sergey Fedosin Essay

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 03:05 GMT
Dear Tirthabir and Anupam,

I really enjoyed your essay! A couple of questions come to mind.

1. How does the causal structure of spacetime relate to the metric structure of spacetime in this nonlocal gravity scenario?

2. Would it be plausible, in the spirit of "whatever is not forbidden is mandatory," that if nonlocal behavior shows up in gravity, it could be expected to show up elsewhere too? Or is gravity distinguished in this regard since it has a geometric origin?

Thanks for the great read. Take care,

Ben Dribus

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 15:06 GMT
Dear

Very interesting to see your essay.

Perhaps all of us are convinced that: the choice of yourself is right!That of course is reasonable.

So may be we should work together to let's the consider clearly defined for the basis foundations theoretical as the most challenging with intellectual of all of us.

Why we do not try to start with a real challenge is very close and are the focus of interest of the human science: it is a matter of mass and grain Higg boson of the standard model.

Knowledge and belief reasoning of you will to express an opinion on this matter:

You have think that: the Mass is the expression of the impact force to material - so no impact force, we do not feel the Higg boson - similar to the case of no weight outside the Earth's atmosphere.

Does there need to be a particle with mass for everything have volume? If so, then why the mass of everything change when moving from the Earth to the Moon? Higg boson is lighter by the Moon's gravity is weaker than of Earth?

The LHC particle accelerator used to "Smashed" until "Ejected" Higg boson, but why only when the "Smashed" can see it,and when off then not see it ?

Can be "locked" Higg particles? so when "released" if we do not force to it by any the Force, how to know that it is "out" or not?

You are should be boldly to give a definition of weight that you think is right for us to enjoy, or oppose my opinion.

Because in the process of research, the value of "failure" or "success" is the similar with science. The purpose of a correct theory be must is without any a wrong point ?

Glad to see from you comments soon,because still have too many of the same problems.

Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

August 23, 2012 - 11:51 GMT on this essay contest.

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 07:56 GMT
After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I assess the level of each submitted work. Accordingly, I rated some essays, including yours.

Cood luck.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 05:23 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
$R_1$
and
$N_1$
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
$S_1=R_1 N_1$
of points. After it anyone give you
$dS$
of points so you have
$S_2=S_1+ dS$
of points and
$N_2=N_1+1$
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
$S_2=R_2 N_2$
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
$S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1$
or
$(S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1$
or
$dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1$
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
$dS$
then the participant`s rating
$R_1$
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate