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

Georgina Woodward: on 12/2/14 at 4:46am UTC, wrote Good talk, clearly explains the proposition. Like the water analogy for...

Amrit Sorli: on 11/4/14 at 9:06am UTC, wrote ABOUT TIME here on this web was published so much nonsense in this last 5...

Amrit Sorli: on 11/4/14 at 8:58am UTC, wrote OPEN LETTER TO EDITORS OF Physical Review Letters Dear Editors recent...

Zeeya Merali: on 7/7/14 at 17:23pm UTC, wrote Just a quick round-up of some more video and audio on offer. If you've...


Robert McEachern: "Eckard, I do have an interest in the history, but not as much as I used..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "Robert, While Carroll and Rovelli are looking for an explanation of..." in First Things First: The...

Georgina Woodward: "The Schrodinger's cat thought experiment presents 3 causally linked state..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Roger Granet: "Well put! Physics is hard, but biochemistry (my area), other sciences..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Georgina Woodward: "BTW The neck scarves are a promotional souvenir given out at non sports..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: ""At the risk of stroking physicists’ egos, physics is hard" But every..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "lol Zeeya it is well thought this algorythm selective when names are put in..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "is it just due to a problem when we utilise names of persons?" in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

October 18, 2019

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Consciousness = Maths, Simulating Time Travel, BICEP2 Scrutinised and Quantum Entropy [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Jul. 7, 2014 @ 17:23 GMT
Just a quick round-up of some more video and audio on offer.

If you've been following Max Tegmark's latest ideas on consciousness as a state of matter (which I blogged about in January), then you'll enjoy his TEDx Cambridge talk:

I've also posted the latest FQXi podcast, which this month includes physicists Andrew White and Martin Ringbauer talking about their quantum experiments to simulate time travel, in particular closed timeline curves (CTCs), in the lab. The team uses two photons -- one representing the older version of the time travel and the other its younger self -- and then monitors what happens when the two interact. When CTCs are involved, they have found that a some standard quantum rules need to be rewritten: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is violated, and the quantum no-cloning theorem no longer applies.

Physicist Malcolm Fairbairn also chats about his analysis which shows that if the BICEP2 results stand, the model of inflation they favour -- combined with data we now know about Higgs boson -- suggests that the universe should have collapsed long ago. The BICEP2 results are, of course, under scrutiny, right now, as cosmologists ponder whether the results, which I blogged about in March, really do provide evidence of primordial gravitational waves, or were instead caused by contamination from dust in our galaxy. In the main podcast, we're hear Alan Guth's thoughts on the controversy (recorded in May). On the podcast page, you can also listen to a longer interview with Guth, where he discusses the implications for reconciling the data with Planck, models of inflations, grand unified theories and the multiverse, if the results do hold.

Plus, Colin Stuart talks to FQXi members Jon Barrett and Matt Leifer about their quest to explain why nature chose quantum theory, based on an investigation of entropy in thermodynamics and information theory. You can read and discuss Colin's profile of their work here too.

The podcast is available here.

And back to Max, on an older podcast special, in January, we shared the audio from his talk at the FQXi conference in Puerto Rico. The video of that talk is now up, if you haven't seen it already:

We've also uploaded this panel discussion on consciousness from that meeting, featuring Max, along with neuroscientists Christof Koch and Giulio Tononi, psychiatrist Larissa Albantakis and electronics developer Federico Faggin:

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate

Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Nov. 4, 2014 @ 08:58 GMT

Physical Review Letters

Dear Editors

recent article on time "Identification of Gravitational arrow of Time"

published in your journal has wrong conclusions because time we

measure with clocks has only a mathematical existence. In the universe

there is no such a thing as "arrow of time" which exists only as a

mathematical direction of numerical order of change which run in

quantum vacuum, see our paper published in


re than that: gravity is immediate, that's why in Newton formalism

for gravity there is no symbol t and in GR time t is only a parameter

of stress-energy tensor.

From this point of view relating time with gravity is pure mistake.

Yours Sincerely Amrit Srecko Sorli, Foundations of Physics Institute

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Nov. 4, 2014 @ 09:06 GMT
ABOUT TIME here on this web was published so much nonsense in this last 5 years I follow. And about our research on time published in FOOP

ere is no possibility to discuss. Making science a private affair of few people on power is not a good idea. SCIENCE MUST BE FREE; and this means that we all have right to present our work here on FQXI. Why our paper in FOOP is ignored despite resolves "time problem" in details?

Lee Smolin is right to discuss here that time and space are one, a year before he wrote a book "Time Reborn" !.

We want our research on time to be presented here. This is our right.

Yours Amrit Sorli

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward wrote on Dec. 2, 2014 @ 04:46 GMT
Good talk, clearly explains the proposition. Like the water analogy for emergence of properties. Also like discussion of waves as example of substrate independence.

Max asks for patterns that make the difference.For living or dead thing, it can be the difference between Krebs citric acid cycle cycling or not cycling, for example. Citric acid cycle There are many other metabolic pathways, a simple chemical "spanner in the works" of which can lead to death. These "patterns" are already well known.

It sounds to me very feasible to determine the differences in biochemical (and resultant electrical patterns) between the deep sleep and anesthetized unconscious compared against the variously conscious.

Bookmark and Share
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.