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.

Contests Home

Previous Contests

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
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

Anonymous: on 4/13/15 at 15:55pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr.Muteru, Thanks for your brilliant "reasoning enhancer" essay.I am...

Joe Fisher: on 3/30/15 at 15:25pm UTC, wrote Dear Dr. Muteru, I thought that your engrossing essay was exceptionally...

Alex Newman: on 3/2/15 at 7:18am UTC, wrote This essay was much better than several others with authors that pretend...

Theodore St. John: on 2/24/15 at 12:54pm UTC, wrote Dear Michael Muteru, Nice work on your essay. Short and sweet but you make...

Michael muteru: on 2/22/15 at 10:54am UTC, wrote Dear Baduseba True The mathematical symbol ∞ sure cannot just sit...

Michael muteru: on 2/22/15 at 10:45am UTC, wrote dear Sujattha Thanks for the review dont worry its a trend the future of...

Michael muteru: on 2/22/15 at 10:40am UTC, wrote Dear joe Thanks for the post.I think physical Reality is in the eyes of...

Michael muteru: on 2/22/15 at 10:30am UTC, wrote Hello sophia Thanks for the critical anecdote,Very well appreciated and...


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

George Musser: "Imagine you could feed the data of the world into a computer and have it..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "Personally Joe me I see like that ,imagine that this infinite eternal..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "Joe it is wonderful this,so you are going to have a nobel prize in..." in First Things First: The...

Robert McEachern: ""I'm not sure that the 'thing as it is' is irrelevant." It is not. It is..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

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...

Georgina Woodward: "I suggested the turnstiles separate odd form even numbered tickets randomly..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

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: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Michael muteru wrote on Jan. 9, 2015 @ 22:27 GMT
Essay Abstract

We human beings are highly spiritual animals, it occurs not by chance that when we study natural philosophy (physics) We use abstract axioms to describe the universe namely maths to derive reality. The ‘eerie ghost in the detail’ that forecasts a shadow is actually math. I discuss in layman terms why physics is not only maths but also a set of Neuro- psychologically wired philosophical axioms posited in mathematical rubric

Author Bio

Theoretical physicist,been working in fields m-theory and Cosmology.i have a universe model that m-theory posits here-
.301.7717,or here-

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share

Sophia Magnusdottir wrote on Jan. 23, 2015 @ 15:07 GMT
Hi Michael,

At some (old-fashioned) universities, the PhD in physics is still a PhD phil. nat. owing to its origin as natural philosophy. This is certainly historically true. However, the way that most physicists understand the words today, physics is not a philosophy.

I have a great sympathy for your insight that our brains are intrinsically part of the process of physics. In my essay I have driven that to the conclusion that mathematics is a useful help in this process, but it's not ultimately necessary.

-- Sophia

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Michael muteru replied on Feb. 22, 2015 @ 10:30 GMT
Hello sophia

Thanks for the critical anecdote,Very well appreciated and helpful.In my essay i redefine the word philosophy and put it forth as a set of rules and axioms to which a physical system keeps to and emulates to achieve functionality.I think Physics is ageless.It is as vast and old as the reality to which it describes.I work on a physical theory called M-theory.Its the deepest insight we have of the universe.the theory is both mathematically and philosophically correct.its What we call METAPHYSICS.Why do we need maths,simple-its any sound theory must have both philosophical and mathematical; appeal to describe Everything.

Physics is a human art.Any art that we humans engage in is a product of our brains.Our perception of the universe is the product of the conditioned synthesis of information by our brains input through the five senses.The atoms that make up this organ are no different to others in the distant galaxy or universe.One aspect of mathematics to describe the universe is that is is universal.Having physics without maths is like having music without notes.its just noise .All the best to you

Bookmark and Share

Sujatha Jagannathan wrote on Feb. 16, 2015 @ 08:38 GMT
The central idea of the work though shifted from the subject of Mathematics, its intrinsically connected to be more calculatedly Universally acceptance.


Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Michael muteru replied on Feb. 22, 2015 @ 10:45 GMT
dear Sujattha

Thanks for the review dont worry its a trend the future of physics is headed.its called Metaphysics-Physics owning the overall grand theory of the universe.Never mind Godels incompleteness problem.see here-String Theory - From Physics to Metaphysics

Reiner Hedrich. a nice one.aAll the best

Bookmark and Share

basudeba mishra wrote on Feb. 18, 2015 @ 09:30 GMT
Dear Sir,

Your statement: “Complexity is the sum total (plural) of Repeated simplicity” is the basis of number system as explained in our essay. However, it is not a monkey on the tree describing the full tree, but a defining characteristic – the quantitative aspect – that describes one aspect of Nature. The mathematical symbol ∞ does not mean eternity. It only describes something...

view entire post

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Michael muteru replied on Feb. 22, 2015 @ 10:54 GMT
Dear Baduseba

True The mathematical symbol ∞ sure cannot just sit there like an appendix in a human abdomen,its does not have only aesthetic appeal.But we cannot simply say it describes something,What then?

The concept of infinity(eternity) is as elusive to learned fellows.Godel coined the incompleteness theorem after finding that there are limits to which human thought can define.Energy,matter cannot be created neither be destroyed they exist forever eternally-Inexhaustible .There will be always be soething new to discover a world of endless possibilities

Bookmark and Share

Theodore St. John wrote on Feb. 24, 2015 @ 12:54 GMT
Dear Michael Muteru,

Nice work on your essay. Short and sweet but you make several good points. I love the sentence, “Weird it seems that the monkey lives on a tree and is able to describe the tree, its stranger when the tree defines the monkey too”. I’m not sure I fully understand where you stand on M-Theory though. You said “it has survived all pummeling hurled at it from Mathematics and physicists alike.” So do you think that it is correct? You said, “Mathematically coherent, but untestable in particle detectors due to immensely high energies required.” I confess that I don’t know much about M-theory, but to me, untestable makes it unusable as a model.

I have proposed a simple model, called the space-time-motion model, (posted at, that represents space and time as mathematical, conformal projections of motion onto 2 dimensions (also mathematical conceptual models). As such, space is potential that is being transformed into actual units of energy, which give rise to expansion of consciousness. You may enjoy it if you get a chance to read it.

I went a different route for this essay and wrote what I consider a more entertaining twist - sort of a blend of Knights of the Round Table and Lord of the Rings (See Doctors of the Ring - The Power of Merlin the Mathematician to Transform Chaos into Consciousness). I think you will see that I agree with your last paragraph about the relationship between physics, math and philosophy. It is based on my space-time-motion model, which I invite you to read ( and let me know what you think (email to Of course, I also invite you to read and rate Doctors of the Ring if you get the chance.


Ted St. John

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Alex Newman wrote on Mar. 2, 2015 @ 07:18 GMT
This essay was much better than several others with authors that pretend they know something or are too dogmatic about their writing. I do not agree with everything but I agree that physics includes a lot of philosophy. I liked the reference to Fibonacci numbers.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 30, 2015 @ 15:25 GMT
Dear Dr. Muteru,

I thought that your engrossing essay was exceptionally well written and I do hope that it fares well in the competition.

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Apr. 13, 2015 @ 15:55 GMT
Dear Mr.Muteru,

Thanks for your brilliant "reasoning enhancer" essay.I am especially impressed with your postulation that,"maths is innately wired into us and the universe to aid our spatial motion in it".So much so your inclination to "call physics the mathematical method of natural philosophy" affirms rather than negate the nexus between the two subjects.

Keep on flourishing.

Lloyd Tamarapreye Okoko.

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.