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

Bayarsaikhan Choisuren: on 4/8/17 at 7:56am UTC, wrote Dear Sameer Anant Kolhar, Your essay is nicely written. I so appreciate...

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 4/7/17 at 3:37am UTC, wrote Dear Sirs! Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of...

Peter Jackson: on 3/28/17 at 16:22pm UTC, wrote Sameer, A nicely written essay for your early stage showing that you've...

Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/17/17 at 8:16am UTC, wrote Nice essay Kolhar, Your ideas and thinking are excellent for your age as...

Joe Fisher: on 3/15/17 at 16:28pm UTC, wrote Dear Anant Kolhar, Please excuse me for I have no intention of...

Sameer Kolhar: on 3/14/17 at 17:30pm UTC, wrote Greetings Sir, Thank you for your encouraging words. I knew that my...

George Gantz: on 3/13/17 at 15:22pm UTC, wrote Hello - I see that you are a student at the undergraduate level! ...

Sameer Kolhar: on 3/10/17 at 16:39pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract In this essay we shall review the long-standing...


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: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: An Eponym in Nature by Sameer Anant Kolhar [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Sameer A Kolhar wrote on Mar. 10, 2017 @ 16:39 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this essay we shall review the long-standing alliance with mathematics and physics. And later we shall review some ideas and proposals to help us get a sense of what might be the reason to this wonderful conjugation of mathematics and physics to work but although they are mere speculations that hope to help resolve this very well established fundamental question that has been bothering the best of the best for decades now.

Author Bio

Student, Undergraduate level in Pune, India

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share

George Gantz wrote on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 15:22 GMT
Hello - I see that you are a student at the undergraduate level! Congratulations on an excellent effort in your essay.

I would like to make an observation about your comments - "would it escape Godel’s results is a big question mark" and then shortly after - "Mathematics wins over every other method (perhaps) because it is based purely on deduction." While mathematics may be based on deduction, even deduction is not immune from Godel's results - in fact his Incompleteness theorems were proven deductively. The proof relied on the interesting properties of recursive statements, like "This Statement is False." How would you evaluate this statement?

I hope you find the many essays in this contest to be enlightening and educational. Please feel free to review and comments on mine - The How and The Why.

Regards - George Gantz

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Sameer A Kolhar replied on Mar. 14, 2017 @ 17:30 GMT
Greetings Sir,

Thank you for your encouraging words. I knew that my conclusion(which I spent very little time on) was not a very good one since I lacked the ideas to provide a better conclusion to my work. There's plenty of work to be done still on this. One more point that could be under dispute would be when I have not really given solid points / directions for the reader so that they clearly understand what my goal really was, I have just kept many blank spaces where I've said what could've been done. So there's lots to complete in here. I will keep working on the same and possibly include interaction between the points or bring in the notion of "objects".

Thank you very much for time and your honest assessment of this article. I shall certainly review your article and may others' since I have lot more to learn.

If you will then once I am ready with a better version of this I shall send the same to you as well.

Bookmark and Share

Joe Fisher replied on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 16:28 GMT
Dear Anant Kolhar,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 17, 2017 @ 08:16 GMT
Nice essay Kolhar,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent for your age as you are a student, for eg…

‘In the figure 1, we have a at space with boundaries that expand at a constant rate on to in_nity and it has the points marked. There is no clear origin present on this space and hence all measurements are relative.’ You are accepting our universe as totally expanding.


view entire post

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 28, 2017 @ 16:22 GMT

A nicely written essay for your early stage showing that you've started to understand how little we truly understand. I particularly liked that you pointed out;

"there has never been a prominent incident where we stopped to think and question ourselves whether mathematics is the way to go about resolving nature's secrets to a great certainty. and.. ..we may need to think about Mathematics 2.0 if we are to make many a more significant discoveries."

I may not agree with your alternative (or I may find I do!) but I you may find it enlightening to look at my (top scored) last years essay identifying a crucial link between logic and arithmetic so far unexploited Red & Green Socks (I apply it this year).

For yours this year my favourite line; "we must not cease to ask this question "Why did we think about this like we have thought about something similar in our past?" Indeed how DO we learn to think differently. I hope you'll look at my essay which analyses that and finds an important insight to QM.

But never assume what you're taught or read is 'fact' rather than just theory, incomplete at best but all so far unsuccessful.

Well done. A deserved boost to your low score is on the way.


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 03:37 GMT
Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use spam.

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.


Dizhechko Boris

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren wrote on Apr. 8, 2017 @ 07:56 GMT
Dear Sameer Anant Kolhar,

Your essay is nicely written. I so appreciate you.

I think that for your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results.

I like this phrase that

“We might have divided the workings of nature into Physics, Astronomy, Chemistry, Biology et cetera. But nature will function will function as she’s supposed to and we are mere observers who can just watch and learn all that we can and pass on the message to the coming generations in terms of intuition and mathematics.’’

With Best Regards,


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.