How We Make a Difference
At FQxI, we are committed to supporting scientific revolution, not just evolution. FQxI funds high-risk, high-reward projects that challenge the status quo. Our interest is in science as an end in itself. Before technological advances and lucrative spin-offs comes curiosity and a desire for knowledge in its own right.
Through FQxI’s grantmaking programs, we are able to support scientists working at the forefront of their disciplines. Those who challenge the ideas that others take for granted. Those who are able to dream big and then roll up their sleeves to test their ideas.
FQxI runs grant programs to support research endeavors varying from large-scale support of laboratory work to mini-grants awarded to create workshops where great ideas can be exchanged between colleagues. To date, we have provided over US$29 million in funding across ten RFPs and 28 mini-grant (now Fulcrum Grant) rounds, generated thousands of scientific papers, hosted six international conferences, and supported a large number of meetings and workshops.
the foundational questions institute in numbers
Founded 2006 BY MAX TEGMARK and Anthony aguirre
US$28 million AWARDED in Grants
10 RFPs and 28 Mini-grant rounds
6 International Conferences
OVER 350 Members
4 Nobel LaureaTEs
10 FUNDING THEMES
Over 1,000 research papers
QSpace Latest
Video: IPI Talk – Dr. Emily Adlam: Are Entropy Bounds Epistemic?
Entropy bounds have played an important role in the development of holography as an approach to quantum gravity. In this talk I will introduce the strong and covariant entropy bounds, and then discuss how the covariant bound should be interpreted. I will argue that there is a possible way of thinking about the covariant entropy bound which would suggest that it encodes an epistemic limitation rather than an objective count of the true number of degrees of freedom on a light-sheet; thus I will distinguish between ontological and epistemic interpretations of the covariant bound. I will consider the consequences that these interpretations might have for physics and discuss what each approach has to say about gravitational phenomena. My aim is not to advocate for either the ontological or epistemic approach in particular, but rather to articulate both possibilities clearly and explore some arguments for and against them.