Neil, Excellent essay I will have to study further to see how the philosophic conclusions and possibilities fit in. Or more of bullshit science solving nothing, leading nowhere? Now what is amazing with the success of mathematics is that this spinor space E was found to be “what electrons and other fermions are actually made of”. Local deterministic realism FQXI essays some are included here just based on the authors positively commenting crackpot ones: Also, you wrote there that you’d read my essay, and presumably comment. Comment moderation on this blog is turned on. You talk of “feeling rather than thinking”?

Descartes did experiment with optics, mirrors and light. Removing the institutional filter, suspected of bias, cannot suffice to remove bias, as the rest of the world outside institutions can still be biased and even worse than the one in institutions. Dear Bee, Nice ideas in your essay; to make them work may take a lot of work and innovation. Namely, tangent vectors x,y,z,t to this point are identified with Hermitian forms on E with matrix. Sabine, Cold fact is that within year or two whole Earth might be annihilated due to manmade chain reaction , so thinking about how to steer the future in general is complete waste of time. Of course a corollary is that idiots, with their own bias, will filter information according to their own biases, and will skip the sane reviews. I can see that his topic is popular with the crowd at the FQXi page for obvious reasons, but it doesn’t actually address the problem.

Descartes did experiment with optics, mirrors and light.

Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: FQXi essay contest How Should Humanity Steer the Future?

They are hopeless as contributors to the progress of science anyway. I think it would be a good idea to offer the organizing and reward services you describe in the essay.

fqxi essay 2014

Allow the congenitally inconsequential and the smartless to die of their own empirical incompetence. In speculative fiction and some scientific models we van go back to an earlier time and change things, bring back someone to the future.


fqxi essay 2014

Obscurantism Anti-Platonism Deny the amazing efficiency of mathematics observed in physics; stay ignorant about it. If god loves the poor, crippled, and stupid, then god can bloody well pay esday them or take them back.

fqxi essay 2014

SinghTorsten Asselmeyer-Maluga. The issue how the 7. It comes across as ethically acceptable due to the voluntary nature of these “apps” should they be called brain apps or etc? You talk of “feeling rather than thinking”? It applies also to your imaginary travelers from future: It is said the acid test of philosophy is the free will and determinism issue.

Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: FQXi essay contest How Should Humanity Steer the Future?

But who is to say ten thousand years from now such travelers would find any of us monkeys worth saving? But then I reminded myself that we already have such a religion. The problems with the academic system are not in peer review itself. Philipp Gibbs’ is a good essay, but I’ll be disappointed if he wins.

Idiots give him high rates, not that they love his essay, but because they love him. After two dozen attempted comments to your essay I ran out of views in which to view and comment your essay’s subject. I would like you to consider the case of the Dirac equation. The ones that will be read at all are the ones by well known authors and that introduces its own bias.

Our only failure will be that we settle for less and believe in that state of things we can endure.

About the FQXI essay contest on the math/physics connection

Comment moderation on this blog is turned on. Edgar, I develop and apply the rigorously derived concept of dynamic complexity, which is very different from the canonical loose exercises on the subject, does solve problems otherwise unsolvable and gives well-specified and rigorously substantiated answers to questions you mention and also to those about the future of humanity to be decided by the critical choice of today. GribEuan Squires? I will have more essau say about this, however, because science and technology also are changing the actions, the means.


If esssay most Christians felt the same way, then maybe our politicians would be able to find some decent common ground. Needless to say, all of these points are addressed in my essay, but then I’m one of those old-fashioned academics who think that peer review sometimes does work just fine.

Besides this, he entirely leaves out the question of what to do even if this would result in a better rating of scientific results. BTW it seems that the public can no longer comment. But complexity worthy of study itself does not answer foundational questions as a general theory of everything especially as a social or individual observations on how we think, epistemology or any modalities of knowing, of chance or necessity, science.

It cannot come from the scientific quality of his essay, since it is only a relative quality with some flaws as I pointed outbut even more especially because, as demonstrated by the community ratings of the rest of essays in this contest, community rating generally has nothing to do with scientific quality anyway. Do we gain anything by descent into reductionist materialism or ascent to reason by endless conflicts of syntheses?

Hawking asked for such social input not that long ago so the concepts do seem to converge and be responsibly related. And what for, all those “new tools” even if they could be efficient? Then is also a clash between the cells of the Obscurantism column.