June 5, 2019 posted by

Well, these people are Christians Of course some essays have well-deserved very low rating. They are hopeless as contributors to the progress of science anyway. Many-worlds interpretation Famous physicists: Mind makes collapse before decoherence H. Without my rating, you can figure out how absurdly low their rating would have been. However, he does not seem to realize the difficulty of the task, and how it can fail if it is done in a naive manner.

He does not even try to defend any obscurantist position that would please the idiots; as his position mathematical universe hypothesis belongs to the scientism group. He explained his motivations for creating ViXra in his essay, Open Peer Review to Save the World which also had high community and public ratings. But the essay of Philip Gibbs does not have this “quality”. They love him because he is the creator of ViXra. Many authors claim to “explain” the remarkable role of maths and physics by the assumption that it does not exist, i.

SinghTorsten Asselmeyer-Maluga. To read all of the winning entries, visit http: 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.

Thus, he argues, the distinction is artificial, and only a kind of union of kinematics and dynamics has a bearing on the predictions of the model.

fqxi 2013 essay contest

For more information, contact: Idiots give him high rates, not that they love his essay, but because they love him. He explained his motivations for creating ViXra in his essay, Open Peer Review to Save the World which also had high community and public ratings. Scientism Platonism Recognize with R. But it’s not even that he tries to defend any obscurantist ideology there: Then is also a clash between the cells of the Obscurantism column.


Mind makes collapse before decoherence H. They love him because he is the creator of ViXra. Removing the conttest filter, suspected of bias, cannot suffice to remove esxay, as the rest of the world outside institutions can still be biased and even worse than the one in institutions.

The content of a theory is usually specified by describing separately the physical states that are possible in the theory, known as its kinematics, and the rules that govern how one state evolves into another, or its dynamics. On the other hand, those who appeared best by “community rating” on March 16th were: Spinors are not “made faxi space-time connections, since any spinor element of E would correspond to a light-like direction of space-time but any physical description by such a direction would fail to fix the phase of this spinor.

See my comments there As I noted there, that article has some points, but also some flawsand in my Web page on the topic.

About the FQXI essay contest on the math/physics connection

HAMMING that “mathematics is unreasonably effective [in Physics] and that all of the [natural] explanations when added together simply are not enough to explain [it]”, and are thus also mathematical Platonists: They are hopeless as contributors to the progress of science anyway. However, just removing the institutional filter on the ability to put things on the web in fact there is no such filter as any serious person can easily make their own web site as I did, with the only problem of how to be referencedor on who can write reviews, cannot be the magical solution against any real or assumed “bias” problem.

So to be workable, an open peer review system would also need a kind of filter, to let anyone filter the measure of reviews according to his own standards. On the contrary, scientific quality would be rather a handicap in this rating. Burov Rare in this contest though they form the overwhelming majority of humans, probably because they like neither math nor physics ;- Elsewhere: In their stead, he proposes that physical theories be described through their causal structure, a promising new approach that is still being developed.


His misunderstanding is to insist on the fact that institutional habits and peer review can be biased, which may also happen in principle, but which is only one side of things; he does not seem to measure the real extent to which science does need a filter to survive in an ocean of bad ideas from amateurs.

Here are the explanations. In fact, the popularity he gets among idiots by his creation of ViXra and his ideas on Open Peer Review, is based on a double misunderstanding: Namely, tangent vectors x,y,z,t to this point are identified with Hermitian forms on E with matrix.

So it needs another explanation.

Everyone his own opinion. HitterdaleRoger SchlaflyPaul Merriam.

Robert Spekkens wins first prize in FQXi essay contest | Perimeter Institute

Mathematical Universe Hypothesis mathematical monism. To explain how the concepts of “abstraction” and “generality” differ, I need to take a specific example.

fqxi 2013 essay contest

Among these oppositions, the biggest clash is between columns: Of course some rssay have well-deserved very low rating. Not only this, but I also cared to make the most serious, accurate and developed comments to many essays – I did not find anyone else writing such serious and elaborate comments as I did.

Mathematical Universe Hypothesis mathematical monism QM: