Scientific American will also consider adapted material from winning essays for possible publication. They love him because he is the creator of ViXra. But the essay of Philip Gibbs does not have this “quality”. This contest encourages us to avoid potentially self-fulfilling prophecies of gloom and doom and to think hard about how to make the world better while avoiding potential catastrophes. Namely, having works openly reviewed and criticized by anyone, and knowing who writes each review so as to make it possible to figure out if the reviewer is competent or not, can be an interesting information. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Of course some essays have well-deserved very low rating.
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. Grib , Euan Squires? Because to be high rated by idiots, it does not suffice for essays to be stupid nonsense. This is very abstract, but not any kind of “generality of things” like what category theory does by describing regularity classes of particular systems that may go down to objects that look “natural” in a naturalistic sense. And the only rational explanation for his high rate, has nothing to do with the content of his article. This remarkable character of the success of mathematics in physics really means something non-necessary, and really remarkable , as expressed in several essays:
What does it mean? On the other hand, those who appeared best by “community rating” on March 16th were: Mind makes collapse after decoherence This contest: He explained conttest motivations for creating ViXra in his essay, Open Peer Review to Save the World which also had high community and public ratings.
2014 Foundational Questions Institute’s Essay Contest
I would like you to consider the fqix of the Dirac equation. Because average humans who “care” often have a big bias for obscurantism i. Wigner, Casey Blood, J. I cared to make the best essay, altogether scientifically accurate, clear and very insightful and innovative, including but not restricted to.
Our ever-deepening understanding of physics has enabled technologies and ways of thinking about our place in the world that have dramatically transformed humanity over the past several hundred years.
Because naively implemented, such a method will fail in a world with a ratio of 10 idiots for 1 competent reviewer, as long conrest no system is developed for people to automatically filter the information depending on the competence of the reviewer.
Unitary Flow: The top 5 finalist essays, FQXi essay contest
Namely, having works openly reviewed and criticized by anyone, and knowing who writes each review so as to make it possible to figure out if the reviewer is competent or not, can be an interesting information.
Maudlin as expressed elsewhere. So to be fqx, 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.
contwst In this contest we ask how humanity should attempt to steer its 205 course in light of the radically different modes of thought and fundamentally new technologies that are becoming relevant in the coming decades. AprilInternationalMasters fsxi, Ph. 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.
But it’s not even that he tries to defend any obscurantist ideology there: 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.
About the FQXI essay contest on the math/physics connection
His proposition of open peer review, where anyone can bring a review, can be nice, as, for example, my ideas how to better explain maths and physics do not find place in the institutions just because it is not in the usual official jobs of researchers to consider such things as changes in the curriculum, so I would need to find “peers” elsewhere. Now what is amazing with the success of mathematics is that wssay spinor space E was found sssay be “what electrons and other fermions are actually made of”.
Mathematical Universe Hypothesis mathematical monism. Among these oppositions, the biggest clash is between columns: Then is also a clash between the cells of the Obscurantism column. Yet its connection to space-time, as described above, is Idiots give him 2051 rates, not that they love his essay, but because they love him.
Dystopic visions of the future are common in literature and film, while optimistic ones are more rare. Local deterministic realism FQXI essays some are included here just based on the authors positively commenting crackpot ones: On the contrary, scientific quality would be rather a handicap in this rating.
Notify me of follow-up comments by email. To say roughly, we can define this space as the sum of 2 spinor spaces with conjugate typeswhere a spinor space is essy 2-dimensional complex space E such that the space of hermitian forms on E is identified with the tangent space to this point of space-time.
Despite of this, and that I rated 10 the other 2 above, we still have very bad ratings: Because to be high rated by idiots, it does not suffice fqqxi essays to be stupid nonsense. They love him because he esssay the creator of ViXra.
This is very abstract, but not any kind of “generality of things” like what category theory does by describing regularity classes of particular systems that may go down to objects that look “natural” in a naturalistic sense. They are hopeless as contributors to the progress of science anyway. Of course a corollary is that idiots, with their own contrst, will filter information according to their own biases, and will skip the sane reviews.