We are pleased to announce the winners in the 2010/2011 Essay Contest, "Is Reality Digital or Analog?"
[youtube: AXtmnYVW2JY, 560, 340]
Top prize of $10,000 and FQXi Membership goes to ...
Jarmo Mäkelä from Vaasa University of Applied Sciences in Vaasa, Finland, for his essay "Is Reality Digital or Analog" recording a late-night conversation with Isaac Newton. In his essay, Jarmo reports that Newton decidedly told him "Digital, of course".
Our two Second Prize winners (who receive $5,000 each and invitations to Membership) are...
David Tong and Tobias Fritz.
David Tong's essay "Physics and the Integers" reverses a common belief about the foundation of mathematics and our world -- arguing that the integers are emergent, and that, "discrete mathematics is no better a starting point than the rules of scrabble".
Tobias Fritz's essay "Quantum Graphenity" does not offer a direct answer to the question, but argues that we can gain insight into fundamental physics and the universe by studying non-fundamental models of smaller systems. In his essay, David explores the lessons that emerge from studying graphene, the two-dimensional carbon substrate of the familiar graphite.
Visit this link to view the full list of winners.
A further five essays received Third Prize, receiving $2,000 each and a Membership invitation, and ten more received Fourth Prize and $1,000. The panel chose not to award any additional special commendation prizes, since the list of winners already includes a highly diverse set of winners, including non-physicists and those outside of academia.
I'd like to reiterate some points made last year by myself and Anthony Aguirre. The panel expressed a variety of opinions on all the essays, and even the highest rated did not receive unanimous praise. We should all keep in mind that the awarding of a prize signifies that the winner wrote a relevant and interesting essay: something well written, thought provoking, stimulating, fun, etc... The results do not mean that everyone, including the members of the panel, believe that the approach is complete, flawless, or unobjectionable!
Also, failure to win a prize does not mean an essay has something fundamentally wrong with it. Essays ended up off the list that at least one panelist or the Community on its own liked very much.
On behalf of all the FQXi administration, I want to thank our media partner Scientific American who helped organize and promote the contest. I also wish to think our co-sponsor The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, who helped provide the funding for the contest.
And finally, all of us at FQXi want to say thank you to all the participants. We were excited to see the depth and range of ideas that emerged, and the endless ways to answer a yes-or-no question without saying 'yes' or 'no'. Here's to the next contest!
[Edited on 24 June 2011 to add video clip of the prize-giving ceremony in New York.]