Much of Friday was spent discussing the direction in which FQXi should move in the future. FQXi directors Max Tegmark and Anthony Aguirre described some of the successes of FQXi and set up brainstorming sessions between physicists and philanthropists to try and think of new ways to fund foundational research.

On the success front, Aguirre highlighted the Nature of Time essay contest, which...

view entire post

Much of Friday was spent discussing the direction in which FQXi should move in the future. FQXi directors Max Tegmark and Anthony Aguirre described some of the successes of FQXi and set up brainstorming sessions between physicists and philanthropists to try and think of new ways to fund foundational research.

On the success front, Aguirre highlighted the Nature of Time essay contest, which received 137 entries (a spooky number for a physics contest, as it turns out), and he promised that the contest results will be announced very soon (honestly, really).

He also discussed the two rounds of large grants that FQXi have already given out, splitting some $5 million between 66 researchers. Aguirre described how some of these researchers--for instance, Garrett Lisi and Christopher Isham--would probably not have been able to conduct these lines of research without these grants.

www.savagechickens.com

Tegmark then outlined the instructions given by FQXi to the scientific panel of experts who chose the grant recipients. Unlike most grants, “they are not given out based on the likelihood of success of the project, but on the impact they would have _if_ they turn out to be successful.” In that sense, FQXi favors “higher risk” projects that would be overlooked by more conventional sources, he said.

Speaking from the viewpoint of one of those more conventional streams of funding, Fred Cooper, program director for theoretical physics at the National Science Foundation, gave a talk describing how governments prefer funding “safer” science. “Since the 1990's a “business” model has corrupted todayʼs research climate for both Academia and Research labs. Without a grant most Assistant Professors will _not_ be promoted. This pressure results in many creative people writing very "hum-drum" safe proposals to get funded and then hopefully find the time to "moonlight" on more interesting projects (working on foundational issues that interest them). Many never get the extra time because of survival pressures."

In the current economic climate it will understandably be even less likely for the government to fund riskier projects and Cooper agreed that there’s room for philanthropically-funded organisations, like FQXi, to help fund "visionary" science that would otherwise be overlooked.

Up next, Patricia Gruber described why the Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation chooses to award science prizes in neuroscience, genetics, and cosmology, as well as prizes in the fields of justice and women’s rights.

“Curiosity driven science research changes the way we think about things, changes fundamental assumptions,” said Gruber, adding that a partnership between scientists and philanthropists makes perfect sense. “We contribute the little we have in the hope that it will inspire other people.”

Gruber also spoke about the personal satisfaction she and her husband receive by funding promising young researchers starting out in their careers, in addition to honouring established and accomplished scientists.

At a brainstorming session later in the day, Bruce McWilliams, chairman of Tessera Technologies, Inc., who endowed the “Bruce and Astrid McWilliams Center for Cosmology” and the “McWilliams Fellowship for graduate students in science,” picked up this theme, talking about how much he enjoys meeting and talking to the science students that he supports.

Charles Harper, senior vice president of the John Templeton Foundation, which provided FQXi with its seed grant commended FQXi for helping to fund “really bright, but not herd-following,” people and reiterated that “wealthy people with good will and scientists can gel, but these communities don’t often come together.” The key, he says, is to bring the groups together. Hopefully, this month’s meeting is a good start in that direction.

* Credit to Abhay Ashtekar for the title of this post.

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread