Collections

Foil theories sometimes called mathematically rigorous science fiction describe ways the world could have been were it not quantum mechanical. Our understanding of quantum theory has been deepened by contrasting it with these alternatives. So far observers in foil theories have only been modeled implicitly for example via the recorded probabilities of observing events. Even when multi-agent settings are considered these agents tend to be compatible in the classical sense that they could always compare their observations. Scenarios where agents and their memories are themselves modeled as physical systems within the theory (and could in particular measure each other as in Wigner's friend experiment) have not yet been considered. In this workshop we will investigate which foil theories allow for the existence of explicit observers and whether they allow for paradoxes in multi-agent settings such as those found in quantum theory. We will also investigate which interpretations of quantum theory would equally well interpret the foil theories and which interpretations are truly quantum. We will gain a deeper understanding of how this can happen by discussing appropriate definitions observers in these theories and seeing how such observers learn about their environment.

Scientific inquiry in the 21st century is beset with inefficiencies: a flood of papers not read theories not tested and experiments not repeated; a narrow research agenda driven by a handful of high-impact journals; a publishing industry that turns public funding into private profit; the exclusion of many scientists particularly in developing countries from cutting-edge research; and countless projects that are not completed for lack of skilled collaborators. These are all symptoms of a major communication bottleneck within the scientific community; the channels we rely on to share our ideas and findings especially peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings are inadequate to the scale and scope of modern science. The practice of open research doing science on a public platform that facilitates collaboration feedback and the spread of ideas addresses these concerns. Open-source science lowers barriers to entry catalyzing new discoveries. It fosters the real-time sharing of ideas across the globe favoring cooperative endeavor and complementarity of thought rather than wasteful competition. It reduces the influence of publishing monopolies enabling a new credit attribution model based on contributions made rather than references accrued. Overall it democratizes science while creating a new standard of prestige: quality of work instead of quantity of output. This workshop will bring together a diverse group of researchers from fields as diverse as physics biology computer science and sociology committed to open-source science. Together we will review the lessons learnt from various pioneering initiatives such as the Polymath project and Data for Democracy. We will discuss the opportunity to build a new tool similar to the software development platform GitHub to enable online collaborative science. We will consider the challenges associated with the adoption of such a tool by our peers and discuss ways to overcome them. Finally we will sketch a roadmap for the actual development of that tool.