Nature | News

Simulations back up theory that Universe is a hologram

A ten-dimensional theory of gravity makes the same predictions as standard quantum physics in fewer dimensions.

Article tools

Rights & Permissions

Artist's impression by Markus Gann/Shutterstock

At a black hole, Albert Einstein's theory of gravity apparently clashes with quantum physics, but that conflict could be solved if the Universe were a holographic projection.

A team of physicists has provided some of the clearest evidence yet that our Universe could be just one big projection.

In 1997, theoretical physicist Juan Maldacena proposed1 that an audacious model of the Universe in which gravity arises from infinitesimally thin, vibrating strings could be reinterpreted in terms of well-established physics. The mathematically intricate world of strings, which exist in nine dimensions of space plus one of time, would be merely a hologram: the real action would play out in a simpler, flatter cosmos where there is no gravity.

Maldacena's idea thrilled physicists because it offered a way to put the popular but still unproven theory of strings on solid footing — and because it solved apparent inconsistencies between quantum physics and Einstein's theory of gravity. It provided physicists with a mathematical Rosetta stone, a 'duality', that allowed them to translate back and forth between the two languages, and solve problems in one model that seemed intractable in the other and vice versa (see 'Collaborative physics: String theory finds a bench mate'). But although the validity of Maldacena's ideas has pretty much been taken for granted ever since, a rigorous proof has been elusive.

In two papers posted on the arXiv repository, Yoshifumi Hyakutake of Ibaraki University in Japan and his colleagues now provide, if not an actual proof, at least compelling evidence that Maldacena’s conjecture is true.

In one paper2, Hyakutake computes the internal energy of a black hole, the position of its event horizon (the boundary between the black hole and the rest of the Universe), its entropy and other properties based on the predictions of string theory as well as the effects of so-called virtual particles that continuously pop into and out of existence (see 'Astrophysics: Fire in the Hole!'). In the other3, he and his collaborators calculate the internal energy of the corresponding lower-dimensional cosmos with no gravity. The two computer calculations match.

“It seems to be a correct computation,” says Maldacena, who is now at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey and who did not contribute to the team's work.

Regime change

The findings “are an interesting way to test many ideas in quantum gravity and string theory”, Maldacena adds. The two papers, he notes, are the culmination of a series of articles contributed by the Japanese team over the past few years. “The whole sequence of papers is very nice because it tests the dual [nature of the universes] in regimes where there are no analytic tests.”

“They have numerically confirmed, perhaps for the first time, something we were fairly sure had to be true, but was still a conjecture — namely that the thermodynamics of certain black holes can be reproduced from a lower-dimensional universe,” says Leonard Susskind, a theoretical physicist at Stanford University in California who was among the first theoreticians to explore the idea of holographic universes.

Neither of the model universes explored by the Japanese team resembles our own, Maldacena notes. The cosmos with a black hole has ten dimensions, with eight of them forming an eight-dimensional sphere. The lower-dimensional, gravity-free one has but a single dimension, and its menagerie of quantum particles resembles a group of idealized springs, or harmonic oscillators, attached to one another.

Nevertheless, says Maldacena, the numerical proof that these two seemingly disparate worlds are actually identical gives hope that the gravitational properties of our Universe can one day be explained by a simpler cosmos purely in terms of quantum theory.

Journal name:
Nature
DOI:
doi:10.1038/nature.2013.14328

References

  1. Maldacena, J. M. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 231252 (1998).

  2. Hyakutake, Y. Preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.7526 (2013).

  3. Hanada, M., Hyakutake, Y., Ishiki, G. & Nishimura, J. Preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.5607 (2013).

For the best commenting experience, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will see comments updating in real-time and have the ability to recommend comments to other users.

Comments for this thread are now closed.

Comments

72 comments Subscribe to comments

  1. Avatar for Richard Taylor
    Richard Taylor
    It's a very simple process that leads to the creation of matter in all it's forms. Light contains all the frequencies that we understand as the periodic table of, currently, about 100 elements, (though keplar worked with over 1600 frequencies in his and Newton whose Great Great Great . . . . . Grand Nephew I worked with for over twenty years till his death in 2007 had about 200 on his 'Atomic Harmonic Spiral'). So light contains all the frequencies that create matter and to put it simply. The infinite universe is an interference pattern of Light. Gravity is electro magnetic.
  2. Avatar for Jan Vones
    Jan Vones
    So, a computer simulation suggests the universe is a computer simulation? If you'd asked a hammer it would have said a nail.
  3. Avatar for Eric Bram
    Eric Bram
    Right, the universe is God's holographic projection creating an IMMORPG (an Infinite Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game) for our enjoyment. Because the Void was just SO boring!
  4. Avatar for James T. Dwyer
    James T. Dwyer
    I suspect that all the 'theories' expressed in the comments below could be backed up by simulations, also! <%)
  5. Avatar for Luca Vangelista
    Luca Vangelista
    Dear Madam/Sir, I like math a lot, I always did very well at school and university, yet all this is far beyond my abstraction abilities and time I could ever dedicate to it. Nevertheless, and hating the mixing of science with exoteric whatsoever (eventually conceding some exo-link at the very end of the sci-time), I am attracted by these big questions since I was a very young child. From those times, I kept a couple of rather unanswered questions alive, with the difference that now, being an adult, when I think about them, I do not cry in despair anymore. The two questions are intertwined and related to the extension of time and space. Clearly my view of the problem should be biased by the fact that, being a three-dimensional living with a clock, I miss some possible solutions, or the fact that my questions might be elided by the supra3D-conceptuality of the matter. Whatever the situation, I finally get to my point. Question 1, time: there should always be an after and there should have always been a before, is that right? If so, could anyone link the holographic news to this concept or provide me with some scientifically sound answers/models, theoretical ones would do, yet no religious stuff please. Certainly, the Big Bang theory with explosion, expansion and shrinking in infinite cycles would do, is that right? Question 2, space: our universe has defined limits, good enough, what about a possible outside of our universe? Ok, putting it simple, this projection of a holographic universe from a black hole gives us the possibility of projecting many universes, possibly an infinite number of them. Pretty good, then the space unlimitedness question would be answered, the point now is: is this new math theory actually/potentially incorporating this answer to my question? In other words, from my 3D view of the World, there is no reason why the space should be limited to what we are capable to observe or conceive, rather it should extend with no limits. As for the time question, I believe this is necessarily connected to the space companion. The point now is, I tend to give all this for granted, am I so dramatically naïve not to comprehend that all I wrote is obvious or rather, is someone out there that understands me and is capable to give me a scientific path to the explanation of these major questions? Would after all, a World composed of infinite (thanks to the holographic projections from black holes) universes exploding, expanding and shrinking again and forever be the best and most simple explanation to my questions? Again, and for how easily this could be linked to religious/spiritual matters, I am only looking for scientific (possibly put simple) explanations, thanks for understanding me. Citations could do, yet only if a brief and simple point reporting to the citation is added to make it edible for ignorants such as me. Cheers
  6. Avatar for JJ Binq
    JJ Binq
    Hi, Just a quick question from a major Novice on the whole subject: What makes space-time? Maybe Space-Time is also just information, maybe information, although it mustn't be lost, it also doesn't exist in the physical sense of existence, I don't see how putting it in 2D really helps, that's just a technicality, a cute trick, that you can make it fit. We all know that information is beyond physics, our minds, our brains don't grow as we learn more and absorb more information, in fact our brain cells die pretty quickly as we really start expanding our knowledge base. So isn't there a much simpler answer to all this? For instance, E=mc2 for example is information, it's information critical to the functioning of the Universe, but are you going to tell me that it is written down in 2D somewhere in the cosmos, just doesn't seem right. I see it 2 ways, either all that information is just in our minds, and in fact it is our observation that creates the universe (which would answer a hell of a lot of questions) and it's also why our brains have so much (2D) surface area. Or the universe and it's information is just a consciousness, something that doesn't exist in any physical, corporeal, fashion, kind of like our souls. But more rigid, organised and complete, perfect in fact, but at the same time, that consciousness that contains all information has to have the ability to manipulate that information, and all the rules, all physics is actually malleable, changeable, otherwise there is nothing, no outside of the system, no observer, no entity above or outside of the information, what use is it if it isn't manipulable? Just a suggestion
  7. Avatar for Not Today
    Not Today
    I admit, much of this is hard for me to comprehend. I WANT to understand it, but I don't really. Starting with the biggest question I have is....if everything we see, do, hear, taste, experience, etc. is a hologram, being played out first somewhere else in 2D, then why can I think? Why do I dream? Or taste or make choices? How can I do all of those things? How can I think? Ahhhh! I can't stand it!
  8. Avatar for peri lena
    peri lena
    I think this 'holographic' universe and black holes relation is that technically every galaxy is actually falling into its central supermassive black hole, which we now know to be true. It's been proven that information falling into a black hole is not destroyed by it, but rather 'stored' in the event horizon. It could be that the entire universe is then "expanding" or also falling into or being stretched as it's falling into a 'universal black hole' where our entire universe is in its event horizon. In that case, yes, we are the holographic projection. I watched a documentary on this subject and I have to say it was very convincing. This might explain why gravity is present in our 'event horizon universe' but could be something else within the universal black hole itself. If that makes sense... Gravity is a strange force, that's for certain and I hope I'm around when we come close to an explanation of it, or at least when the physicists are able to unify it with the other forces. On a similar subject, I also read about a mathematician who claims that it could be that our universe appears to be a programmed 'supercomputer'. I can see why a mathematician would come to that conclusion because, given the right numbers, you could technically predict where every atom was, is and will be (except where there is life, for life could be said to be matter reconstructed to move itself around unpredictably). But at the same time, the laws of physics are so incredibly consistent everywhere...yet, given the properties of quantum mechanics and their particles behaving so strangely, apparently having the ability to be in two places at the same time...almost as if the universe is actually really really tiny, it makes you wonder whether it is in a 'computer' of sort. The universe could really be a program, a self-sustaining computer... Either way, the fact that animals, we humans especially, are self-aware and make our own choices, you can say that we are the exception to the laws of determined physics. We are the universe become self-aware. Whether holographic or computerized, we were given freedom from being 'pre-programmed'. Although, sometimes I wish that I was a Sim and the guy playing me would force me to do the things I procrastinate!!
  9. Avatar for Anthony Stark
    Anthony Stark
    That explains why every time I forget to do anything I was about to do, that's because the guy playing with me cancelled the action I was ordered to do.
  10. Avatar for Shawn Thompson
    Show parent comment
    Shawn Thompson
    That makes me think of the Q Collective from Star Trek, they're able to change the very laws of the Universe to do whatever they like as easily as they can move their hands. And other beings are able to join the Collective. I don't know how accurate what you said about basically reprogramming the Universe to fit your needs is or how possible it is, but imagine it is possible. We may be able to ascend the the level of the Collective eventually. Perhaps they are able to reprogram the Universe by using little chips implanted in their brains. That actually sounds like a good idea for a headcannon and for a show. I think a show explaining the origins of the Collective would be amazing. Show them evolve from a Type 3 civilization to an omniscient and omnipotent civilization.
  11. Avatar for bryan lohr
    bryan lohr
    I've got my own theory, which is a whole lot less complicated, and based in reality, but I can't do the math to prove it. Anybody wanna give it a shot? http://brrrn.com/art/mix/science/gravity.html
  12. Avatar for Mikel Phipps
    Mikel Phipps
    I have tried to imagine gravity in many different ways trying to experience a revelation. I like the idea you propose. I'm pretty sure physic's has already explained bodies in motion pretty good. Referring to you're explanation of elliptical orbits and rotation.
  13. Avatar for Brian Legg
    Brian Legg
    Bryan, I thought your theory was pretty interesting. The only part that casts a doubt for me is the "wake" left behind by a moving body through the CBR. If Earth is passing through this field of particles and they are pushing back causing gravity then wouldn't gravity be significantly less on the opposite side of the planet? In contrast gravity is constant around the Earth and only decreases as you get further from the planet. Also, there is no gravity in space at all once you leave Earth... even while traveling through space. Wouldn't the particles still push back? Wouldn't there be some level of gravity once you started to move... similar to floating in water, you can be very still and weightless but once you start moving you can feel the resistance. Even if this was many many times weaker I'm sure something would be detectable. I'd like to hear your thoughts.
  14. Avatar for Everett Buck
    Everett Buck
    There is one thing I feel must be brought up. If gravity is a pushing force, then it is expected that the force is greatest around the edges of the object it is pushing on. How would you explain gravity's weakness at higher altitudes, and increase with lower altitudes?
  15. Avatar for Joseph S. Brown III
    Joseph S. Brown III
    This all might seem exciting but I covered it in my 2006 model Millennial Physics on www.joebrownscience.net My reference to holographic universe is not so exciting as Ron depicts, but it is included in a complete model of universal physics that may be far superior to the one you learned. I do not think our universe is a hologram, and M-P will show you where to stop along this line of thinking and move toward a more complete model.
  16. Avatar for James T. Dwyer
    James T. Dwyer
    FYI - the linked site welcome page begins: "This website contains the Internet portion of my ministry in the worship to God..."
  17. Avatar for Matthew Huddleston
    Matthew Huddleston
    It is a little disconcerting for me to see the level at which major science publications are "spicing up" news articles with misleading eye-candy for non-scientists. Most any non-physicist would completely miss the true significance of the research being covered by this article: Two dissimilar imaginary model universes have been mathematically linked, hinting at possible (though as yet completely untested and unproven) implications for the universe in which we live. This research may (or may not) end up being important for our future understanding of the "real" universe. For now, it is interesting mathematics, potentially useful for developing testable hypotheses. From the comments below, most readers have been severely misled into thinking it is much, much more. This is disrespectful to the researchers themselves, who may now find themselves in a position of defending overreaching ideas that their work was never meant to address.
  18. Avatar for Sky Talker
    Sky Talker
    Well said. I think this is a problem that is increasingly common within academic circles. Pandering to the public does bring in more more support for a theory and hence a greater budget but it also dangerously raises expectations and means that really significant scientific discoveries that don't make a good story are more easily ignored.
  19. Avatar for Jonathan Simon
    Jonathan Simon
    If the Universe is a hologram of 10 dimensional core, then living structures are holograms of their genetic codes.
  20. Avatar for kayton leslie
    kayton leslie
    scientist themselves dont actually understand what gravity is. each individual planets or celestial objects dont really have there own gravity. gravity is the pull or vacuum effect of outer space itself. what causes that pull is probably dark energy itself. our planet act as a shield by blocking and warping these gravitational waves around the circumference of our planet, that is why we have orbit. if the universe was an hologram then we would not be solid beings at all, but instead we would be made up of energy.
  21. Avatar for Brian Legg
    Brian Legg
    Who's to say we're not? Energy can be converted to mass and vise versa.
  22. Avatar for David Ravicher
    David Ravicher
    So, this in conjunction with the recent Amplituhedron discovery, the new quark entanglement/wormhole discovery and now this... I'm terribly sorry to break it to you all, but we are on the event horizon of a Scientific Revolution. The old mono-paradigm be damned ∞ http://ravicher.me/2013/06/18/the-paradigms-of-revolution-pt-1-of-the-scientific/
  23. Avatar for David Ravicher
    David Ravicher
    and if that's not enough - check out the peer review changes... and pepper that with some dark energy...
  24. Avatar for Calvin Noronha
    Calvin Noronha
    The first question that comes to mind is who is running the hologram? Or who created it? Could this be a hologram within a hologram? Does this theory then hint towards intelligent design?
  25. Avatar for Ed Rybicki
    Ed Rybicki
    Well, if you look at the article on the cosmic microwave background, you may get to the realisation that the hologram is part of a simulation with a logo embossed in it - which is why the map looks the way it does. And that we are, all of us, sims. As to whether the design was intelligent or not - well that decision rests with who/whatever is grading the assignments. I feel another Futures story coming on...B-)
  26. Avatar for Aaron McLeod
    Show parent comment
    Aaron McLeod
    David Bohm and “The Undivided Universe” A contemporary discussion of interconnectedness has been presented by David Bohm in his last book, The Undivided Universe. This physics text has great contemporary credibility because Bohm derives quantitatively correct answers to some of the most puzzling questions at the ragged edges of modern physics with his concept of the Implicate Order and Enfoldment. A whole generation of physics students in the 1960s learned quantum theory from Bohm’s outstanding textbook of that title. Bohm provides a compelling model for all the data we have been examining. He does so through the use of a holographic model of the universe. The defining property of a hologram is that every tiny piece of the hologram contains a complete picture of the whole. In physics, quantum mechanical-wave functions predict and describe with perfect precision (ten decimal places in optics) what we will experience in our physical measurements. For Bohm, these wave functions make up a physical, four dimensional, space time hologram in which we are all embedded. The wave functions are solutions arising out of the Schrodinger equation, which is the quantum mechanical engine used to solve all problems in the quantum domain. However, these solutions are usually treated as merely mathematical models, so called probability waves. In Bohm’s interpretation, the quantum mechanical-wave functions are treated as having measurable effects through space and time. These wave functions describe what Bohm calls “active information,” and this information has its own nonlocal existence. If you look at a hologram on a photographic plate, the imbedded three-dimensional image is invisible. It is entirely dispersed in the optical interference pattern spread throughout the plate, even though these fringes cannot be seen or measured directly. Bohm calls this the implicate, or “enfolded,” order in the holographic plate. The explicate order would be the three-dimensional picture that you see when you illuminate the hologram with a laser beam. Imagine that you had a large sheet of postage stamps, where the whole sheet showed a picture of a flag and each small sheet showed a picture of the same flag. As you break off smaller and smaller pieces of the hologram, the three-dimensional field of view decreases along with the spatial resolution, but you still get the whole picture. It’s as though you start with a big piece of matzah. No matter how small a piece you break off, you still have matzah. Bohm says, “The essential features of the implicate order are that the whole universe is in some way enfolded in everything, and that each thing is enfolded into the whole.” This is the fundamental statement of a holographic ordering of the universe. It says that, like a hologram, each region of space-time contains information about every other point in space-time. Bohm continues: “All of this quantum interconnectedness implies a thoroughgoing wholeness, in which mental and physical sides participate very closely in each other. Likewise, intellect, emotion, and the whole state of the body are in a similar flux of fundamental participation. Thus, there is no real division between mind and matter, psyche and soma. The common term psychosomatic is in this way seen to be misleading, as it suggests the Cartesian notion of two distinct substances in some kind of interaction. Extending this view that you cannot separate the observer from the observed, we see that each human being similarly participates in an inseparable way in society and the planet as a whole. What may be suggested further is that such participation goes on to a greater collective mind, and perhaps ultimately to some yet more comprehensive mind, in principle capable of going indefinitely beyond even the human species as a whole.”
  27. Avatar for Mikel Phipps
    Mikel Phipps
    So basically the calculated internal energy of a black hole matches the calculated energy of a universe with-out gravity? That seems logical. So is perceiving objects as smaller the further they are away another product of warping space time?
  28. Avatar for Logan McCoy
    Logan McCoy
    I think pretty soon we should realize that the only boundary that exists is thought itself.
  29. Avatar for Dot Com
    Dot Com
    Why, oh why, didn't I take the BLUE pill?
  30. Avatar for Subjective Observer
    Subjective Observer
    "When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all." Gospel of Thomas
  31. Avatar for Justin Case
    Justin Case
    It is ironic that science started out as a branch of philosophy. Thanks to quantum physics, we now know that consciousness plays an integral role in our reality and existence. Science has truly come full circle. Was George Berkeley 300 years ahead of his time?
  32. Avatar for Aaron Friedman
    Show parent comment
    Aaron Friedman
    In it's simplest, simplest form. I'd say it's like a raid 3 or 4 disk array. The parity drive would be like the low-level dimension - it contains enough information to recreate the whole. But the information is sort of jumbled around in a parity "state," - the data is there but there is no knowledge. The other drives contain knowledge. They would be like the dimensions we experience.. Now, keep in mind this isn't a perfect explanation, but you asked for simple. That's about as simple as I think it can get.
  33. Avatar for Drew Danielson
    Drew Danielson
    To paraphrase the emergency medical hologram from Star Trek: Voyager, "please state the nature of the existential emergency."
  34. Avatar for Sally Ire
    Sally Ire
    I've been trying to understand the implications of what this all could mean but I still can't quite wrap my head around it.
  35. Avatar for Stephanie Freeman
    Stephanie Freeman
    I am trying to visualize a 1-dimensional universe. Even a string is 2 dimensions (L x W, though a very small width). The tesseracts that I have seen for higher dimensions don't help here.
  36. Avatar for Robert Roy
    Robert Roy
    Yes, it is hard to imagine if not unimagineable. You could imagine a string with a specific, finite length but with zero height. The question is would have such string a mass? If yes it is hard to imagine, either. If not it'd probably act like a photon, there weren't solids, liquids or gases. Maybe some weird aggregation of plasma. Even if there were a proven 1-dimensional universe we couldn't think of it and it was beyond our imagination. Our consciousness is purely not capable of doing so. But being holograms with everything in it as well, our thoughts, mankind's greatest achievements, even pain or hitting something like concretes could just be "surreal", holographic, string-emitted energy.
  37. Avatar for Cornelia Arbitrot
    Cornelia Arbitrot
    Gotta love a website that mixes Gurdjieff with science. And since when is a "numerical test" anywhere close to confirmatory of a physical theory? Especially one in 10 dimensions resting on a foundation of 9 dimensions which most serious physicists regard as a curiosity at best? By the way, on the math involved, though I'm not motivated to personally check it out, last time I did check, String Theory (that supposedly nine dimension exercise in mathematical onanism), somewhat defensively, or so it seemed, admitted that it was still in step with QM. So by adding a 10th dimension we've somehow eclipsed Bell? C'mon, get serious.
  38. Avatar for Drew Danielson
    Drew Danielson
    Where does Gurdjieff talk about multidimensional string theory, or even much of anything to do with the physical substance of the universe? His stuff was all metaphysical. If you're responding to some other poster's woo woo theories, sorry for the critical response. If that's the case probably best to reply to that poster than to start a new thread.
  39. Avatar for macs rutledge
    macs rutledge
    gurgjieff never became involved in metaphysics, being a strict materialist. his materialism just doesn't sound like materialism to most of us because he believed that matter on different "levels" obey different physical laws. all of his psychology is actually also his cosmology because he believed that the human body is an image of the universe and visa versa. in this an other ways his philosophy seems to mesh quite well with the holographic theory. if you read "in search of the miraculous" you'll have to go through many pages of cosmology, math, harmonics, ect. interestingly, one of the conclusions of the book is that there are no miracles because everything in the universe obeys physical principals of one sort or another. god exists, but is material and mortal, we are just a part of his universe-wide life-support machine. it's really more like sci-fi than religion. in his defense though, he somehow knew that the moon used to be a part of the earth back in the 1800s, so maybe there is wisdom to be gleaned there.
  40. Avatar for David Ravicher
    David Ravicher
    meet the Amplituhedron... making Time and Space Emergent - I liked that Gurgjieff smoked... it said something very important about him.
  41. Avatar for matt Mellen
    matt Mellen
    How does this link up with theories that consciousness brings reality into existence through observation? Perhaps life isn't a random event that occurred in the physical universe but a integral factor to its genesis and evolution. If this is the case is it not a Proof of Purpose? http://www.ecohustler.co.uk/2013/12/09/proof-purpose/
  42. Avatar for Mikel Phipps
    Mikel Phipps
    The way I would understand it. (If I did) The tree doesn't make a sound. Everything is only a possibility til it's observed. The entire universe wasn't here the second before the first consciousness started to observe it. I don't feel very comfortable with that.
  43. Avatar for matt Mellen
    matt Mellen
    Consciousness came first... then the entire universe...
  44. Avatar for Randy Habfast
    Show parent comment
    Randy Habfast
    People would probably relate that to the "Law of Attraction"
  45. Avatar for Ebrahim JD
    Ebrahim JD
    Although I admire those people who try to understand these fundamental concepts but I think the first rule in numerical modelling is to know how a system works and what are the most important parameters and I don't understand how we can claim that the numerical models can be reliable when our knowledge about the universe is such limited!!!
  46. Avatar for Liam Coyle

    This comment is awaiting moderation.

  47. Avatar for Randy Habfast
    Randy Habfast
    I actually had that same problem a few years ago. I wanted to understand, but most of it was over my head. It's super fascinating stuff, and it can fly over most people's heads which is a bummer cause people really need to understand these new discoveries. I spent 3 years studying, and then 4 months putting together a very "laymen" 9 chapter, heavily sourced paper breaking down new discoveries like this. Uses videos, documentaries and published papers among other things. The holographic theory of our universe was one of those. If you wanna give it a read and see if it helps in your understanding, here's the link: http://perceptivereality.weebly.com/introduction.html#/
  48. Avatar for Jared Rodri
    Jared Rodri
    As I understand it, think of the universe(s)... kind of like the Matrix. It's not FAKE... in fact, it can be completely real. Keep in mind that what our eyes perceive as a desk, lamp, tree, etc... are really just light bouncing off of different objects within a range that our eyes can detect. Those objects, whether a chair, or a car, or even YOUR BRAIN, are all made up of the same materials... atoms. They're just arranged differently. Now when we talk about a Black Hole, the laws of physics actually BREAK. Einstein's theory falls apart (so to speak) when we discuss things that we now KNOW exist, but can't be explained with the current model. So the question of a 10 dimensional universe being holographic comes down to an understanding of those 10 dimensions. We think of a dimension as the X, Y, Z axis equaling 3 dimensions. But every single point within that 3D world is the center point, meaning additional dimensions are required that interact with ALL of those other points simultaneously to allow every infinite point to be the "center". This combines with additional dimensions that do NOT abide by the laws of physics. I call it the "matrix" because it's the simplest way of thinking about it. It's not fake, but it's not real either, and it can be completely circumvented. No robot overload is "controlling" it like the Matrix though. :)
  49. Avatar for a m
    a m
    Did Sheldon come up with this?

Top Story

Retina

Next-generation stem cells cleared for human trial

Researchers hope to treat macular degeneration of the retina with induced pluripotent stem cells, a method that has generated enormous expectations.

Science jobs from naturejobs