Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe • Hacker News Board

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#101

Post by azeirah » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

wturner wrote: post #86

remir wrote: post #77

It's crazy to think we are the universe observing and trying to understand itself. Matter organised in a certain way is able to observe itself? How weird is that!

This is the perspective that I hardly ever hear discussed when the issue of "human freedom" is brought up. If you assume we are a result of the big bang, then the causal relationship infers humans are not free. If on the other hand you assume humans "are" the universe, then an entirely different perspective seems to be possible albeit one that is much more confusing to reason about.

Daniel Dennet wrote a book arguing for the existence of free will despite the determinism of the universe.

It's called the evolution of free will. You might want to check that out if you'd like to know more about that perspective.

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#102

Post by Balgair » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

patcon wrote: post #71

I've recently been thinking on how our human definition of intelligence might relate to holographic principles, particularly in regards to information theory. We are small creatures, but our networks -- our brains and societies -- represent the most complex information-encoding geometries we've yet seen in the universe. And I see the way that our curiosity reaches upward in scale, documenting the far corners and fold…

I'm not so sure that our human brains and human societies are the most complex information encoding geometries in the 'verse. The brain of an elephant's trunk motor control cortex is pretty amazing, and they have a very complicated social system too. Ants also outweigh humans in terms of total biomass, let alone number of ants, and their eusocial system of 'governance' inside of a colony and between colonies is barely grasped as it stands. Do these creatures have a sense of 'curiosity'? Elephants are really close to maybe having it, but as for ants? Who can tell? Does that mean that they cannot build models of the future too, perhaps in ways we will not understand for millennia?

I think it's just evolution, nothing more, but that is not to say that evolution as a very simple principle has not made astounding 'discoveries'. We evolve, elephants evolve, ants evolve, and in that bloody and hungry process, beautiful things of incredible complexity emerge all over the globe.

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#103

Post by stordoff » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

blincoln wrote: post #51

Possibly dumb question, but I know my niece is going to ask me about this, and I'd like to be able to give her a solid response: does this mean that most distances within our universe are illusory? If not, why not? To expand on that thought a little bit, with a hologram, the projected object is an illusion, and can be made to appear to move at arbitrary speed by e.g. rotating the projection apparatus. On a larger sca…

> If this theory models the universe as a 3D (or more) projection from a 2D surface

Further, would such a projection suggest a possible mechanism for entangled particles to interact at distance (e.g. the particles are separated in 3D-space, but are co-located in 2D-space)?

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#104

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 9:49 PM UTC

d0mine wrote: post #64

Osmium wrote: post #58

Question, from someone who does not understand the Holographic universe idea: If 'true', is the holographic universe 'merely' a mathematical tool that helps us solve problems, or is it a description of an objective reality, and the universe is 'really' a 2D surface, and our 3D perception is somehow illusory? I understand this is partly a philosophy of science question, but would be interested to hear an expert opinio…

All models are wrong. If a model is not wrong; it is called reality. http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/57407/what-is-the-m...

[deleted]

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#105

Post by rrggrr » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 9:51 PM UTC

IANP, but its seems as if the measurement problem will always cause us to observe, more accurately measure, a 2D projection and maximum entropy; where before the wave collapse a 3D+ universe and perhaps infinite entropy existed.

In the same way that two trains traveling at different speeds are warped to the observer, it would seem to me that we would need to observe the wave in real-time to accurately observe it.

Again, INAP.

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#106

Post by ImTalking » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 9:55 PM UTC

Does this mean that consciousness is a dimension? Would a (say) lifeless planet 'be' 3D if not observed or would it remain encoded in 2D? (Asked by a layman).

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#107

Post by nerfhammer » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 10:00 PM UTC

acchow wrote: post #79

remir wrote: post #77

It's crazy to think we are the universe observing and trying to understand itself. Matter organised in a certain way is able to observe itself? How weird is that!

This and Godel's Incompleteness (equivalently the halting problem) and entropy (which gives the "arrow of time") I always find endlessly strange.

what about human consciousness?

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#108

Post by rocqua » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 10:01 PM UTC

azeirah wrote: post #101

wturner wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the perspective that I hardly ever hear discussed when the issue of "human freedom" is brought up. If you assume we are a result of the big bang, then the causal relationship infers humans are not free. If on the other hand you assume humans "are" the universe, then an entirely different perspective seems to be possible albeit one that is much more confusing to reason about.

Daniel Dennet wrote a book arguing for the existence of free will despite the determinism of the universe. It's called the evolution of free will. You might want to check that out if you'd like to know more about that perspective.

I have found that discussions on 'free will' tend to be doomed from the start because no-one can agree on a definition of free will.

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#109

Post by smrtinsert » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 10:02 PM UTC

jameskilton wrote: post #7

wodencafe wrote: post #2

What does this mean? The universe is fake? Is this along the same lines as "everything is a simulation"?

Holographic theory is not the same as the universe being a simulation. I have only done basic reading and following of the idea but as I understand things, the "holographic" universe is about figuring out how our experience is encoded in the fabric of the cosmos. It's another step in trying to find the universal equation that works at the big (gravity / relativity) and the small (quantum). If the holographic informat…

Does this mean it could be theoretically possible to warp between two locations utilizing the 2d properties of the unprojected universe?

Re: Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

#110

Post by Groxx » Mon, Jan 30, 2017, 10:05 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #59

Osmium wrote: post #58

Question, from someone who does not understand the Holographic universe idea: If 'true', is the holographic universe 'merely' a mathematical tool that helps us solve problems, or is it a description of an objective reality, and the universe is 'really' a 2D surface, and our 3D perception is somehow illusory? I understand this is partly a philosophy of science question, but would be interested to hear an expert opinio…

Until and unleas.a theory is falsified and revealed to be an incomplete model, there is no way to differentiate the "mathematical tool" from the "underlying reality" case, since any theory that works without qualification is, by definition, a model which is not detectably distinguishable from being the underlying reality.

So is holographic universe theory expected to work without qualification (thus being indistinguishable), or is it more of a temporary patch that nobody believes is correct, but works better for one area, and worse for others?

Newton's model of gravity works well enough for approximation at human scales, but is flawed enough that you don't use it for astrophysics or microscopic realms.