You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: World we see is make-believe, top British scientist says
The "everything in the universe is a hologram" theory continues to gain traction and in my opinion will eventually be proven.
Like that guy told Tony on The Sopranos, "everything we see is simply shapes in our own consciousness. Nothing is actually real."
Well, why can't I imagine hot, REALLY hot pussy on a regular basis?
My brain desires it.
Re: World we see is make-believe, top British scientist says
We've discussed the hologram theory here before but here's a new article on the subject....
TAKE a look around you. The walls, the chair you're sitting in, your own body - they all seem real and solid. Yet there is a possibility that everything we see in the universe - including you and me - may be nothing more than a hologram.
It sounds preposterous, yet there is already some evidence that it may be true, and we could know for sure within a couple of years. If it does turn out to be the case, it would turn our common-sense conception of reality inside out.
The idea has a long history, stemming from an apparent paradox posed by Stephen Hawking's work in the 1970s. He discovered that black holes slowly radiate their mass away. This Hawking radiation appears to carry no information, however, raising the question of what happens to the information that described the original star once the black hole evaporates. It is a cornerstone of physics that information cannot be destroyed.
In 1972 Jacob Bekenstein at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, showed that the information content of a black hole is proportional to the two-dimensional surface area of its event horizon - the point-of-no-return for in-falling light or matter. Later, string theorists managed to show how the original star's information could be encoded in tiny lumps and bumps on the event horizon, which would then imprint it on the Hawking radiation departing the black hole.
This solved the paradox, but theoretical physicists Leonard Susskind and Gerard 't Hooft decided to take the idea a step further: if a three-dimensional star could be encoded on a black hole's 2D event horizon, maybe the same could be true of the whole universe. The universe does, after all, have a horizon 42 billion light years away, beyond which point light would not have had time to reach us since the big bang. Susskind and 't Hooft suggested that this 2D "surface" may encode the entire 3D universe that we experience - much like the 3D hologram that is projected from your credit card.
It sounds crazy, but we have already seen a sign that it may be true. Theoretical physicists have long suspected that space-time is pixelated, or grainy. Since a 2D surface cannot store sufficient information to render a 3D object perfectly, these pixels would be bigger in a hologram. "Being in the [holographic] universe is like being in a 3D movie," says Craig Hogan of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois. "On a large scale, it looks smooth and three-dimensional, but if you get close to the screen, you can tell that it is flat and pixelated."
Hogan recently looked at readings from an exquisitely sensitive motion-detector in Hanover, Germany, which was built to detect gravitational waves - ripples in the fabric of space-time. The GEO600 experiment has yet to find one, but in 2008 an unexpected jitter left the team scratching their heads, until Hogan suggested that it might arise from "quantum fluctuations" due to the graininess of space-time. By rights, these should be far too small to detect, so the fact that they are big enough to show up on GEO600's readings is tentative supporting evidence that the universe really is a hologram, he says.
Bekenstein is cautious: "The holographic idea is only a hypothesis, supported by some special cases." Better evidence may come from a dedicated instrument being built at Fermilab, which Hogan expects to be up and running within a couple of years.
A positive result would challenge every assumption we have about the world we live in. It would show that everything is a projection of something occurring on a flat surface billions of light years away from where we perceive ourselves to be. As yet we have no idea what that "something" might be, or how it could manifest itself as a world in which we can do the school run or catch a movie at the cinema. Maybe it would make no difference to the way we live our lives, but somehow I doubt it.
Re: World we see is make-believe, top British scientist says
Riad wrote:How is this news? Everyone knows this I would have thought
Huh?
Maybe it's just me. I've always been fascinated with this stuff, and back in the day like the 17/18 hundreds before they all got shit, there were philosophers who used to dig into things like how we can never validate that what we experience is what actual reality is like.
That type of thing. Love this shit.
James Lofton wrote:The "everything in the universe is a hologram" theory continues to gain traction and in my opinion will eventually be proven.
Like that guy told Tony on The Sopranos, "everything we see is simply shapes in our own consciousness. Nothing is actually real."
Well, why can't I imagine hot, REALLY hot pussy on a regular basis?
My brain desires it.
You could. We stick those people who do in insane asylums though.:P
Actually here's a real head-fuck.
Our concept of an objective reality is a backwards rationalization.
We don't ever experience an objective reality.
We only have our subjective experience. From that we have assumed there is an objective reality and backwards rationalized that because there is a subjective reality there MUST be an objective reality that gives rise to it.
Our concept of a subjective reality is based on our experience of subjective reality. The concept is directly supported by the evidence of our experience.
Our concept of an objective reality has no evidence. It is based on a logical leap from our evidence for a subjective reality.
The problem with that is that logic is a process that can be applied to any concept whether the concept is true or false. False concepts can be just as logical as true ones.
Our only grasp of an objective reality is a conceptual grasp that has no direct evidence, stranger it's a subjective conceptual grasp.
We really know sweet fuck all.
Exhilarating stuff.
I've always thought that, this is exactly what Axl was talking about with "Use your Illusions"
- IRISH OS1R1S
- Rep: 59
Re: World we see is make-believe, top British scientist says
Here you go people, for all those that are interested. This doc explains the theory very well. Just stick with it, it comes together towards the end. 
