Does Space Emerge From A Holographic Boundary?
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 03. 2024
- Check out the Space Time Merch Store
www.pbsspacetime.com/shop
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
Space seems fundamental. To build a universe, surely you need something to build it on or in. Many, maybe most physicists now think that the fabric of space emerges from something deeper. And perhaps the most existentially disturbing such proposal is that our 3-D universe is just the inward projection of an infinitely distant boundary. A hologram, or sorts. Let’s see how that can actually work, and what the holographic principle really says about the “realness” of this universe.
Check Out the Holographic Universe Playlist
• Hawking Radiation
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to:to.pbs.org/DonateSPACE
Sign up for the mailing list to get episode notifications and hear special announcements!
mailchi.mp/1a6eb8f2717d/space...
Search the Entire Space Time Library Here: search.pbsspacetime.com/
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Matt O'Dowd
Post Production by Leonardo Scholzer, Yago Ballarini & Stephanie Faria
Directed by Andrew Kornhaber
Associate Producer: Bahar Gholipour
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
Executive in Charge for PBS: Maribel Lopez
Director of Programming for PBS: Gabrielle Ewing
Assistant Director of Programming for PBS: John Campbell
Spacetime is a production of Kornhaber Brown for PBS Digital Studios.
This program is produced by Kornhaber Brown, which is solely responsible for its content.
© 2024 PBS. All rights reserved.
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / multidroideka
Space Time Was Made Possible In Part By:
Big Bang Sponsors
John Sronce
Bryce Fort
Peter Barrett
David Neumann
Alexander Tamas
Morgan Hough
Juan Benet
Vinnie Falco
Mark Rosenthal
Quasar Sponsors
Glenn Sugden
Alex Kern
Ethan Cohen
Stephen Wilcox
Mark Heising
Hypernova Sponsors
Michael Tidwell
Chris Webb
David Giltinan
Ivari Tölp
Kenneth See
Gregory Forfa
Bradley Voorhees
Scott Gorlick
Paul Stehr-Green
Ben Delo
Scott Gray
Антон Кочков
Robert Ilardi
John R. Slavik
Donal Botkin
Edmund Fokschaner
chuck zegar
Jordan Young
Daniel Muzquiz
Gamma Ray Burst Sponsors
Jessica M. Kandal
Anthony Crossland
Grace Seraph
Frank Plessers
Stephen Saslow
Robert DeChellis
Tomaz Lovsin
Anthony Leon
Leonardo Schulthais Senna
Lori Ferris
Dennis Van Hoof
Koen Wilde
Nicolas Katsantonis
Joe Pavlovic
Justin Lloyd
Chuck Lukaszewski
Cole B Combs
Andrea Galvagni
Jerry Thomas
Nikhil Sharma
John Anderson
Bradley Ulis
Craig Falls
Kane Holbrook
Ross Story
teng guo
Harsh Khandhadia
Michael Lev
Terje Vold
James Trimmier
Jeremy Soller
Paul Wood
Joe Moreira
Kent Durham
jim bartosh
Ramon Nogueira
John H. Austin, Jr.
Diana S Poljar
Faraz Khan
Almog Cohen
Daniel Jennings
Russ Creech
Jeremy Reed
David Johnston
Michael Barton
Isaac Suttell
Oliver Flanagan
Bleys Goodson
Mark Delagasse
Mark Daniel Cohen
Shane Calimlim
Tybie Fitzhugh
Eric Kiebler
Craig Stonaha
Frederic Simon
John Robinson
Jim Hudson
David Barnholdt
John Funai
Adrien Molyneux
Bradley Jenkins
Amy Hickman
Vlad Shipulin
Thomas Dougherty
King Zeckendorff
Dan Warren
Joseph Salomone
Patrick Sutton
Julien Dubois
For the casual viewer feeling like they're having trouble following along, just know that I did my master's thesis on a topic based on the AdS/CFT correspondence, and I still feel like I struggle to properly wrap my head around all of it... Kudos to PBS spacetime for fighting to make it more accessible
I suspect even the most celebrated theoretical physicists have trouble visualizing much of this material, as it is literally in other dimensions and at infinite distances. Me, I'm just fascinated that there exist people who can figure all this stuff out. It's mind-blowing
Thank you.
"Masters" thesis is a bit of a pretentious misnomer. There is no mastery of any subject at that level, just highly simplified understanding so naive university students can figure it out while chugging beers and playing Minecraft.
@@bardsamok9221 bro dropped out 💀💀💀
@@bardsamok9221Your bitterness seems to be an emergent property of your failure to launch😵💫
Who else watches this weekly but has no idea what's being talked about? 🙌
Eventually, through audio osmosis, it will make some sense, lol.
Sleep will absorb something, I hope.
I’m usually very high…
Not always over my head but definitely this one! 😆
Social engineering stickers are in place to do away with abstract thought. Meanwhile kids today wouldn't recognize #PROPAGANDA if it was advertised on CZcams...
The whole “size scales lead to a third dimension” thing never made any sense no matter how hard I tried, but your example of the “effective radius” and the differing shell sizes finally made it click! Absolutely wild!
What if there is only one shell, evolving in time, so called RG time or renormalization group time?
I didn't fully understand this part. Is the idea that the system treats similarly shaped configurations at different scales similarly, and this creates nesting levels reality at different scales which subjectively is perceived as 3d?
Again, I'm not sure if I'm understanding this correctly, but if it is then why only 3 spatial dimensions?
Legendary science communicators!
My comment is @exodus
@@Exodus5Kyes, except formally similar, not colloquially similar.
I understand less than 1% but I am still so happy that this dude is talking and I get to hear it.
English accent sells a lot of BS!
@@arsenelupiniii8040im pretty sure that's a kiwi accent.
@@arsenelupiniii8040 Australian
Those Physicists, always projecting. 😂
Brilliant 👏
Hey-oo 😂
🤦♂️
😂🎉
Well played . 😁
Hey Matt et al., I've been a viewer since y'all started back in 2015. Never commented, and I wish I had the money to join the Patreon, but I just wanted to say that I appreciate how much this series breaks my brain every week.
I'm a big Brian Greene guy, and, even so, I feel as though I understand so little but love the content so much I can't stop myself from coming back.
Thank you!
thank you for your many years of support!
Q@@pbsspacetime
R @@batmanchurch
my brain is breaking so hard i might have to take this one in parts
Brian Greene is a smarmy New York ___ in comparison to Matt. There's no artiface with Matt. It's typical spartan, self deprecating Aussie delivery. With Brian, I can see his enthusiasm for teaching, but that's tarnished by the fatuous showmanship needed to pander to his Hamptons benefactors.
That was quite interesting. Not sure how far you really can take the analogy, but coming from an IT background, that "multiple seemingly different models describing the exact same thing" made me immediately think how you (in principle) can describe an application by giving its behavior and functionality, OR by listing its source code, OR by describing how the electricity flows through the hardware circuits. Vastly different descriptions that seem to have nothing in common, yet all describing the exact same thing. Nor can you really say which of these is the "real one" as it's more a switch in your point-of-view and which description fits your purpose. If it's anything sorta-like this, yes, makes sense. Though, always have to be careful about analogies, especially when they are of something outside your own field of expertise 🙂 but can be a useful tool when trying to understand things.
This description made things click
Also interesting to me that software is just the language encoding physical processes, so that we can manage those processes. It doesn't 'do' anything.
Thanks for pointing out these dualities in IT. Your point is so interesting!
It's the concept lf abstraction, when he used the analogy of 4 "pixels" clumping into a larger one to produce the same information, my head immediatly went there
You know a topic is truly complex is PBS needs to make a playlist for it 😀
I mean, he explained the new paper about their possibly not being a Singularity at the center of a black hole in just one episode.
I watch this channel for ages now and usually I feel pretty smart because I understand the gist of most episodes pretty well.
This episode makes me feel oldfashionedly stupid.
That's exactly what I thought 😂
It's definitely one of the more difficult concepts in spacetime, it seems. I like to think I'm pretty good at this stuff but this whole episode was just the smell of my brain melting.
I came to the comments to write exactly this. 🤣
Which part didn't you get?
@@das_it_mane Yes.
Well not entirely true. I understood the solar eclipse shirt section.
When I watch PBS Space Time, I really do think I should be outside bashing rocks together
Brittish accent has always had that effect. They sell a ton a crap that way.
Reject physics, return to the wild
@@arsenelupiniii8040 He doesn't have a British accent :)
This is the first video that seems to have actually succeeded in getting me to understand the whole concept of the Holographic principle.
Great episode! I watched all the old holographic principle episodes when they first came out and they were mind-blowing but very heavy and hard to follow. You did an incredible job summarising and re-explaining the whole thing here in simpler terms.
Can't wait to get reminded again next time why this is the best channel I've ever discovered.
Have you got a minute? 😊
Yeah. It's unreasonably effective.
Brittish accent! Makes people feel smarter, when in reality it is ALL bs!
I totally understood all that
Yes, so did I. Absolutely.
I now have a complete understanding 😊 ...... of what a person who does not speak English experiences when watching a video in English 😂
Great, could one of you guys summarize it for me in your own words? Cause I have no sweet clue!!!
@@ShippyJack42
@@ShippyJack star trek
First heard of Erik Verlinde’s entropic gravity/holographic universe theory probs 7-8yrs. ago in the context of him arguing that dark matter/energy are so difficult to detect bc they don’t actually exist, but rather are emergent products of space time geometry-it was so elegant & intuitive that I was sold then & there 👀
'Everything we know., or will know will ultimately be emergent
I had exactly the same reaction from his lectures on it. The math isn't perfect because it challenges existing assumptions but the concepts are incredibly elegant.
finally back to headache content, thanks
As somebody who majored in the humanities because I am allergic to math, I'm amazed by how much I've learned from this channel. I never thought I would understand so many of these principles, even on a surface level.
Heehee. Sometimes the ability to calculate or do math isn't the same skill as comprehending or teaching the material conceptually. Probably why I'm not in science as a career though, good with concepts and communication, would be miserable about all the mental effort it takes for me to memorize things or keep numbers straight. A Relativity class teacher once made this clear, being like, "You're the only one in the class that understands the material, but you remember two times three is six, right?" Oops. :)
Well, according to the video, if you understand something on a surface level, then you understand it completely!
I think you aren't allergic to math, at all. You're rightly allergic to badly taught math. A depressing amount of K-12 math is dismally badly taught.
So basically we really don't know how the universe works.
@@OllamhDrabheehee
As a layman that likes thinking about these topics but lacks the terminology, and in depth study, I find this channel uniquely inspiring. Keep up the good work, I might share this channel if it's alright.
I can't help seeing our true source selves dance on the cosmic Plato's cave wall, where the story is flipped, the shadows are the casters of players, not the other way around.
The projector is inside the cave, made from the soup of fundamental shadow code, projecting an emergent representation that we consider...
...Reality.
Additional: Science channels like this have filled a void within me, thank you for projecting some wonderful education and perspectives my way
Extremely excited for this series of upcoming episodes!!
Always a pleasure listening to Matt. He structures the concept in a understable method and doesn't dumb it down. Moreover, he provides the definition and notations; to keep up. Either to learn or to brush up . Cant wait to hear the reast of this series.
He does dumb it down, sorry.
@@NontrivialZetaZeros yes obviously. But this is still a 15 min podcast; at best. Not the lecture itself. He is still tailored towards a specific audience. I mean how many people actually understand what a boundary or bulk is. Entanglement of the field, Lorenz transformation in QFT.
@@NontrivialZetaZerosit's simplified, not dumbed down.
Dang, I didn't notice it on the last episode but the new credits visuals and music are incredible!
I'm very excited to see you guys picking this topic back up! Looking forward to this series.
Yay! This one was complex enough that it will require revisiting! 🎉🎉
This channel never fails to blow my mind
Its PBS Space Time O Clock folks
Great episode! Your explanations and the artist’s depictions make a formidable combination. Looking forward to the next ones you teased!
Best video in a long while for me. Been trying to understand this, this really helped.
Short answer: Yes
Long Answer: Yes but longer
Right answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.
@@adamb89 no
@@adamb89 it's more like "yeeeeeeeeeeessssss....?"
That's what she said? 🤔😏
😆
Never look directly at a solar eclipse tshirt
I hope Spacetime sells me ISO 12312-2 certified sunglasses so I can decide if I want to buy the shirt
Never listen directly to brittish accent, lest you wanna buy some BS!
@@arsenelupiniii8040 what about australian or newzealand accents?
It seems less like we are moving to the future, but that the future is pulling us towards it in a fundamental way that affects the present.
I sometimes have a feeling like that, almost as if we are being physically pulled. I wonder if it's meaningful....
That's not a bad way of thinking about it. I like to think of it as the 'Now' falling into the 'Future' faster than the 'Past' can keep up. So we get this lovely illusion of a 3d reality within the 'Now' as we observe it's 'Past' like a wake on a cosmic sea.
@bobjason7540 , the branch of philosophy called Teleology builds out frameworks supporting the hypothesis you state here... Not that I've really dug into Teleology all that much, (yet)...
Yea@@EleneDOM
So glad you’re covering this topic now. Can’t wait for the next episodes and really hoping you’ll dig into more of the machinery explaining the why and how.
My most favourite astrophysics presenter!
Oh finally! A Spacetime video about entropic gravity is coming up! Can't wait for that one.
Back with a bang! Somehow I understood this recap better than the individual episodes. Maybe I have levelled up or this channel has :) What a duality!
Aw Matt! It's been a while since you did one of your 'deep dives' into a subject. They are what first found me your channel way back when. Looking forward to seeing this one through :)
I think we continue to misunderstand space altogether. From the fact that a spin 1/2 particle needs 720 degs of rotation to come back to its starting point, to the fact that entropy is proportional to area, and that the area of a one plank volume sphere is 4 plank areas. Also, that the "stiffness" of spacetime, that defines how fast gravitational waves move through it is related, in an unknown way, the the permeability and permittivity of space.
We are missing something very fundamental, IMHO, and when we find it, we'll no doubt to a face-palm.
"do a face palm" so annoying when the punchline gets scrowed :)
Oddly enough, was watching the episode wondering if spinners would be a useful topological description in navigating a holographic dimension.
Something I wish I was told a lot earlier about spinors: they are not geometric objects. They are transformations. You can stop wracking your brain trying to picture them; they just are not living in physical XYZ space. I highly recommend the series "Spinors for Beginners" by Eigenchris here on CZcams. You can understand them perfectly well without any modification to your understanding of space.
To clarify, rotating a spinor 360 degrees turns its object all the way around, but the spinor itself is its opposite. The additional full turn leaves the spinor and the object both as they were.
@@davidhand9721 The experiment has been done with electrons. Electrons transform as spinors, under SU(2), as opposed to SO(3).
Alright you did it Matt. I usually loosely follow (definitely not fully understand) a good 80% of what you talk about. This one was definitely under 50%.
But please keep doing it. This is why we watch your videos.
I'm going to watch the previous series on the holographic principle then re-watch this.
Leonard Susskind has several good talks that explain this more easily.
“Easily”.
@@TheJohnmmullin lol I have seen them. He doesn't even attempt to dumb down. Granted he's typically speaking to colleagues.
@@Josh-mu7qy the math heavy talks (Stanford lectures, etc) I literally do not understand word one. He might as well be speaking in another language (which, in fact, he is).
His black hole war talks are much more accessible - I grasped almost 10% 😂😂
@@TheJohnmmullin his talks on quantum entanglement and black hole entanglement are incredible. It's literally his theory and I've never heard anyone else talk about it. Would love for Matt to do an episode.
@@Josh-mu7qy surely there’s an episode on it?
Great videos. Always interesting to watch and contemplate.
Been a while since I've watched, I love your new intro!! 💜
Quantum entanglement across many scales. Can't wait for that episode!
It may be, that there is only one shell, evolving in time. Your motion through the shells in radial direction gives the appearance of time - quantum entanglement. In this sense galaxies are past us.
exciting stuff on the horizon !
Thanks Matt! This episode gave me some useful new terminology. True dualities and approximate dualities, super useful
you are an amazing communicator. not sure theres anyone else on the platform with such skill
*reaches for the Aspirin bottle*
Reminds me of an experience I had once on Salvia Divinorum. Great video and explanation!
Please share more!
I've always been fascinated by this particular concept of the holographic universe, ever since it was first proposed in our modern understanding of physics. I'm very happy that it has gotten such a great explainer in a readily accessible video. You have done such a great job explaining so many concepts that I find so enjoyable to listen. It's like listening to one of your favorite stories, only this time told by one of the greatest orators and storytellers, it is just simply a pleasure)
Nice, pretty much what I was thinking, about emergence and entanglement and information theories. Excited for this upcoming series
Emergent gravity is the most important concept in modern physics, and most likely the true path to the theory of everything!!! Thanks so much for covering this Matt et al.!!! I am beside myself waiting for the next episodes! I sincerely hope you guys can shed some light on how the implications of ER=EPR and emergent gravity can reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics WITHOUT invoking this fictitious "dark matter" stuff ;)
there will never be a theory of everything. Bet the house on that.
@@lordemed1 Oh I disagree heartily... there is a theory of everything out there, we just probably aren't going to like it whole lot when we find it. 🙂
The best explanation of CFT and the Holographic Principle I have ever seen is Raphael Bousso’s
This is a fascinating episode with just the right presentation level. Thanks. I am looking forward to more episodes on this subject
Fantastic visuals and script, as always!
Theoretical physicist: i have done enough drugs to create a new theory
The spice must flow.
@@kenbohlin1642mescaline. Spice doesn’t make theories.
Jedi : may force be with you
Gravity : but i'm not force
Jedi : f#ck #ff
@@DrDeuteron Don't underestimate spice.
Like Miccheo Cookoo! That guys hair is more interesting than Neil Degrasse Tyson's PTSD!
Kinda off-topic: Just read about the newly observed dark galaxy "Nube" which seems to be a highly challenging observation with regards to dark matter models, which have been discussed just recently on this channel... Might be a video opportunity for an update! Anyway, great content as always Spacetime! :)
i usually get most episodes but this one Im gonna have to re-watch lol
Hi Matt, great video! Can't wait for the next ones that continue the holographic story!
It seems that the more we unravel the fundamental tangles of reality, the more knots appear to confound us.
Funny, I just recently watched one of your earlier episodes where you touched upon the topic. The AdS/CFT correspondence is one of the most interesting topics in physics.
Got damn PBS, you guys have been around forever, glad to see you still here.
Kudos for the animator trying to visualise emergent space!
we are just the result of Azathoth having a bad dream after to much spicy food
Ol' Az is gonna have an existential crisis when it realizes it's just a lonely Boltzman Brain
Vindaloo?
Too much
@@DObscura-yi5es That boltzman brain will be shook when it realizes it's just a simulation
Ah, a product of Azathoth's slumbering brain on spicy food?
I'm glad our origins aren't from his gastrointestinal agitation.
What's with the foreboding background chord...?
Really though. I can’t concentrate on anything he’s saying because of it.
I'm having a hard time focusing on the video because of this as well :(
I think it's intended to make us feel even more insignificant and lost in this vast universe than we already are.
Was that on purpose? I thought it was some kind of ghastly feedback, or audio artifact or something. Pretty distracting.
Was it always there? I think there was always some background sound there, but this one is particularly distracting.
It would be really neat if you guys could include references in the description field. It saves me looking around for them.
Thanks for the great content.
Keep up the excellent work.
I think that describing the boundary as 'infinitely distant' doesn't quite get at the relationship, though it does hint at it's inaccessibility. The relationship between the bulk and the boundary cannot be described by vectors, directions or distances. It's not like the volume of the ocean beneath it's surface or a ball with the universe 'inside' it.
It's rather more like a 3D picture projected onto a screen from a projector - but as seen by the characters in the show, not by the audience watching it.
Would the characters in the show be able to point in the direction of the projector? Not really, because from their perspective it doesn't really exist, even if they know there is a projector and that they are in a show. The projector generates their reality, but isn't really a part of it - there is no direction that the characters in the projection could walk to reach the projector, because they cannot leave the screen. The reality the projector resides in is fundamentally different than their reality, even though there IS a direct relationship between the two.
I just wrote a paper on the stack about how the space between dark lines in the Double Slit experiment can be changed by what material you make the Slits from. And the dark lines aren't lines, they are a piece of a circle.
Great presentation.
As a holographer, I am constantly fighting circular diffraction patterns and interference.
@@subliminalvibes what's a holographer?
@@billschwandt1-- I assume someone tmakes holograms.
@@billschwandt1 photograph : photographer :: holograph : holographer
@@billschwandt1 like a photographer, but I make holograms with lasers.
Are you familiar with holograms and how they relate to laser interference?
So what I got from this is a black hole all along has been that last little spot seen when old tvs were turned off.
I'm just some uneducated dude, but through life, I have had theories and the more time passes the more those theories are being taken seriously, this is one of them!
Love all videos from PBS space time
My head.... I was not ready for this.
It was sooo confusing and weird
The holographic principle feels like Stoke’s theorem on coke
Very excited about this series!
finally a good explanation of this, thank you so much
I'm fairly well versed in physics, but this episode... I'm gonna have to study a bit to actually get it
I need a PhD to even remotely understand this......make another episode like this lol
Great Episode! Reminds me of the things Wolfram Physics is starting show - i.e. space as an emergent property of entangled computation. I'm not a physicist so hopefully I got that right. But I'd love to see you guys do an explainer on Wolfram Physics some day.
I'm super excited for this mini series.
Your universe is the projection I put on at night when my child goes to sleep. It gets turned off every morning and turned back on at 8pm in my dimension.
It feels like gravity may turn out to be the result of standing wave nodes on the surface of a blackhole which we are the projection of. Basically, Faraday waves on the boundary and we are on a sheet of time falling towards the singularity while everything we look out towards appears to be expanding. Entanglement would be the result of these nodes as they are created by a single wavefunction on the surface and are the result of all wave functions interacting to create the effect of nodes and anti-nodes. It would suggest the CMB is actually the Event horizon we are looking back towards and using it we should be able to calculate various properties of the blackhole we are in. The CMB is so uniform as things reach maximum entropy right before falling in.
Wait, so could that also explain why we see the beginning of the universe as infinitely/extremely dense and ours is not dense in comparison? Causing us to believe our universe started off that way when it was really just the projection from the other plane and ours has a different "beginning state" that would give us different constants possibly? Where ours as it became a supermassive blackhole the total density dropped? Or am I talking nonsense, because I admit the holographic universe and this holographic boundary concept is above me, whereas usually I feel with or above the curve a little on most concepts on this channel. Could that concept you said also implicate that due to the observance of multiple black holes, would that basically be the multiverse theory in a half true manner? Except rather than concept of all possible outcomes existing and infinitely varying universal constants instead you have multiple very similar universes due to them all being black holes. Also, would the predicted ratio of matter to antimatter, and its slight imbalance, at the creation of the universe still be a relevant meaaurement? If so, I wonder in what way it would manifest itself within the concept of reality you said. Again, sorry if these are dumb questions, Im struggling with some of these concepts lol, but it weirdly feels good. The more contradictions with our theories we find with the JWST and the harder to conceptualize these topics become the giddier it makes me, for so long I think many casual followers (or maybe just myself 😅) of theoretical physics, astrophysics, astronomy, etc have felt like many of the mysteries were solved, like we were almost done or close to the final step lol. But our knowledge is like an expanding circle, as we grow the circumference of our knowledge we exponentially increase the volume of our ignorance 😂. I stole that from somewhere and probably paraphrased it crappy but you get the gist.
I love that PBS spacetime is becoming more advanced and using info taught in past videos to create a basis for new complex videos. Its like a class I've made it to the end of somehow.
So love how he still keeps the ending like you can feel any moment now he's about to say "Space Time" as I usually say it at my screen lol.
Completely off-topic but a question I had:
If bosons can be occupy the same space, and the W and Z bosons are more massive than even iron atoms, and we know that you can create a black hole from concentrating photons... Can W and/or Z bosons create a black hole if too many of them accidentally overlap? How many W/Z bosons would you need to accidentally make this black hole (even a small one)? And is this at all likely to accidentally occur?
The trouble is manipulating W/Z bosons into any actual location. They exist on such short timescales, you can do almost nothing more than identify their brief existence.
I wonder if every conversation Matt has ends with him saying the word "spacetime" 😄
"I'll see you again soon, in another distant corner of this grocery-store's intergalactic... spacetime".
Granted I've had a few drinks but this is the first episode for a while where it's been completely over my head. Not that my PhD was ever in physics to begin with.
I love coming across one of your new videos. Make more if possible.
Please provide links to the holographic principle episodes in the description here. They aren’t all named in a way that would show up in a single keyword search.
Everything you see is just the surface we've never managed to scratch yet.
I've been waiting for you guys to cover this topic for 10 years. This is the true bleeding edge of quantum gravity
Brilliant! As an architect i love thinking about the interplay between dimensions. The notion that materialization in 3 dimensions could emerge from infinitely scaling information surfaces... Like onion skins... Is amazing. Thank you for such a coherent explanation
We observe the universe in the present moment (wave function collapse) surrounded by the observable therefore, predictable past (general relativity) moving towards the unobserved therefore, probabilistic future (quantum mechanics).
@@acajoom I never claimed this is how reality actually works. Merely how we perceive it.
I have often found answers to ultimate questions lacking because in my mind, you can’t give answers if you haven’t even determined the appropriate questions. The questions posed in this video finally satisfy me as ultimate questions to be asking
@9:30 This is like the image pyramids we use in computer vision. It's cool to see the analogs of concepts popping up in different places
This reminds me of smooth functions, green’s theorem, and differential equations; where some properties of a function over a region are reflected in other properties of that function on the region’s boundary
I propose the wolographic principle, where spacetime emerges from the devoted prayers of monks on a 2D map
😶🌫️: WOLOLOOOOO🕛🕧🕐🕜🕑🕝🕒🕞🕓🕟🕔🕠🕕🕡🕖🕢🕗🕣🕘🕤🕙🕥🕚🕦🌌☀️🌑🌕🌖🌗🌘🌍🌎🌏🌋🗻🏔⛰️🌊🦠🌿🌳🪼🐟🐊🦕☄️🦫🐒🦧🚶♂️➡️🛖🏘🏰🏭🚗🛩🚀🛰🪐!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Waluigraphic?
I propose a rival theory: the Ayoyographic principle.
Wololo
Cool new intro!
The spring equinox for North America occurred a few days ago on March 19, 2024, at 10:06 p.m. CDT. Good Friday occurs exactly 10 days after the equinox on March 29, and the total solar eclipse occurs exactly 10 days after Good Friday on April 8.
In other words, Good Friday lies at the exact mid-point in time between the equinox and the eclipse.
This concept sounds very interesting to me. Thank you very much
If wormholes were real wouldn't the gravity at One end pull on the other. They'd be unstable close less then anano nano second so not light would get through and stretched and contracted in so many different directions affects on light would be cancelled out.
But paths of gravitational bodies would be altered areas of gravity would be linked much closer then would other wise
It seems to be that the ‘infinitely far away’ boundary is designed to fit Penrose's theory, where the boundary lies at the end of our time.
But there's an alternative boundary we can consider that is more analogous to a black hole, which is the sphere where space is expanding away from us at the speed of light. This occurs since space is not a thing with a speed limit, unlike particles. As nothing can escape the ball defined within this sphere, one might expect similar properties to those of a black hole, such as the entropy being proportional to the area of the sphere.
Would love to see you look into the physicist Nassim Haramein. This is exactly the thing he is working on. His scaling law and work on the Swartzenchild proton papers are very acclaimed and would seem a perfect fit for this channel. Hopefully you see this. I love this channel!
Huh thats weird, I didnt get my notification about this upload, been subscribed for a long time