Surprise Comeback: Dark Energy Could Be Holographic After All
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 окт 2024
- Special Offer! Use our link joinnautilus.c... to get 15% off your membership!
Dark energy is (probably) real, but physicists still don’t know what it’s made of or how to interact with it. One idea that solves this problem is that dark matter isn’t made of anything, but is a consequence of the universe being holographic. While that idea has been floating around since the ‘90s, it's had a few problems. Now a pair of physicists claim to have solved that problem. Let’s take a look.
This video comes with a quiz which you can take here: quizwithit.com...
Paper: www.sciencedir...
🤓 Check out my new quiz app ➜ quizwithit.com/
💌 Support me on Donorbox ➜ donorbox.org/swtg
📝 Transcripts and written news on Substack ➜ sciencewtg.sub...
👉 Transcript with links to references on Patreon ➜ / sabine
📩 Free weekly science newsletter ➜ sabinehossenfe...
👂 Audio only podcast ➜ open.spotify.c...
🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
/ @sabinehossenfelder
🖼️ On instagram ➜ / sciencewtg
#science #sciencenews #physics #darkenergy
This video comes with a quiz which you can take here: quizwithit.com/quiz__page/1728715032057x821485153627419000
You can now also create your own quizzes on my website -- it's free.
"Podcasts happen in a different dimension" "One can write papers about it" -- The "wrong answer" possibilities make these quizzes an enjoyment.🖖
Mathematics is a logical system. As such, it basically conforms to the elemental rules of many forms of insanity, and has no truly valid relationship to physics.
" Help me, Obi-wan Kenobi, you're my only hope."
after watching this video and the recent video by 3B1B about hologram, I just realised the reason it is called a hologram is because the 3D information of a scene is stored entirely on the 2D boundary surface, and it has less to do with having a 3D image in space like in Star Trek
This is a major part of a lot of people's excitement over the hopf fibration. It's the shape of energy changing forms in a fractal holographic universe.
So, Stoke's Theorem all over again?
My first thought was the divergence theorem
@@tylwhite Indeed, mine was Cauchy's integral formula
It is a god concept; there are an infinite, infinity, or infinities of possible answers. I do consider it to be plausible, but probably unfalsifable. You can always take and adjust the math to make space emergent and fiddle with it more and it will answer any question you want. So the only way to really prove it is to disprove every other theory. Anyway we could just keep fiddling with the math and then leave a small message, "Just checking to see if you are still reading," or something like that.
Thanks Sabine.
But if every particle has slightly different observable cone, then that means that every particle is an hologram of it's own bounding box? It's sounds complicated.
Oh the maths. Yes, the maths
As a holographer, what confuses me about the 'holographic principal' is that there's no reference information. I agree one _could_ store volumetric information on the surface of a black hole or universe, but not without a completely undisturbed reference (beam). What I would call, a quantum observer. You need a quantum observer just to record the information.
That is an interesting thought. What if there is a like a fundamental underlying time wave to the universe that defines spacetime, and if it become incoherent in some area, the local hologram would mess up? Good scifi if nothing else.
It's because "ordinary" holograms are created backwards - you start from the results and create a hologram from it. In greater space, it's the other way around - the hologram creates the result.
na that's only needed to record the hologram on a photographic plate.
The principle which makes it possible is, that the information about the light source is determined by the fields at the plate, or boundary. And that's because it has to obey the laws of electrodynamics. These laws are independent of a reference beam - and so is the holographic principle.
That would be the one who projects our reality or as the Bible puts it, "God spoke saying 'Let there be light, and there was light.'" If you consider our creation a holographic simulation, the 6 days of creation become the six days of God's time spent wrighting the program. It is concievable that he would have then started the program after the six days of creation. With this model, Genesis chapter 1 can be lined up perfectly with our known cosmological model. It is the only spiritual text which can pass that test.
Go back to the matrix Trunptard
On one hand, it's a very cool concept. On the other, I'm kind of tired of people chasing down theories that don't invite any kind of experiment to prove them. Relativity and Quantum Physics both had a wealth of experiments that could test for them. Everyone wants the next theory of that magnitude, but they're all either untestable, or when the test comes back false people just juggle the numbers to put the answer a little further out of reach.
If space is infinite, how can you get information from its surface?
This is not about the surface of the entire universe, but only about the surface of the observable universe.
And vice-versa.
If anyone is interested, Dave Farina recently eviscerated both Bret and Eric on his channel.
I think holographic principle is more about how matter organize than what's happening of the surface.. because it's kind of obvious than a good box hides what's inside it. I suppose it means that the complexity, the size of the description grows like the surface. That would explain why the universe seems to go repeating like minecraft (isotropic) at a certain scale.. and noisy random at small scale.. and maybe the evolution of the complexity of the universe is simply directly related to the growth of the size of the observable universe (for each observer, there's a unique description of the universe). If the algorithmic complexity grows, it means you need to create new things (not just repeating) when the universe grows, but also that the growth is slower than the growth of the available volume : so new things don't fill the volume constantly but keep appearing slower and slower. the density of "new things" by volume is decreasing.
I don't really like the idea of reality being highly compressible as it does reminds me of our own computer.
You'll be 2D encodable and you'll like it.
Oh, new sponsorship segment? It's quite inviting! You know your audience well!
Yes, new essay nautil.us/einsteins-other-theory-of-everything-823245/
No surprise. There is always another epicycle to invent.
But, it sounds like a different kind of holographic principle than one from ADS-CFT.
So, if in a vacuum, you capture a photon and send it bouncing around a given space. If it takes twice the speed of light for observations to take place, than that means that the observations are taking place before the actual results. In that space, the photon is radiating, which would cause a shadow of the photon to appear. I think it would be heading in the opposite direction, but if it travels at the rate of light, than the shadow would be moving on a parallel plane, reflecting light like the moon. Right?
My nicest takeaway from this wonderful video: We are all little babies, just begining to understand the universe.
But: How does it fit to your talk with Subir Sakar some years ago?
I’m convinced theres mainstream physics and then the physics we don’t know about because nations don’t want their enemies to know.
For all we know we’re out here playing with primitive tools and advancements are being made behind the scenes.
Everything makes sense when its a hologram.
So now suddenly, the Universe is finite? How come?
The visible part is finite. Whether it "really" is infinite is a very philosophical question seeing that we will never know!
It's a lot of interesting possibilities, but it relies on unjustified assumptions. Philosophy is critical.
@@SabineHossenfelder Perhaps you would like to make a video about this? Greetings from Frankfurt and have a nice weekend. - Andreas
@@SabineHossenfelder Wouldn't it be finite if it was some kind of closed hypersurface like a hypersphere or hyperdonut (I am hoping for a Hyperbrezel)? And figuring out whether it is such a thing doesn't sound impossible. If it isn't though, I agree, we could never say whether it is infinite or ends somewhere or is just a hypersurface subtle enough that we can't tell.
It was never known (and never will be) if it's infinite. We only know that it's large, and that the visibility boundary is due to speed of light constraints, so having a visible edge of the universe (the background radiation) doesn't implies that there's actually any edge. From that you can make a leap of logic and assume that the universe is infinite, but nobody ever said that.
Could it be that the Universe appears to us to expand for the same reason that a black hole evaporates? Matter moves outside the horizon which to us appears as expansion. And the acceleration of the expansion could be for the same reason a black hole's evaporation rate increases as it gets smaller.
Funny coincidence that the size of observable universe is close to Schwarzschild radius of observable universe. The discrepancy is probably just a measurement error too.
I'd say that this is simply a consequence of dimensional analysis: there is only one way in which one can combine the mass of the universe, the gravitational constant and light speed into a formula which yields a length scale. You can the multiply this length scale with dimensionless constants like 2 or pi, but usually these constants are small and similar to each other.
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 Which says that there's a logical and physical connection. Same as planck's constant appearing in all kinds of different scenarios.
I used to think that pseudo science use physics terms, I start to realise that is the other way around.
Well we should also give the Weinstein brothers some scrutiny too. There's plenty to attach to them.
I’m a “masshole” He should come do the research in Boston. In the winter. He will be less sensitive once he spent a little of time getting honked at every 10 seconds, while commuting home. Mass pike is parking lot. God forbid he has to take 128 up north.
Energy going to the surface, information going to the surface has a lot to do with black body radiation. Understanding how this works helps you cut through a lot of lies about global warming.
Dark energy cannot be seen... Can electromagnetic radiation be seen? There is electromagnetic radiation everywhere in the universe, UV radiation, X-rays... light radiation, this radiation traverses the universe. When this radiation shines on matter, it can change the matter, e.g. heat it up. Why not equate dark energy with electromagnetic radiation?
We have devices that can see the radiation.
The harmonics of infinite infinities are negative infinities, the average harmonic of negative infinities is the standard deviation of infinite infinities. Warp drives are really tiny and quite inconsequential unless your far too consequential to be pertinent, like a red hat death star galaxy proton. A real force emerges from point capacitances of density / mass as the system can gain surface area over an infinite volume of capacitance, like lightning or gamma ray showers.
It feels like a Guassian surface in electromagnetics. Though just because the sum over the Gaussian surface is zero, doesn't mean nothing of interest is going in inside that isn't represented on the surface. There could be whole EM machine inside the little balls, computer chips and all with complex interactions going on.
Imagination v Fantasy
Imagine that the universe is an invisible grid. Light must travel through each square, and this determines its speed. When matter reaches a critical mass it creates gravity. The only questions that we need answered are, what is the scale of the grid. Dark matter. And, what is the critical mass. Gravity. Simples. Blessings. 🐝♾️❤️
Principle v Value
"Marvelousness is simply afoot." 🙏♾️❤️
Order v Control
If that is true, then: What is happening inside a blackhole, also must be holographically drawn at his surface.
I think we need to start over cuz some of these ideas don’t make any sense. We’re still running around talking about fundamental “forces”, basically space magic. The only property that we actually understand is gravity as a curve in space time. It’s simple and makes sense. I suspect all of the forces and mysteries equate to a simple idea like that but we’re so stuck on building new ideas off poor ones that we can’t see the forest from the trees.
it's not that the ideas are poor, it's that local correlations are easier to observe and experiment on than global ones. We can be locally precise while being horribly inaccurate in a universal sense.
We have a pretty solid understanding of quantum mechanics... the problem is fitting those two understandings together. As a chemist, I could sooner dispense with relativity than quantum mechanics. Anyone who works with spectroscopy knows how reliable our quantum models are.
No, this has nothing to do with "magic".
And it's really interesting that you claim that we understand gravity, but not the other forces... other people keep telling me that we do _not_ understand gravity, because we don't know how to quantize it, but that we _do_ understand the other forces, because we do know how to quantize those. :D
Oh, and the other forces _also_ can be interpreted as curvature. Not of spacetime, but of so-called "fiber bundles". E. g. electromagnetism is a consequence of the curvature of a U(1) fiber bundle.
The voices in my head are confused. Are they compressions of compressions of compressions...bound by darkness?
I'm close to going crazy. I hope AGI will solve physics and we can finally live peaceful lives.
"The one won a Noble Prize and the other was called an asshole." Hahahahaha. You're a delight.
"Djerrart Thauooft"? Damn that hurts.
The fact that there is a limit to our observable universe does not mean that the universe stops at that limit. There is ample evidence to suggest that the universe is much larger than the bit we can see. The crucial point that never seems to be mentioned is that the effects of the universe beyond our visible limit such as gravity will still extend through the visible boundary. If the gravitational mass of the universe outside the visible boundary is greater than the area we can observe, then the effect would appear from our viewpoint to be an accelerating expansion of our bit of the universe. Dark energy/matter, but only because it is beyond the observable limit, but it is still just everyday normal matter and energy.
That could perhaps explain dark energy - but how would that explain dark matter?!?
I think it's a consequence of universal expansion carrying mass past the hubble radius faster than light.
So where is the surface? If it's always somewhere else from where you're at, it isn't anywhere. Or it's everywhere! Maybe it's an infinity of surfaces piled on top of each other. What would then be a good shorthand for it? Space?
If I start a website devoted to holographic images, will some ignorant politicians try to get it banned?
I can flow with this idea. There are now a few mathematical relationships that show a Black hole Universe is not totally far fetched. Nice. If I remember: Leonard was good till he became infected with string.
Im delighted that I understood the concept of losing my keys (inside my pocket). I equate it to the real-life experience of losing my head-mounted torch (still sitting securely upon my head). As for the rest of the video, well, I guess it was above my head.
don't look behind the curtain
Whoops, let me put that away.
So, where exactly is the surface of our Universe?
This sounds like one of those ideas that could have a lot of potential. It reminds me of all the various fluxes, or the shell theorm for gravity, or even just the fact that our experiences here on earth happen at the surface of our own bodies (our retinas, ear drums, skin). Certainly, the only information I'll ever recieve from the universe can be limited to what passes through my own surface area... but when I reverse the flow, it seems we miss a lot of info: you might see me, but you don't see my intestines, or the nuclei in my cells, or any of the hundreds of millions of things going on underneath. That stuff is all still happening in the volume, although you don't see it on the surface 🤔
I'm going to bet it's not a deep principle of the universe, but merely a mathematical formality. Like the fluxes, and shell theorm of gravity &c.
The box might tell you it tastes great. But you won't know till you open the box and eat some.
Then the upshot is that quantum gravity is a three dimensional construct of light and information.
RUclips is shadowbanning my posts but pretty sure it's that space can be accelerated faster than light, and black holes do this at their event Horizon, but this effectively sends the space back in time. You can test it because supermassive black holes create a halo of extra space around themselves at some distance where the space decelerates into the present and that means you get a halo of extra space around galaxies that has effects on lensing, spin rates, and could possibly be observed by looking at the gravitational waves coming off a merger/collision
There's nothing wrong with this idea, we just need to make up ways that fits exactly to what we want it to be. Or something.
I wonder if a black hole has a nucleus?
Even if all the math is correct we're still left holding an empty sack. Even if A correlates with B it doesn't mean either is the change agent.
The physicists version of Indra's net?
I do think the right answer too dark matter and dark energy right now is some kind of topological answer. it might be that it's the holographic principle, or it might also be that the universe isn't flat. It's the only simple answer that really makes sense to me right now.
So Platon could be kind of right, after all..?
That makes me wonder what the source of the hologram is. I remember there is a theory about an "anti-universe"
Thank you Sabine.
Would a holographic universe explain entanglement? Two particles distant from one another in our space, but adjacent, or co-located, on the holographic surface?
Strikes me that so far, they're using the expansion of the universe (at the boundary) to explain the expansion of the volume.
Pardoning the expression, but that seems circular to me.
This would benefit from an exact definition for hologram>
They can teach physics, but you can't teach someone to be funny. Those who do research, do. Those who cannot, do exclusively content creation.
Seems like theories have flaws, and we patch them with made-up crap. Like unicorns exist, but the horn is from transparent matter, that we can not detect.
Look out, here comes galaxy brain Weric Weinstein
I immediately watch your videos when they show in my feed. And you're right, as usual. The box sure does move the nuts when you shake it! 😂
I thought me mother in law was holographic, but then she disappeared down a black hole, so obviously she was made of entropy.
An idea i saw.... although certainly must have been disproven by math by now?
If time is slowed around mass, then lower mass areas would appear to move and expand faster in space. This could explain why edges of galaxies move "too fast" and why the universe is seemingly expanding at an increasing rate.
But certainly this must have been thought of by Einstein
The holographic universe is not new; it has always been indirectly the philosophy of Plato, Descartes, Kant, Hegel, and Schopenhauer. Today, we have just understood it scientifically. We can explain it rationally since the works of Schrodinger, Ilya Prigogine, Nambu, and Yoshinori Ohsumi have labored indirectly in that direction. All the ingredients are present and there is no doubt: the probability that we live in an energy hologram is 99 to 1. Religion also has been talking about it since then; one verse that supports it is Isaiah 45:7. Today, religion, philosophy, and science support the holographic reality of the universe. People who disagree will not stand a debate in front of a knowledgeable audience. One of the reasons materialist scientists struggle to understand it can be found in Dirac's 1931 paper: "Quantised Singularities in the Electromagnetic Field."
Look at my idea just sent to preprint server "A New Theory of Gravity: Space Flow and Its Interaction with Massive and Massless Particles" I love your comments .
I salute you,as you helped me to came out of misinterpretation of double slit experiment,if somehow you make your lectures available in Hindi dubbing it could have helped us immensely.
There's something outside of this universe pulling on it?
what if we look at it from the wrong side?
maybe the thing about information being stored in a certain space is more or less true in the sense that energy wants to exist in a certain space but the energy is currently in too small a space and wants to expand
(because everything is basically made of energy)
and it just keeps getting faster because everything is already moving and is only being held back by its inertia?
Dark Energy could be unicorn poop!
And if that surface is connected to the rest of the universe you would be able simulate the whole universe using a single piece of fairy cake, and never have to leave the office again!
The holographic premise creates space for the egotistical human mind. If true, we have a chance to understand what is too big and too far away for true measurements outside of quanta of light and its shifts as it passes through something.
Holodeck Sol3 is on the blink again.
Send in the Dodgy Theory Puncture Repair Squad!
I think the real question, is, “How do we get bubbles in the tub?”
🙈🙉🙊
The 'Radox' Theory?
I think you guys have it in reverse matter is holographic being projected from dark matter like a film red room
I think that sounds stupid as hell.
From what I've read elsewhere, the holographic principle only applies to infinite volumes and infinite surfaces around them.
The video _you're watching_ states the exact opposite.
@@unduloid Yes. Exactly. That's why I specified that I read it elsewhere. Otherwise, I'd be wrong.
@@darrennew8211
Where did you read it. Donald Duck magazine?
How the nuts move around if you shake the box!? Are you playing innuendo bingo with your friends? 😂
I think the way the expansion rate changes with time can be represented by the Schwarzschild metric. Why? Because I think that space emerges from time but time is fundamental.
The universe only needed the energy of time to come into existence and we automatically got space along with it.
Gravity is the curvature (changing) if time and so is the cosmic expansion. (Dark energy is the changing rate of time over the aons).
So we might expect the same curvature of time away from the big bang temporally, as from a black hole with distance away. i.e. Schwarzschild.
We are currently on the "flat bit" of the curve where time is changing very slowly now. It is almost linear. Earlier in the universe the time rate change, or curvature, would have been extremely fast, giving rise to "inflation", whereas we now only have "expansion".
If we had existed during inflationary times, we wouldn't even be considering the holographic principle.
I think the holographic principle is crap.
The holographic principle as we define it according to the agreement between religion, philosophy, and science, stipulates that another reality, energetic by essence, lies behind this material world. As Einstein’s equation (E=MC2) shows, an unknown energy realm projects out as the material world. First, the material world emerged as a dialectic unit made of order and disorder. Then life emerged and carried order and disorder into a dialectic process known as the entangled system degradation/synthesis. As Professor Ohsumi said, life is a tightly controlled balance between synthesis and degradation.
Finally, a solution that doesn't smell of fudge!
Is this idea testable on any other than cosmic scale? Is it even possible or is it just pure math excersise? I also like this holographic principle, but would like to know if we can prove it in any way.
There have been claims that it can be tested with interferometers www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269321006031
Excellent video as ever
This episode is so packed with information I was worried it might collapse on itself.
First, black holes do no "store" information. That's a Kindergarden metrics, based onn a lack of object-oriented thinking, and a lack of short-term memory.
The holographic principle likewise: since when could you distort the causality within the observed chai of events by holding a magnet to a cathode ray tube TV showing a holographic or whatever image of those underlying events?
You know computer science is not physics? Because a lot of CS people seem to think that computer design models work for the universe.
Entropy is the cause of expansion.
Honestly, isn't most theoritical physics almost like talking about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Its no different then the act of communication realistically speaking math is an angel it can translate the idea but itll never be a entity
The expansion of the Universe isn't speeding up. Our ability to see farther is speeding up.
Dark energy & dark matter….mysterious frontiers for speculation & discoveries
Samstagnachmittag auf der Couch, erst Marianne Rosenberg Videos geschaut und jetzt Frau Dr. Hossenfelder - wird wohl irgendwie Sinn ergeben - was wissen wir schon 😊
Dark energy there's a lot we still don't know about😕
Yeah like how made up it is.
Sabine, do you think there is a connection between the nonlocality of the holographic principle and superdeterminism (maybe the fractal Tim Palmer kind)?
Seems the brainiacs are fixated on a thesis of " it has to be".
Our lack of understanding does not, our arrogance does not preclude our understanding.
Keep kicking ass!
Cool to have a quiz :0
We are just scratching the surface 😆🥁
Krumps! what year is it?
Gerard 't Hooft has also in interesting perspective on physics, but nobody seems to care. I think his Cellular automata interpretation of quantum Mechanics is interesting; however physicists are not familiar with Cellular automata. Who knows, a future Nobel prize can go to a computer scientist. Also, Gerard 't Hooft interpretation of quanta is deterministic. Just saying.
New conspiracy theory: Everything and everyone you know is really a cardboard cutout, but each time you want to take a peek behind it, it will quickly reconfigure itself...