Physics: Life is a holograph

[Winston001]

Fascinating article on the substance of reality: http://www.globalone.tv/group/quantumquest/forum/topics/is-the-universe-a-holographic

The theory is that what we see is only part of a deeper connected Universe which is beyond our perception. It answers the well-known quantum puzzle of how a particle in one place can affect another extremely remote particle at the same instant.

It always pays to keep an open mind but this proposition answers a lot of questions about matter. Essentially everything is connected and information jumps from place to place. For example the human brain doesn't work in a logical sequence like a computer so why are we able to instantly bring up images - such as a zebra - when most of us rarely have anything to do with this animal.

Interesting.

[Okey Dokey]

The science is amazing, isn't it?

[Hans]

I have skimmed over the article and my first impression is that it's slightly misleading and factually inaccurate. I'll read it properly and post my somewhat informed opinion. I do find this subject fascinating.

[Hitcher]

If life is a holograph, then why does it hurt so much when one falls off one's motorcycle?

[Hans]

If life is a holograph, then why does it hurt so much when one falls off one's motorcycle?

It only hurts when the information plane and your particular reality intersect. The cost of such a crash is, however, not subject to common physics and seems to follow it's own rules.

[Hans]

Can't be bothered taking the whole article apart. I will, however, point out the errors in the introduction alone.


"In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science."
WRONG. THE EXPERIMENT TOOK PLACE IN 1980. THE PAPER DETAILING THE EXPERIMENT WAS PUBLISHED IN 1982.

"Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart. "
BOLLOCKS. THE UPPER LIMIT FOR THIS "ACTION OVER DISTANCE" HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.

"Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations."
UTTER BOLLOCKS. INFORMATION CANNOT BE TRANSMITTED IN THIS WAY. UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE, THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS THE LIMIT FOR COMMUNICATION.

Make up your own minds on how reliable the rest of the article is. Not that it wouldn't be extremely interesting, if there was something to this basic theory.

[rainman]

Us Buddhists figured this out ages ago.

Oh, and so much for rugged individualism.

[Pixie]

Can't be bothered taking the whole article apart. I will, however, point out the errors in the introduction alone.


"In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science."
WRONG. THE EXPERIMENT TOOK PLACE IN 1980. THE PAPER DETAILING THE EXPERIMENT WAS PUBLISHED IN 1982.

"Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart. "
BOLLOCKS. THE UPPER LIMIT FOR THIS "ACTION OVER DISTANCE" HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.

"Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations."
UTTER BOLLOCKS. INFORMATION CANNOT BE TRANSMITTED IN THIS WAY. UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE, THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS THE LIMIT FOR COMMUNICATION.

Make up your own minds on how reliable the rest of the article is. Not that it wouldn't be extremely interesting, if there was something to this basic theory.

The fact that entangled particles affect each other,by definition,implies that information was transferred.

Shrodinger's cat is still at the vet's

[NighthawkNZ]

Fascinating article on the substance of reality: http://www.globalone.tv/group/quantumquest/forum/topics/is-the-universe-a-holographic

The theory is that what we see is only part of a deeper connected Universe which is beyond our perception. It answers the well-known quantum puzzle of how a particle in one place can affect another extremely remote particle at the same instant.

It always pays to keep an open mind but this proposition answers a lot of questions about matter. Essentially everything is connected and information jumps from place to place. For example the human brain doesn't work in a logical sequence like a computer so why are we able to instantly bring up images - such as a zebra - when most of us rarely have anything to do with this animal.

Interesting.

saying that for ever... ;) Matrix movies any one???? I mean come on...

[NighthawkNZ]

If life is a holograph, then why does it hurt so much when one falls off one's motorcycle?

Safety protocols of the Holodeck have been switched off...

[Hans]

The fact that entangled particles affect each other,by definition,implies that information was transferred.

Shrodinger's cat is still at the vet's

So far we can only observe the changes in the state of these entangled particles-not cause them. In other words: At the moment it cannot be used to transmit information at FTL speeds. As for information on the state of the particles travelling FTL, it doesn't matter because we can't observe that information. And you know how important the role of the observer is in relativistic physics, right?

[Hans]

To elaborate: If you can't observe something, you can't put it in a frame of reference. So speed becomes irrelevant. At least in relativistic physics-which is exactly the branch that forbids faster-than-light-just-about-everything.

[avgas]

Hmmmm recognizing things we don't deal with.
We are taught at a young age to recognize many things - most of which we won't deal with.
Zebra is a common example - and a good one. You will always remember a zebra for a very simple reason
ITS A BIT STRIPEY FUCKING HORSE

You remember a Giraffe or an elephant for the same reason.
Its is though association that you make similar conclusions later in life - this is why you know a horse doesn't have stripes - but your pretty sure the 2 are related. Note robots are only now just getting to this stage. Honda's latest little lovely can now determine that a table is not a chair.

This is why babies don't know what the fuck a zebra is, but does not explain how they know who mum is.......but the theory goes that the 2 have already known each other for 9 months.

Scary concept is the fact that no one has been able to explain what exists between the nucleus and the electrons, and apparently this is the only thing that gives us depth or volume.

Today young men on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather.

[Pixie]

So far we can only observe the changes in the state of these entangled particles-not cause them. In other words: At the moment it cannot be used to transmit information at FTL speeds. As for information on the state of the particles travelling FTL, it doesn't matter because we can't observe that information. And you know how important the role of the observer is in relativistic physics, right?
I never said "we".
Information was transferred

[avgas]

To elaborate: If you can't observe something, you can't put it in a frame of reference. So speed becomes irrelevant. At least in relativistic physics-which is exactly the branch that forbids faster-than-light-just-about-everything.
Lovely so this is all based on perception.
Nice to know we have such a solid baseline of reference
dont tell the blind people!!!

[avgas]

Shrodinger's cat is still at the vet's
With a bad case of curiosity?

[Hans]

Lovely so this is all based on perception.
Nice to know we have such a solid baseline of reference
dont tell the blind people!!!

No, it's not. It's based on observation. The point is: the outcome is based on the situation of the observer. Any number of individual observers in an identical position will give identical outcomes. Hence it's not perception.

[Winston001]

WRONG. THE EXPERIMENT TOOK PLACE IN 1980. THE PAPER DETAILING THE EXPERIMENT WAS PUBLISHED IN 1982.


BOLLOCKS. THE UPPER LIMIT FOR THIS "ACTION OVER DISTANCE" HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.


UTTER BOLLOCKS. INFORMATION CANNOT BE TRANSMITTED IN THIS WAY. UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE, THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS THE LIMIT FOR COMMUNICATION.

Make up your own minds on how reliable the rest of the article is. Not that it wouldn't be extremely interesting, if there was something to this basic theory.

I'm pretty much with you but have a few general comments:



Einstein did not say in Special Relativity that you cannot travel faster than light.

What he did postulate was that the velocity of light is independent of the velocity of the source




Poincare postulated - before Einstein - that the speed of light was an upper limit for mass and information.



Physicists argue about this today and there are experiments which demonstrate negative velocity ie. when a pulse appears before it is sent. Such is the wonderful world of the quantum. :D http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077368/



We don't know the distance quantum entanglement occurs over but nothing so far confirms its only local time/space.

I think the article on holographic information has a few holes in it but its written for non-scientists which can be forgiven. I don't like the meandering into metaphysics at the end but acknowledge that is a logical path.

The essential point is that a holographic view of the universe where everything is connected - presumably in the sea of quantum foam - is a fascinating proposition. It answers some weird stuff and is worth thinking about.

[avgas]

Any number of individual observers in an identical position will give identical outcomes.
Are you sure about that.
History has told us otherwise.

[Banditbandit]

The fact that entangled particles affect each other,by definition,implies that information was transferred.

Shrodinger's cat is still at the vet's

No it doesn't. Information implies a high level cognative skill which is not evident in particles.

[Banditbandit]

Lovely so this is all based on perception.
Nice to know we have such a solid baseline of reference
dont tell the blind people!!!

Yes. Change your perception - change the world ... The basis of the dharma ...

[Banditbandit]

No, it's not. It's based on observation. The point is: the outcome is based on the situation of the observer. Any number of individual observers in an identical position will give identical outcomes. Hence it's not perception.

Yes .. but all observation is intertwined with perception. There can be no observation from an objective position. Multiple observers seeing identical outcomes just means they share the same perceptions.

I want to qualify that a little .. because the repetative nature of our apparent world is the basis of our functioning within it. Gravity always causes things to fall towards each other ... friction allows us to walk ...

However, how we break up and label the world is tied up with our perceptions, which are developed and indoctirnated with language and the culture we grew up in. (Read Kant .. )

[Edbear]

No, it's not. It's based on observation. The point is: the outcome is based on the situation of the observer. Any number of individual observers in an identical position will give identical outcomes. Hence it's not perception.

Would it not be observation of measurable experiments? Not dependent upon the perceptions of the observer but the observer simply records the results, not affecting the outcome.

How does it apply that the situation of the observer affects the outcome?

[Banditbandit]

Anyway ... that was fun ... but next thing we'll be discussing Sheldrake's theory of Morphic Fields and how one person in Godzone learning to handle the new R1 will help the rest of us become better riders ...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Edbear]

Yes .. but all observation is intertwined with perception. There can be no observation from an objective position. Multiple observers seeing identical outcomes just means they share the same perceptions.

I want to qualify that a little .. because the repetative nature of our apparent world is the basis of our functioning within it. Gravity always causes things to fall towards each other ... friction allows us to walk ...

However, how we break up and label the world is tied up with our perceptions, which are developed and indoctirnated with language and the culture we grew up in. (Read Kant .. )

Are you referring to philosophical debate or scientific experiment and observation?

[slofox]

... all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves...

The older I get and the closer I get to death, the more I begin to suspect just exactly this...

My old man said to me not long before he kicked the bucket "It's all a big fat nothing son..."

I reckon the old bugger was on to it, meself...

[Banditbandit]

Are you referring to philosophical debate or scientific experiment and observation?

Hmmm ... the philosophy has to underpin the science. Berkley started it ... Kant had a hand in it ... then Ayers and co (the logical positivists) had a go ...

Science is generally not what most people think it is ... Try Feyerabend .. my favourite philospher of science ...

[hayd3n]

just forget about all this and go for a ride, thats where the fun physics are

[Hans]

Would it not be observation of measurable experiments? Not dependent upon the perceptions of the observer but the observer simply records the results, not affecting the outcome.

How does it apply that the situation of the observer affects the outcome?

a) Correct.

b) It does in relativistic physics. For example: As the relative speed of an observer and an object increases, the object appears shorter. In other words: As the relative speed approaches the speed of light, the relative length approaches zero. Relative speed is a "situation". Excuse my engrish, maybe I should have used the word "state"

[Hans]

Are you sure about that.
History has told us otherwise.

But this is Physics. Much unlike History, you can't bend it whichever way suits.

[NighthawkNZ]

Much unlike History, you can't bend it whichever way suits.

you can bend history if people get taught and told the wrong thing about your past... ;) however I believe you are correct

[gatch]

Today young men on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather.

Die Eier Von Satan !

[avgas]

But this is Physics. Much unlike History, you can't bend it whichever way suits.
Bwhahaha yeah right.
Physics text books still state that their is nothing consistent in chaos. And that results that do no meet the grain of figures are erroneous.
Admittedly it has still come forward a small amount - and we are slowly correcting some wrongs. But there is still a strong society of the 'old boys club' resident in many papers that a being published.
Unfortunately you are correct - you can't bend it..........but this is more political than anything else.

[Edbear]

Isn't "Bend It" a song...?:innocent:

[Winston001]

Hmmmm recognizing things we don't deal with.
We are taught at a young age to recognize many things - most of which we won't deal with.
Zebra is a common example - and a good one. You will always remember a zebra for a very simple reason
ITS A BIT STRIPEY FUCKING HORSE

You remember a Giraffe or an elephant for the same reason.
Its is though association that you make similar conclusions later in life - this is why you know a horse doesn't have stripes - but your pretty sure the 2 are related.

Ah but you didn't read the link. Fair enough. The point is that a computer when shown a zebra would run through its memory of images in a logical progression, drilling down until something like a zebra was found.

The human brain does not work that way. Instead it has almost instant access to memories without having to go through a file discarding irrelevant data. Even more remarkably, a damaged human brain can still hold complete memories from before the damage.

The concept is that there are structures in the universe - the human brain being one - which contain complete information within the smallest parts. A holographic memory. The proposition is that these small parts are connected to the rest of the universe where all information is stored.

I think. I'll freely confess this is way over the edge of my knowledge. :D

[NighthawkNZ]

The human brain does not work that way. Instead it has almost instant access to memories without having to go through a file discarding irrelevant data.

I clear our my brain cache files regularly... but some times I delete the wrong files... (like that advert on tv guy in brain throws away a file then in life he keeps working into a door) ummm where am I again...?