Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday January 31 2017, @12:44AM   Printer-friendly
from the are-we-really-here? dept.

A UK, Canadian and Italian study has provided what researchers believe is the first observational evidence that our universe could be a vast and complex hologram.

Theoretical physicists and astrophysicists, investigating irregularities in the cosmic microwave background (the 'afterglow' of the Big Bang), have found there is substantial evidence supporting a holographic explanation of the universe -- in fact, as much as there is for the traditional explanation of these irregularities using the theory of cosmic inflation.
...
A holographic universe, an idea first suggested in the 1990s, is one where all the information, which makes up our 3D 'reality' (plus time) is contained in a 2D surface on its boundaries.

Professor Kostas Skenderis of Mathematical Sciences at the University of Southampton explains: "Imagine that everything you see, feel and hear in three dimensions (and your perception of time) in fact emanates from a flat two-dimensional field. The idea is similar to that of ordinary holograms where a three-dimensional image is encoded in a two-dimensional surface, such as in the hologram on a credit card. However, this time, the entire universe is encoded!"

So there is a reason you feel like you're living in the Matrix.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 31 2017, @10:00AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 31 2017, @10:00AM (#461124) Journal

    How much of what physicists are doing isn't experimentally determinable and of actual consequence to our lives?

    You should be thinking about what has already been experimentally determinable here. We have already determined that there are a large number of mass concentrations consistent with being black holes. We are not just speaking of purely theoretical objects.

    Bottom line here is that just because scientists are really, really sure about their math, doesn't make it real.

    My view is that when the patterns of math manifest in reality (and there wouldn't be reality without some sort of pattern of consistency in the first place), then it doesn't matter how sure we are about our math, or even if we are at all aware of the pattern. The consequences follow as surely as 2+2=4.