Dec 12 - The Universe Is A Hologram!!!???

[Arishok]

That's an interesting observation fam but let me ask you do you believe everything is real? and if not what method do you use to determine what is real and what is not.

Reality is relative

 

[Chesirecatdaddy]

There is a fifth dimension, beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition..

the outer limits

 

[Deadpool1986]

"Simply, we are living in a virtual reality in which our brains trick us into believing matter, space and time exist when there's only vibrating strings of energy. Our reality is determined by our brain's individual perception of these vibrating strings. If something comes along and changes the frequency at which these strings vibrate our reality changes. We do this all the time physically, but it has also been proven scientifically that the electromagnetic fields generated by our hearts can do this much more efficiently without the limitations of time and space. We just haven't learned to harness this internal technology yet."

http://holographicuniverseworkshops.com/

 

[Ego Noir]

@Napoleon that's exactly your problem. You want everything black or white, numeric, proven and defined by substantiated-- whatever.

Spirituality in a simple definition is a state of being. Thoughts, emotions, feeling are all aspects thereof.

It is an abstract concept that is not definable, only understood. Parallel to how I can spend here to years beyond explaining [murderous-hate] to you, and you will never grasp it's true [spirit] until your self is being enveloped by [murderous-hate].

Stop being so confrontational and just discuss with nikkas, we ain't trying to push and shove all the time

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

@Napoleon

+rep to anyone who breaks down the op article into about 4 or 5 sentences so us simpletons can better grasp this theory

Usually when articles like this come out I try to go to the comments and see what the flaws are cause most times this shyt is just link-bait like every new "we cured cancer!" paper that comes out...and doesn't really mean what the headline says.

I'll just grab some of the most salient comments I saw from the reddit on this.

@Uncle Kingpin was right about the reference to the book he suggested in the HL post as being relevant...but all that other shyt about quantum entanglement being inherently present in cognition is just straight conjecture.

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1smk3f/simulations_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/




http://www.reddit.com/r/science/com...ons_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/cdz3qsq

One paragraph I think everyone who has seen this headline should read:

Neither of the model universes explored by the Japanese team resembles our own, Maldacena notes. The cosmos with a black hole has ten dimensions, with eight of them forming an eight-dimensional sphere. The lower-dimensional, gravity-free one has but a single dimension, and its menagerie of quantum particles resembles a group of idealized springs, or harmonic oscillators, attached to one another.

So... a proof-of-principle that a universe with gravity in many dimensions can be modelled by interactions in a universe without gravity in fewer dimensions. Well, great, I suppose: the holographic principle can be used to make calculations, but no predictions have been made about our actual known universe despite the first sentence saying:

A team of physicists has provided some of the clearest evidence yet that our Universe could be just one big projection.

This might be technically true, but looks to me like pure sensationalism.​

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/com...ons_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/cdz37ng

First off:

• Don't mistakenly associate the word hologram with the Matrix or a StarTrek holodeck. It's a mathematical representation of something inside something else. It's like a video playing on your screen: it's there, but it doesn't take place on your actual screen. It also hold more or different "dimensions" than your screen is (you're watching a 3d videorecording on a 2d screen).
• Dimensions are a though concept. It's not just about left right up down "and time being the fourth dimension" - it's a mathematical system that goes over the head of many. For now, consider them as "variables of a calculation", where the calculation is the system.

Then, what does (roughly) means:

• Stringtheory is a (albeit debated) theoretic framework that explains all the different particles and behaviour.
• Strings are 1-dimensional objects.
• They run into a lot of problems explaining all the stuff happening in the universe, what happens in black holes (look up black hole entropy for example) and gravity and such.
• In order to explain part of the stuff happening they need 10 dimensions to make the math work.
• In order to explain a different part of the stuff happening and work with string theory, they have 1 dimension to make the math work
• They have managed to make the math between these two systems correspond to eachother. So they can now use the 10 dimensional calculations and place these "inside" the 1 dimensional calculations.
• This gets them a step closer to making the stringtheory as a whole "work".
• Concluding: it doesn't mean we are living a lie or that we're in some sort of fictional world that doesn't exist. It means they have managed to put a 10-dimensional framework inside a 1-dimensional framework, like putting a video on your screen.

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/com...ons_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/cdzb103

A 2D object is a square. Cut it out of the paper. Rotate it so you only see the edge of the paper. That is a 1D representation of the square. It's not very interesting; however, if you rotate the paper back and forth (still keeping it flat - spin by sticking a pencil through it or something, then rotating the pencil), the line will grow and shrink (because the line that goes between diagonal corners is longer than the line which goes down the sides).

So given a constant speed of rotation, you could work out what shape you were looking at. If you add a different colour to each side, then it'd be a lot clearer, as the colours would come and go. Shine a light source and make the sides brighter if they are in the beam, and you get another way to tell how much of each side is showing - and the direction of rotation.

You could then tell the difference between a square, a triangle, an octogon, and so forth.

You'd have to have it moving (or move around it yourself), but that's no different to your 3D world. Is that a cube? I can only see a square. You have to see it from all sides to be sure there's not a different shape on one of the others.

If you want real fun with this, read "Flatland" which is a book about a 2D world inhabited by 2D objects. Then some 3D guy comes and lifts up one of the squares out of his 2D world. His perspective of that world is what you'd see if you got pulled out of our universe and into a 4D universe.

Just as the square can see the insides of all the Flatland houses, you'd see the insides of everyone else's house. If your eye and brain could interpret the images (and light could get up into the 4D universe).

There's a nice moment when a sphere passes through Flatland, and all the inhabitants see is a circle which mysteriously grows larger, then smaller, then fades away.

basically...they did some theoretical math where they removed the influence of gravity to try and make this SIMULATION try and reach the conclusions they had set out for themselves.

This is cool and all...but its not really getting where people think it is. The word "projection" is screwing people up.

 

[Chesirecatdaddy]

Usually when articles like this come out I try to go to the comments and see what the flaws are cause most times this shyt is just link-bait like every new "we cured cancer!" paper that comes out...and doesn't really mean what the headline says.

I'll just grab some of the most salient comments I saw from the reddit on this.

@Uncle Kingpin was right about the reference to the book he suggested in the HL post as being relevant...but all that other shyt about quantum entanglement being inherently present in cognition is just straight conjecture.

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1smk3f/simulations_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/




http://www.reddit.com/r/science/com...ons_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/cdz3qsq



http://www.reddit.com/r/science/com...ons_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/cdz37ng




http://www.reddit.com/r/science/com...ons_back_up_theory_that_universe_is_a/cdzb103





basically...they did some theoretical math where they removed the influence of gravity to try and make this SIMULATION try and reach the conclusions they had set out for themselves.

This is cool and all...but its not really getting where people think it is. The word "projection" is screwing people up.

50% of the participants of this thread understood that when it was described as a hologram it wasn't meant as a projection.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

@Napoleon that's exactly your problem. You want everything black or white, numeric, proven and defined by substantiated-- whatever.

or maybe you could learn to actually not waste your time saying things devoid of actual content.

Spirituality in a simple definition is a state of being. Thoughts, emotions, feeling are all aspects thereof.

Great. So its a result of perception as a result of neurological stimuli.

That does not mean it exists externally of the one perceiving said events or experiences.

It is abstract concept that is not definable, only understood. Parallel to how I can spend here to years beyond explaining [murderous-hate] to you, and you will never grasp it's true [spirit] until your self is being enveloped by [murderous-hate].

Understanding motivations isn't the same as saying that such emotions exist EXTERNALLY of said entity.

If its an ideological concept, keep it there.

Otherwise, stay in your lane of psychology.

Stop being so confrontational and just discuss with nikkas, we ain't trying to push and shove all the time

Stop speaking in vague generalities then.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

50% of the participants of this thread understood that when it was described as a hologram it wasn't meant as a projection.

and you're in the other 50% that wanna bring in your spiritual bullshyt.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Not even that, a lot of people are confused on the word "spiritual" because, for so long, it's been attached to the word "religion". But anything that affects you can be spiritual and people go through spiritual change all the time both religious and non-religious.

if its not tangible but a relative emotional concept then stop trying to make it more than what it is.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

And yet none of them, including us, can see all of the dimensions and all the spectrums.

SO?!

 

[Arishok]

if its not tangible but a relative emotional concept then stop trying to make it more than what it is.

I never said it was tangible nor more than what it is and if I did, I didn't mean to. I actually stated it's the exact opposite of tangible if I'm not mistaken

 

[Chesirecatdaddy]

and you're in the other 50% that wanna bring in your spiritual bullshyt.

and you're the nikka who thinks that if we can't measure something it doesn't exist.

That "spiritual bullshyt" figured out shyt that science just did within the last decade. Humble yourself.

 

[Poitier]

Great. So its a result of perception as a result of neurological stimuli.

You couldn't have passed your neuroscience classes. You should know that the perception or brain anatomy question hasn't been resolved but it is thought to be 1:1 and neither is subordinate of the other.

 

[saint25225]

.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Man this is whats so funny about this.

Some of ya'll are LITERALLY too hung up on these vague ass indefined concepts of "spirituality" that you're so excited to try and inject it in the latest findings of perception or reasonings behind math that attempts to explain reality.

Its hilarious. Ya'll's only exposure to these concepts comes through youtube and the discovery channel but ya'll ain't got the patience to learn where your arguments are flaws, the limits of what you DONT understand, the inaccuracies of the things you DO believe, and even further, are unwilling to actually invest the time to understand what's being asserted.

Its the same FOOLS ready to jump to conclusions to try and make ANYTHING fit their presuppositions.

Kill religion.

can we just be done with these vague ass notions and corny bloviating wannabes who don't contribute anything besides verbal diarrhea and word soup to the discussion???