Does Space Emerge From A Holographic Boundary?

[@foxglovelove8379]

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

[@MarcoLandin]

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

[@lethargogpeterson4083]

Thank you.

[@bardsamok9221]

"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.

[@ZakiAsir]

​@@bardsamok9221 bro dropped out 💀💀💀

[@fusionfan6883]

@@bardsamok9221Your bitterness seems to be an emergent property of your failure to launch😵‍💫

[@pembrokeisland9954]

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.

[@Hyperbolic_G]

This description made things click

[@geoffwales8646]

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.

[@SuperCharlie-fb4vw]

Thanks for pointing out these dualities in IT. Your point is so interesting!

[@lucascipriano1665]

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

[@marknajam9710]

Also think of it like this You have code for the "world" in a game You have code for the "charachters" in the game You have code that allows for the interaction of the "characters " with the "world" and with each other and the NPC's. All are often written in the programming languages. Sometimes different. All interact with each other and all are, in the final analysis, translated into binary. So you are projecting from the outside in but are constrained by the rules of binary which means inside to out..

[@thecodewarrior7925]

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!

[@frun]

What if there is only one shell, evolving in time, so called RG time or renormalization group time?

[@Exodus5K]

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?

[@anonymousaardvarkinnigeria8721]

Legendary science communicators!

[@maxmccann3030]

My comment is @exodus

[@DrDeuteron]

@@Exodus5Kyes, except formally similar, not colloquially similar.

[@PenDanger2]

I understand less than 1% but I am still so happy that this dude is talking and I get to hear it.

[@arsenelupiniii8040]

English accent sells a lot of BS!

[@BlueKitsune72]

​@@arsenelupiniii8040im pretty sure that's a kiwi accent.

[@moldman5694]

@@arsenelupiniii8040 Australian

[@saagartrivedi4190]

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!

[@pbsspacetime]

thank you for your many years of support!

[@batmanchurch]

Q​@@pbsspacetime

[@cosmnik472]

R ​@@batmanchurch

[@ragevsraid7703]

my brain is breaking so hard i might have to take this one in parts

[@richardfarland]

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.

[@LofiHobbit]

Who else watches this weekly but has no idea what's being talked about? 🙌

[@JoyThiefTheBand]

Eventually, through audio osmosis, it will make some sense, lol.

[@laurabutler9978]

Sleep will absorb something, I hope.

[@nunyabiznaz9593]

I’m usually very high…

[@adamwishneusky]

Not always over my head but definitely this one! 😆

[@ObsidianMonarch]

Social engineering stickers are in place to do away with abstract thought. Meanwhile kids today wouldn't recognize #PROPAGANDA if it was advertised on KZbin...

[@jajssblue]

Those Physicists, always projecting. 😂

[@jmcooney2000]

Brilliant 👏

[@corgi42069]

Hey-oo 😂

[@EJ_WA]

🤦‍♂️

[@enragedares5992]

😂🎉

[@patbluetree4636]

Well played . 😁

[@Dampfaeus]

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.

[@privatename3621]

I never believed in singularities. I always saw them as a fabrication to fill in what scientists can't yet understand in the same way man invented endless numbers of pagan gods to explain things like lightning, floods, war, love, etc. Same is true for black holes in general. I remember when I was in the 7th grade many years ago and popular science of the day was just starting to say that there "may" be a black hole in the center of the universe. Even at that age, I thought, we'll OF COURSE there is. Why TF do you think all those stars are swirling around that hot mess of a center like they are circling the drain? They also said "nothing can ever escape a black hole, which I also knew was BS because, not only did not make no sense, but you could also SEE the unfathomably long "exhaust jets" of these black holes shooting out into space for billions of light years. They may now say its just shooting off from the surface, but again I call BS. That stuff is being burped out of the spinning center as it massively compresses all that material and shoots it off as a hyper focused energy beam. Seems the scientific community always takes many years to finally catch up to obvious and common sensibilities, though they fight it every step of the way.

[@blodbotina]

Can't wait to get reminded again next time why this is the best channel I've ever discovered.

[@ericdavison6186]

Have you got a minute? 😊

[@Awesomes007]

Yeah. It's unreasonably effective.

[@arsenelupiniii8040]

Brittish accent! Makes people feel smarter, when in reality it is ALL bs!

[@DangerousDac]

This is the first video that seems to have actually succeeded in getting me to understand the whole concept of the Holographic principle.

[@toby8814]

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.

[@liamfinlay2039]

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

[@Cruxvae]

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.

[@OllamhDrab]

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. :)

[@michaelearnest1983]

Well, according to the video, if you understand something on a surface level, then you understand it completely!

[@davidwright8432]

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.

[@clarkthomas354]

So basically we really don't know how the universe works.

[@WREFMAN]

@@OllamhDrabheehee

[@TheRABIDdude]

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.

[@napotronix]

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.

[@ontoya1]

That's exactly what I thought 😂

[@nobody.of.importance]

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.

[@HansStrijker]

I came to the comments to write exactly this. 🤣

[@das_it_mane]

Which part didn't you get?

[@HansStrijker]

@@das_it_mane Yes. Well not entirely true. I understood the solar eclipse shirt section.

[@addyyyyg]

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 👀

[@lordemed1]

'Everything we know., or will know will ultimately be emergent

[@grayshadowglade]

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.

[@supreetsahu1964]

I totally understood all that

[@ColeDedhand]

Yes, so did I. Absolutely.

[@enragedares5992]

I now have a complete understanding 😊 ...... of what a person who does not speak English experiences when watching a video in English 😂

[@ShippyJack]

Great, could one of you guys summarize it for me in your own words? Cause I have no sweet clue!!!

[@rackmarkus]

@@ShippyJack42

[@LuisSierra42]

@@ShippyJack star trek

[@ReiHinoSenshi]

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.

[@sakismpalatsias4106]

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.

[@NontrivialZetaZeros]

He does dumb it down, sorry.

[@sakismpalatsias4106]

@@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.

[@phelan8385]

​@@NontrivialZetaZerosit's simplified, not dumbed down.

[@andyc8707]

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!

[@theviscount-ke2ml]

When I watch PBS Space Time, I really do think I should be outside bashing rocks together

[@arsenelupiniii8040]

Brittish accent has always had that effect. They sell a ton a crap that way.

[@JK7H]

Reject physics, return to the wild

[@LeeLynch1]

@@arsenelupiniii8040 He doesn't have a British accent :)

[@fl00d69]

I always said even the trees were a bad move and no one should have left the oceans.

[@jamesstaggs4160]

It's stuff like this that keeps me up at night. There's really only two choices, one, you arrive at a "primal" or "uncaused" thing/object/event which is weird because I don't think we know pf any process that doesn't have a cause, or two, we have infinite regress, which is even more strange than number one. I'll lay awake in bed for hours trying to wrap my head around if the universe is infinite or finite, whether time has a starting point or it just goes backward forever and kinda like time was there an actual "first cause" that itself wasn't caused ot does causality regress backwards into infinity. Also if you view reality in just the right way the fact that anything exists at all looks rather odd. This place we inhabit is way stranger and way more mysterious than most of us realize.

[@jmunt]

Dang, I didn't notice it on the last episode but the new credits visuals and music are incredible!

[@rachel_rexxx]

Yay! This one was complex enough that it will require revisiting! 🎉🎉

[@vu4y3fo846y]

This channel never fails to blow my mind

[@TheAmazingBendini]

Extremely excited for this series of upcoming episodes!!

[@ZoonCrypticon]

My most favourite astrophysics presenter!

[@selfsaboteursounds5273]

I've been waiting for you guys to cover this topic for 10 years. This is the true bleeding edge of quantum gravity

[@flo0778]

finally back to headache content, thanks

[@nightblade628]

It’s a bit like how particles at a small scale create sand, and that creates bricks. A collection of bricks becomes a house. Everything is at its own scale a separate thing with different laws and aspects of laws of physics influencing how they all behave. Nobody looks at a city and goes, “look at all those bricks stacked together!” A city is a thing in its own right with its own environmental aspects. But without the bricks, houses, particles of sand… it wouldn’t be anything. However even a single house is its own thing, as is a single brick. So scaling up, for all we know, everything in the universe could simply be a building block of something much larger that we don’t have the scale to appreciate. Maybe a whole universe is a single particle in a cosmological Yorkshire Terrier.

[@PhilipMurphy8Extra]

Its PBS Space Time O Clock folks

[@marcm.]

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)

[@tobiasweberingold]

Quantum entanglement across many scales. Can't wait for that episode!

[@frun]

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.

[@VictorVæsconcelos]

I find it pretty interesting how physics and psychology are connected in the methodological aspects of measurement. As a psychometrician, I like to say that we're trying to model a completely dark room by touch alone, without any external validation.

[@Josh-mu7qy]

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.

[@TheJohnmmullin]

Leonard Susskind has several good talks that explain this more easily. “Easily”.

[@Josh-mu7qy]

@@TheJohnmmullin lol I have seen them. He doesn't even attempt to dumb down. Granted he's typically speaking to colleagues.

[@TheJohnmmullin]

@@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% 😂😂

[@Josh-mu7qy]

@@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.

[@TheJohnmmullin]

@@Josh-mu7qy surely there’s an episode on it?

[@bobjason7540]

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.

[@EleneDOM]

I sometimes have a feeling like that, almost as if we are being physically pulled. I wonder if it's meaningful....

[@grayshadowglade]

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.

[@Om92OneMedia]

@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)...

[@giordano5787]

Yea​@@EleneDOM

[@CATinBOOTS81]

Me: "I don't understand, if the Universe is infinite (as it likely to be), where do we find the Holographic Boundary? At an infinite distance? That doesn't make any sense, what that even means?" Matt: "The Holographic Boundary may not even be at infinite distance, but rather in the FAR FUTURE." Me: "Ah yes! That's more reasonable! 😄"

[@murraymacpherson7528]

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.

[@jesuschrist2284]

Never look directly at a solar eclipse tshirt

[@tdk99-i8n]

I hope Spacetime sells me ISO 12312-2 certified sunglasses so I can decide if I want to buy the shirt

[@arsenelupiniii8040]

Never listen directly to brittish accent, lest you wanna buy some BS!

[@jesuschrist2284]

@@arsenelupiniii8040 what about australian or newzealand accents?

[@javie5080]

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.

[@highstax_xylophones]

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.

[@jordoe8784]

This makes sense as far as I understand Susskind and his lectures. This theory seems to be the only way to possibly join quantum mechanics and gravity along a curved 2d expanding space where bits of information accelerates towards the ‘bulk’ and space emerges.

[@GeorgeJoubert-id2cv]

Short answer: Yes Long Answer: Yes but longer

[@adamb89]

Right answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.

[@GeorgeJoubert-id2cv]

@@adamb89 no

[@corgi42069]

​@@adamb89 it's more like "yeeeeeeeeeeessssss....?"

[@Aragorn7884]

That's what she said? 🤔😏

[@BasicPsychology101]

😆

[@AkamiChannel]

I think it's because everything can be explained by knot theory. Perhaps it is space-time getting tied up in knots (perhaps this is what elementary fermions actually are). If knot theory explains everything, then it doesn't matter if you're looking at where the knots are in 3-D or if you're looking at a Gaussian surface surrounding the knots. Btw, instead of knots themselves, think of the knot complement, which basically represents a contortion of space.

[@peter5.056]

It seems that the more we unravel the fundamental tangles of reality, the more knots appear to confound us.

[@willd4686]

Thanks Matt! This episode gave me some useful new terminology. True dualities and approximate dualities, super useful

[@Itachi21x]

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.

[@zacharywong483]

Fantastic visuals and script, as always!

[@TheJamiescottie1]

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! :)

[@IanCampbell-vl4yd]

As someone studying astrophysics in school, this video was so well put together and a great explanation. With that being said, I feel like a lot of people may have missed the point or explanation because the core concepts that are needed to understand what you’re describing hahah As a tip for people watching these videos, take what you know about the world and forget about it. When you get into the reality of space, things start to get weird!

[@ArielTriangle]

Reminds me of an experience I had once on Salvia Divinorum. Great video and explanation!

[@tatearnold5050]

Please share more!

[@igorlpmartins]

Very good video! I would like to propose some questions for analysis by professional physicists: 1) Consider that the Universe is made up of only 3 basic elements: charge, position and time (processing the object, proportional to the amount of information) 1.1) Consider the "strong force" an electromagnetic force that acts at a very high frequency (very short wavelength, which appears stable with current technological instruments); 1.2) With such a high frequency, it is expected that its range will be very small (the current understanding is restricted to the atom)... But let's assume that, as with the planets' gravity, this goes a just beyond the atomic nucleus... 2) Consider gravity as a result of the sum of the residuals of the strong force of each atom. Denser materials, with more atoms/unit of space, are heavier (have a greater response)... This is equivalent to saying that the (electromagnetic) frequency at which the gravitational force responds depends on a frequency that varies depending on the density of nearby materials. 3) The Holographic Principle suggests that the universe can be described as a holographic projection of information encoded in a lower-dimensional space... 3.1) Consider that the greater the number of information to be processed, the greater the time dilation required to process the packet relating to the behavior of an object. Thus, time on the atomic scale has phenomena that, because they are so fast, are perceived only as waves (energy fluctuations) by current instruments, while, on the cosmic scale, moving galaxies appear static like photographs, due to the immense amount of information available. be processed. Note: A black hole would be a region in which there is no possible dilation for the processing of the amount of information, creating a "phased" reality beyond the event horizon (time it exists, time it doesn't = Schrödinger's cat. A space full of information that cannot be processed. Questions: 1) Is there any theory that establishes a correlation between the amount of information existing in a region of space and the way time is perceived? 2) Is there any theory that determines that the perception of time between observers arises from the difference in the quantity of information to be processed in each position in space? About the Holographic Universe... Consider that the Universe has no edge... It is infinite in all directions... What is inside is the same as what is outside. What is above is the same as what is below.

[@StringVest]

Bad video, doesn't account for brain's construction of perceived space.

[@igorlpmartins]

@@StringVest The problem is translating the Universe as it is and not as it is perceived. Limiting, without seeing a limit, is forcing the extrapolation of human senses to something that is beyond these. It takes humility to realize that the most logical thing is to recognize that there is no limit. Science suffers from anthropocentrism and the addiction that scientists have in trying to confirm what is established.

[@StringVest]

@@igorlpmartins we already have construction of the 3d world from information on the 2d perimeter - the perimeter being our eyeballs.

[@igorlpmartins]

@@StringVest This is exactly the error! Thinking that this construction, made by all the senses (not just vision), is reality. It is just a "map" (simplification of reality) that makes survival possible. Visible light has a wavelength of 400 to 700nm... If only you could see from radio waves to gamma rays... Your hearing ranges from 20 to 20000 Hz... If you could hear all frequencies. You did exactly what I presented as an error in science... You simplified the Universe of what you think/know. Consciousness does not create the Universe. It simplifies the analog signals received by the senses to enable an interpretation that allows survival, with low energy consumption. Even if information is received through the senses, it will be ignored if consciousness cannot recognize or associate it. You only see what you believe!

[@StringVest]

@@igorlpmartins no I know it's a construction, it's one of the first things in psychology text books. It just doesn't get any proper acknowledgement by physicists that they are trying to explain their own minds.

[@holstorrsceadus1990]

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.

[@CoryVirok]

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.

[@getreal2977]

*reaches for the Aspirin bottle*

[@SecularMentat]

That melted my brain a little, I see the integral of a sphere from radius 0 to radius 1 (the size of the universe). But the effective pixel thing I didn't get.

[@billschwandt1]

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.

[@billschwandt1]

@@sub-vibes what's a holographer?

[@TlalocTemporal]

​@@billschwandt1-- I assume someone tmakes holograms.

[@quillaja]

@@billschwandt1 photograph : photographer :: holograph : holographer

[@billschwandt1]

@@sub-vibes I have some shorts up that you should check out and tell me what you think.

[@kostarak3160]

What you mean piece of a circle?

[@shimrrashai-rc8fq]

This reminds me very much of a basic property of differentiable complex functions in complex analysis. If a complex function is "holomorphic" on a region - that is to say, it can be differentiated at every point both within that region as well as on the region boundary - then in fact the behavior on the boundary _alone_ is _sufficient_ to describe the entire interior behavior. The one-dimensional boundary, fills in all the details of the two-dimensional space inside it.

[@LisztyLiszt]

What's with the foreboding background chord...?

[@ringledinglebingle]

Really though. I can’t concentrate on anything he’s saying because of it.

[@kaia9154]

I'm having a hard time focusing on the video because of this as well :(

[@richardconway6425]

I think it's intended to make us feel even more insignificant and lost in this vast universe than we already are.

[@rexmundi2986]

Was that on purpose? I thought it was some kind of ghastly feedback, or audio artifact or something. Pretty distracting.

[@Crootcovitz]

Was it always there? I think there was always some background sound there, but this one is particularly distracting.

[@LracElosetab]

Nice, pretty much what I was thinking, about emergence and entanglement and information theories. Excited for this upcoming series

[@rhetorical1488]

Theoretical physicist: i have done enough drugs to create a new theory

[@kenbohlin1642]

The spice must flow.

[@DrDeuteron]

@@kenbohlin1642mescaline. Spice doesn’t make theories.

[@pakarpintu4917]

Jedi : may force be with you Gravity : but i'm not force Jedi : f#ck #ff

[@angelmendez-rivera351]

@@DrDeuteron Don't underestimate spice.

[@arsenelupiniii8040]

Like Miccheo Cookoo! That guys hair is more interesting than Neil Degrasse Tyson's PTSD!

[@Pixelkabinett]

This entry blew my mind yesterday. I'm still so excited. Every ounce of physics intuition I've built over the years tells me there's something to this. I can see how the way we can't explain dark matter and dark energy could finally resolved with a theory like this. What about particle duality? Really amazing stuff, thank you so much!

[@seditt5146]

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.

[@Fangman123789]

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.

[@shiijei2638]

Got damn PBS, you guys have been around forever, glad to see you still here.

[@rainrope5069]

Cool new intro!

[@TeodorAngelov]

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!

[@NickBittrich]

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 ;)

[@lordemed1]

there will never be a theory of everything. Bet the house on that.

[@grayshadowglade]

@@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. 🙂

[@Khosann1]

Thank you Matt for your cool-headed explanations. This is one of the best expositions of the holographic principle without becoming science fiction or fantasy. Even Sabine would like it. Besides you are not taking sides, and staying on the instructor level which we do need. Kudos!

[@mother3crazy]

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

[@hotfightinghistory9224]

Its kinda amazing how much this looks like Kepler's discarded theory of perfect solids.

[@mcorvus4530]

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?

[@kindlin]

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.

[@Elusis1]

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!

[@francisallard3077]

My head.... I was not ready for this.

[@Goldenretriever-k8m]

It was sooo confusing and weird

[@ywtcc]

"We can no longer speak of the behaviour of the particle independently of the process of observation. As a final consequence, the natural laws formulated mathematically in quantum theory no longer deal with the elementary particles themselves but with our knowledge of them. Nor is it any longer possible to ask whether or not these particles exist in space and time objectively..." - Werner Heisenberg Once you're in Heisenberg's interpretation of quantum mechanics, I think it's quite natural to think in terms of holographic surfaces instead of volumes. All of Heisenberg's measurements that he applies his Uncertainty Principle to exist on surfaces! Also, since we're dealing with Heisenbergian measurements instead of reality directly, it does make sense mathematically to organize the data in this holographic manner. We're not looking for a true picture of reality at this scale, it seems beyond reach. What we're doing is being very precise about what our measurements yield, when we project our arbitrary x,y,z and t onto the world. In this way, QM is a map of possible measurements, rather than a map of reality. To an empiricist, this is the more useful map!

[@binbots]

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).

[@binbots]

@@acajoom I never claimed this is how reality actually works. Merely how we perceive it.

[@Geffde]

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.

[@verslalchimie5824]

I wonder if every conversation Matt has ends with him saying the word "spacetime" 😄

[@expred]

"I'll see you again soon, in another distant corner of this grocery-store's intergalactic... spacetime".

[@markl4593]

Another great episode. If you’re willing to go a bit further down the rabbit hole, try Unziker’s Real Physics to expand your mind.

[@ExecutionSommaire]

I propose the wolographic principle, where spacetime emerges from the devoted prayers of monks on a 2D map

[@EvsEntps]

😶‍🌫️: WOLOLOOOOO🕛🕧🕐🕜🕑🕝🕒🕞🕓🕟🕔🕠🕕🕡🕖🕢🕗🕣🕘🕤🕙🕥🕚🕦🌌☀️🌑🌕🌖🌗🌘🌍🌎🌏🌋🗻🏔⛰️🌊🦠🌿🌳🪼🐟🐊🦕☄️🦫🐒🦧🚶‍♂️‍➡️🛖🏘🏰🏭🚗🛩🚀🛰🪐!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@robertjones9598]

Waluigraphic?

[@EvsEntps]

I propose a rival theory: the Ayoyographic principle.

[@dinocore1]

Wololo

[@worstedwoolens]

I'm very excited to see you guys picking this topic back up! Looking forward to this series.

[@Sleepy.Time.]

we are just the result of Azathoth having a bad dream after to much spicy food

[@DObscura-yi5es]

Ol' Az is gonna have an existential crisis when it realizes it's just a lonely Boltzman Brain

[@nessuno5403]

Vindaloo?

[@mattneville6601]

Too much

[@hungrycrab3297]

@@DObscura-yi5es That boltzman brain will be shook when it realizes it's just a simulation

[@skateboardingjesus4006]

Ah, a product of Azathoth's slumbering brain on spicy food? I'm glad our origins aren't from his gastrointestinal agitation.

[@bigmouthfisheyes]

Great videos. Always interesting to watch and contemplate.

[@TinyFoxTom]

We're prisoners in a cave trying to explain the behavior of shadows.

[@artificercreator]

10:35 that animation is so sweet and cool!

[@tates300monkyears4]

The holographic principle feels like Stoke’s theorem on coke

[@avstern1958]

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

[@feynstein1004]

My favorite song: Susskind o' Mine 😉 (explanation: The name Susskind comes from the German Süßkind - pronounced Zeus-kint- which translates to sweet child)

[@audiodead7302]

My favourite song: Hawking in Memphis.

[@feynstein1004]

@@audiodead7302 Eh?

[@audiodead7302]

@@feynstein1004 Hawking/walking! It's a play on words. You must have been born after the great Marc Cohn song.

[@feynstein1004]

@@audiodead7302Idk who that is 😅

[@manuelhernandez2017]

*guitar riff ensues

[@be5on]

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.

[@sourdface]

This discussion contributes to my hypothesis that I am a Boltzman brain and none of this is really happening outside my mind.

[@anthonyw6488]

Having studied Non Duality/ 'Consciousness only model' for years now, I truly love these videos explaining some of those ideas in a "sciencey" way. Exciting times.

[@grayjphys]

Reminds me of the new solution that was found for black holes that is kind of like a Matroska doll

[@AlexanderGee]

@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

[@michal.gawron]

I just made an analogy to boundary-bulk idea: CPU/RAM-3D-game. A 3D game can have any physical laws we can come up with (even though usually games try to mimic real world). The in-game world is the bulk. The CPU is the laws of physics on the boundary, and the boundary itself is 1-dimensional RAM that consists of bytes (numbers, generally). So if it's hard for you to imagine that we are really living on the boundary, just think of the rendered world in the game, which _actually_ is just a looong list of numbers if your RAM and their interactions are governed by the CPU. There's no 3 dimensions in RAM, there's no objects, there's no colors, it's just numbers and the laws of physics can be vastly different in the game than in our world. Does it help?

[@michal.gawron]

Also, even though the in-game virtual world might be implemented in such a way that can give impression to be almost infinite, the actual information that can be encoded in the game is limited by the 1D RAM. Think of fractal, that can be zoomed-in infinitely, but to describe it you only need very little information.

[@raqia89]

Hi Matt & co, super excited about this new series! Two questions for you A) If gravity is entropic, and black holes contain most of the entropy in the universe, does Verlinde’s theory assume that spacetime’s 4 dimensions are hidden variables of the wave function? B) and if A is true and we live in a superdeterministic universe, then would transforming the Schrödinger equation from position/momentum ‘probability space’ to loop quantum gravity’s spinor ’metric space’ reveal new (previously hidden) variables?

[@itemushmush]

you are an amazing communicator. not sure theres anyone else on the platform with such skill

[@PhoenixianThe]

Hearing about how the limit of entropy scales with surface area a while back, I have to ask: Is this a product of the fact that, in order for any instrument, person, or particle to interact with the information of any object, that information has to pass through the surface of a sphere? Since even if what's going on inside were, somehow, more detailed than that limit, it would still have to pass through a surface to interact with anything beyond itself, and the most efficient surface volume-to-area wise is a sphere.

[@LowellBoggs]

This is a fascinating episode with just the right presentation level. Thanks. I am looking forward to more episodes on this subject

[@brainsanitation]

Basically saying the universe is perceived and rendered as it is in our eyes

[@kenpanderz]

its been a while since i could actually understand what this series has been talking about, but i still enjoy hearing about it

[@BytebroUK]

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 :)