Does Space Emerge From A Holographic Boundary?

Check out the Space Time Merch Store
www.pbsspaceti...
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
Space seems fundamental. To build a universe, surely you need something to build it on or in. Many, maybe most physicists now think that the fabric of space emerges from something deeper. And perhaps the most existentially disturbing such proposal is that our 3-D universe is just the inward projection of an infinitely distant boundary. A hologram, or sorts. Let’s see how that can actually work, and what the holographic principle really says about the “realness” of this universe.
Check Out the Holographic Universe Playlist
• Hawking Radiation
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to:to.pbs.org/Dona...
Sign up for the mailing list to get episode notifications and hear special announcements!
mailchi.mp/1a6...
Search the Entire Space Time Library Here: search.pbsspac...
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Matt O'Dowd
Post Production by Leonardo Scholzer, Yago Ballarini & Stephanie Faria
Directed by Andrew Kornhaber
Associate Producer: Bahar Gholipour
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
Executive in Charge for PBS: Maribel Lopez
Director of Programming for PBS: Gabrielle Ewing
Assistant Director of Programming for PBS: John Campbell
Spacetime is a production of Kornhaber Brown for PBS Digital Studios.
This program is produced by Kornhaber Brown, which is solely responsible for its content.
© 2024 PBS. All rights reserved.
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / multidroideka
Space Time Was Made Possible In Part By:
Big Bang Sponsors
John Sronce
Bryce Fort
Peter Barrett
David Neumann
Alexander Tamas
Morgan Hough
Juan Benet
Vinnie Falco
Mark Rosenthal
Quasar Sponsors
Glenn Sugden
Alex Kern
Ethan Cohen
Stephen Wilcox
Mark Heising
Hypernova Sponsors
Michael Tidwell
Chris Webb
David Giltinan
Ivari Tölp
Kenneth See
Gregory Forfa
Bradley Voorhees
Scott Gorlick
Paul Stehr-Green
Ben Delo
Scott Gray
Антон Кочков
Robert Ilardi
John R. Slavik
Donal Botkin
Edmund Fokschaner
chuck zegar
Jordan Young
Daniel Muzquiz
Gamma Ray Burst Sponsors
Jessica M. Kandal
Anthony Crossland
Grace Seraph
Frank Plessers
Stephen Saslow
Robert DeChellis
Tomaz Lovsin
Anthony Leon
Leonardo Schulthais Senna
Lori Ferris
Dennis Van Hoof
Koen Wilde
Nicolas Katsantonis
Joe Pavlovic
Justin Lloyd
Chuck Lukaszewski
Cole B Combs
Andrea Galvagni
Jerry Thomas
Nikhil Sharma
John Anderson
Bradley Ulis
Craig Falls
Kane Holbrook
Ross Story
teng guo
Harsh Khandhadia
Michael Lev
Terje Vold
James Trimmier
Jeremy Soller
Paul Wood
Joe Moreira
Kent Durham
jim bartosh
Ramon Nogueira
John H. Austin, Jr.
Diana S Poljar
Faraz Khan
Almog Cohen
Daniel Jennings
Russ Creech
Jeremy Reed
David Johnston
Michael Barton
Isaac Suttell
Oliver Flanagan
Bleys Goodson
Mark Delagasse
Mark Daniel Cohen
Shane Calimlim
Tybie Fitzhugh
Eric Kiebler
Craig Stonaha
Frederic Simon
John Robinson
Jim Hudson
David Barnholdt
John Funai
Adrien Molyneux
Bradley Jenkins
Amy Hickman
Vlad Shipulin
Thomas Dougherty
King Zeckendorff
Dan Warren
Joseph Salomone
Patrick Sutton
Julien Dubois

[@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😵‍💫

[@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...

[@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.

[@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.

[@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..

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@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!

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@rachel_rexxx]

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

[@jmunt]

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

[@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

[@vu4y3fo846y]

This channel never fails to blow my mind

[@peter5.056]

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

[@jesuschrist2284]

Never look directly at a solar eclipse tshirt

[@tylerknight99]

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?

[@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.

[@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]

😆

[@TheAmazingBendini]

Extremely excited for this series of upcoming episodes!!

[@ZoonCrypticon]

My most favourite astrophysics presenter!

[@grayjphys]

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

[@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?

[@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! 😄"

[@PhilipMurphyExtra]

Its PBS Space Time O Clock folks

[@hotfightinghistory9224]

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

[@tobiasweber-ingold2560]

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.

[@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!

[@flo0778]

finally back to headache content, thanks

[@willd4686]

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

[@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.

[@getreal2977]

*reaches for the Aspirin bottle*

[@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.

[@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.

[@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! :)

[@selfsaboteursounds5273]

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

[@N3bu14Gr4y]

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

[@bigmouthfisheyes]

Great videos. Always interesting to watch and contemplate.

[@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!

[@Krack2805]

i usually get most episodes but this one Im gonna have to re-watch lol

[@tates300monkyears4]

The holographic principle feels like Stoke’s theorem on coke

[@Vastin]

I think that describing the boundary as 'infinitely distant' doesn't quite get at the relationship, though it does hint at it's inaccessibility. The relationship between the bulk and the boundary cannot be described by vectors, directions or distances. It's not like the volume of the ocean beneath it's surface or a ball with the universe 'inside' it. It's rather more like a 3D picture projected onto a screen from a projector - but as seen by the characters in the show, not by the audience watching it. Would the characters in the show be able to point in the direction of the projector? Not really, because from their perspective it doesn't really exist, even if they know there is a projector and that they are in a show. The projector generates their reality, but isn't really a part of it - there is no direction that the characters in the projection could walk to reach the projector, because they cannot leave the screen. The reality the projector resides in is fundamentally different than their reality, even though there IS a direct relationship between the two.

[@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.

[@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)

[@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?

[@DrVictorVasconcelos]

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.

[@francisallard3077]

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

[@Goldenretriever-k8m]

It was sooo confusing and weird

[@zacharywong483]

Fantastic visuals and script, as always!

[@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.

[@Itachi21x]

I hope Matt will do an episode about the recent JWST confirmation that the Universe is indeed expanding at different rates.

[@BeamMonsterZeus]

Mass distribution is far from uniform, so certainly the forces which act upon the boundary of universal space-time are a graduation of relative energies. There is a logical explanation just sitting right there.

[@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.

[@LracElosetab]

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

[@ArielTriangle]

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

[@tatearnold5050]

Please share more!

[@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.

[@ChalkyWhiteChalkyWhite]

exciting stuff on the horizon !

[@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.

[@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.

[@spiderjuice9874]

The spring equinox for North America occurred a few days ago on March 19, 2024, at 10:06 p.m. CDT. Good Friday occurs exactly 10 days after the equinox on March 29, and the total solar eclipse occurs exactly 10 days after Good Friday on April 8. In other words, Good Friday lies at the exact mid-point in time between the equinox and the eclipse.

[@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

[@innerufomaker]

I listened carefully, but I can't explain it to someone else. Damn, I can't even explain it to myself. 🤔

[@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

[@user-Tenebrea]

make a video about d-0 branes of which all space can consist

[@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.

[@gove4103]

I usually pride myself on being able to follow these pretty well, but this one was pretty thick. It might need to watch it a few more times for it to click.

[@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. 🙂

[@artificercreator]

10:35 that animation is so sweet and cool!

[@sourdface]

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

[@zenon7094]

Although I did not really understand a word of what was said here, I give the video a thumbs up. At some point, I am sure there will be videos again that I understand somethin about. I do not have basic knowledge of the topic being discussed here.

[@rainrope5069]

Cool new intro!

[@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.

[@robbabcock_]

Mind blowing stuff!

[@byronryan4216]

🤯

[@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

[@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.

[@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!

[@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!

[@FrankTinsley]

Theoretical physics seems to end up just a crazy as you would expect if characters in a game engine tried to explain how their universe works without being able to get outside the computer and look at 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.

[@Qsie]

Been a while since I've watched, I love your new intro!! 💜

[@MrIzzyfunk]

I can't think of anything that is not made of waves. All of reality seems to be a wave which is toroidal, nested, fractal, relative and waving through a holographic medium. It will never end because it never began. The way up is the way down, the way in is the way out and the way to the end, is the way to the beginning.

[@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.

[@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!

[@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.

[@polarwind77777]

Great episode! Your explanations and the artist’s depictions make a formidable combination. Looking forward to the next ones you teased!

[@worstedwoolens]

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

[@Datamining101]

Really interested in seeing this even though I know it’s a long sequence of “not even wrong”ness.

[@TM-yn4iu]

Seems theory is now overwhelming fact, understanding "theory/fiction" combined with suspense draws interest. I have and do enjoy, but looking to further video's for assessment. Thanks..hope to see eclipse from here in Austin, TX

[@VoxyGon]

Wild. I wonder how much crossover there is between theories like this and other fields such as data compression in computer science.

[@NewMessage]

Guess that's why I feel so holo inside.

[@loganstrong5426]

You know it's gonna be a trip when you can't even comprehend the *title.*

[@shiijei2638]

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