Do we live in a 2-D hologram? Experiment will test the nature of the universe

A unique experiment at the U.S. Department of Energy's Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory called the Holometer has started collecting data that will answer some mind-bending questions about our universe -- including whether we live in a hologram.

Much like characters on a television show would not know that their seemingly 3-D world exists only on a 2-D screen, we could be clueless that our 3-D space is just an illusion. The information about everything in our universe could actually be encoded in tiny packets in two dimensions.

Get close enough to your TV screen and you'll see pixels, small points of data that make a seamless image if you stand back. Scientists think that the universe's information may be contained in the same way and that the natural "pixel size" of space is roughly 10 trillion trillion times smaller than an atom, a distance that physicists refer to as the Planck scale.

"We want to find out whether space-time is a quantum system just like matter is," said Craig Hogan, director of Fermilab's Center for Particle Astrophysics and the developer of the holographic noise theory. "If we see something, it will completely change ideas about space we've used for thousands of years."

Read full article here.

Yes, scientists at Fermilab are running experiments to determine whether or not we live in the Matrix. Setting aside the details for the moment, I would like to ask: would you want to know? If there is no possibility of altering the fact that we are just information inscribed on the surface of a hypersphere, running through some sort of immutable program, would you want to know? How would you cope with the knowledge?

a reply to: DJW001

Your perception of this study is incorrect, they're not trying to see whether or not we live in the "Matrix". They are trying to determine several things. Mostly -

"We want to find out whether space-time is a quantum system just like matter is,"

See what I mean yet?

How would you cope with the knowledge?

I would take it with a grain of salt.

Any of their conclusions will be strictly theoretical and this study is flawed due to its limitations in regards to the controlled stimuli and variables. In other words this study is rigged.

Deny ignorance.

CERN has been working on the same problem since activating the Large Hadron Collider.

Would I "want to know" the results of their experiments?

Uhrm.................yes.

"How would I cope" with the knowledge?

I already have. Holographic Universe theory provides a unifying explanation for most of the phenomenon that have perplexed mankind since the dawn of critical thought.

a reply to: real_one

Your perception of this study is incorrect, they're not trying to see whether or not we live in the "Matrix". They are trying to determine several things. Mostly -

Yes, but the Matrix is a popular hook for the discussion.

"We want to find out whether space-time is a quantum system just like matter is,"


See what I mean yet?

Yes, but are you just trying to kill the thread? I said "setting aside the details for the moment."

How would you cope with the knowledge?


I would take it with a grain of salt.

Thank you, that at least serves the purpose of the thread.

Any of their conclusions will be strictly theoretical and this study is flawed due to it's limitations in regards to the controlled stimuli. In other words this study is rigged.

Not rigged, inconclusive, as any such experiment must be.

Deny ignorance.

Always.

originally posted by: DJW001
How would you cope with the knowledge?

If we find out the universe is actually 2D in nature, then I would be OK with that. It's just simply how the universe "is".

I mean, (for example) I'm OK with Einstein's idea that time passes at a noticeably different rate for me than it does on some far-off galaxy moving away from me at relativistic speeds. Time passes different for everybody that is moving relative to me; that's just the way the universe is.

Knowing about time dilation doesn't affect the way we live our lives -- and, similarly, knowing that the universe is 2D in nature will also not affect the way we live our lives.

Granted, I realize that if the universe were 2D, then I am not really "here" (whatever "here" means in a 2D universe), but if that's the way it has always been, then it seems to have worked out OK for me so far.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Granted, I realize that if the universe were 2D, then I am not really "here" (whatever "here" means in a 2D universe), but if that's the way it has always been, then it seems to have worked out OK for me so far.

Would it affect whether or not you believe that you have free will?

I've already come to the conclusion that we are all living in a highly advanced computer simulation probably of the past or just a randomised event filled world, processed on computers of the future, most likely using quantum processors which are of course using qubits (as data points??).

originally posted by: DJW001
Would it affect whether or not you believe that you have free will?

Thats already been answered in another experiment that has been repeated and prven to be true. We do not have free will... It's just an illusion. Makes the simulation argument fit more conclusively in my eyes...

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Granted, I realize that if the universe were 2D, then I am not really "here" (whatever "here" means in a 2D universe), but if that's the way it has always been, then it seems to have worked out OK for me so far.

Would it affect whether or not you believe that you have free will?

One could argue that even with the traditional idea that all 3D matter was created at one time (and all matter was sent moving at the same time), then we would have no free will, because (from a Newtonian standpoint) whatever initial speed and direction all matter had at the beginning would dictate where that matter is today, and how it interacts with itself...

...i.e., the chemicals inside of may brain that make me think and do are moving around in the specific way that they are because of the initial speed and velocity of all matter (and the initial state of all energy) at the time of the universe's creation. From a Newtonian physics standpoint, I can't change that; it was set in motion long ago.

Granted, the quantum view of the universe includes things such as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which on the surface seems as if the universe has some randomness to it. HOWEVER, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle may only be something that means the universe seems random to us. Even with Heisenberg, all matter and energy in the universe may be doing the thing they were set out to do based on the the initial state of those things during the universe's creation (such as, for example, the Big Bang).

So even with the uncertainty principle in a non-holographic universe, we may have no free will.

I don't know if people brought this up but what the program is about is something I've always wondered myself.

At what point in quantum mechanics can you zoom in so close to actually be able to see the "pixels" of the universe? At which point are things so small that you'll see a particle "teleport" from one block of space to another?

Funny thing how quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity can't seem to unite or agree with each other at all.

a reply to: DJW001

The experimental apparatus seems a bit similar to Michelson's experiment. Maybe they'll find a quantum ether, or something.

To answer your question, I don't suppose it would make any difference to me if I discovered the universe had only two dimensions. I'm a bit of a cardboard character myself.

By the way, why do you think the inhabitants of a 2D universe might not have free will? I don't follow your reasoning.

a reply to: Astyanax

To answer your question, I don't suppose it would make any difference to me if I discovered the universe had only two-dimensions. I'm a bit of a cardboard character myslef.

By the way, why do you think the inhabitants of a 2D universe might not have free will? I don't follow your reasoning.

I'm merely suggesting it as a topic for discussion. How would someone proposing that animals adapt to their environment through "natural selection" trouble anyone? Or that there is no universal frame of reference? This experiment seems to be rather abstract, but I suspect the social and psychological impact may be greater than we currently think.

a reply to: DJW001
there is no possibility of altering the fact that we are just information inscribed on the surface of a hypersphere, running through some sort of immutable program

And you insinuated the moon hoax theorists were crazy..now you lend credence to the fact that not only was apollo not real but the moon doesn't even exist.... well say goodbye to your credibility

originally posted by: Misinformation

a reply to: DJW001
there is no possibility of altering the fact that we are just information inscribed on the surface of a hypersphere, running through some sort of immutable program

And you insinuated the moon hoax theorists were crazy..now you lend credence to the fact that not only was apollo not real but the moon doesn't even exist.... well say goodbye to your credibility

In the holographic universe theory, the universe does in fact exist, but information that is perceived as 3D is actually information on a 2D surface.

The idea has been kicked around the physics world for over 30 years now by eminent physicists such as Gerard 't Hooft and Leonard Susskind. It came out of string theory, and the basic idea is that that information about any given region of space can be ascertained by the information on the surface that surrounds it...

...For example (as an analogy), If I project myself onto the surfaces of a cube or sphere that surrounds me, I can (just from the information on those surfaces) ascertain all of the information about me. If all of the information about me is projected onto those surfaces, then conversely, the information on those surfaces can be used to project me.

Obviously, it isn't as simple as that, but that is just an analogy.

The general point is that all of the information about 3D space may be able to be ascertained from a 2D surface that encompasses that space, so potentially the 2D space is what's "real" and the 3D space is a projection of that reality.

However, the moon is still as real as anything else in the universe. If the Moon is really is just information from a 2D surface, then that is simply the nature of EVERYTHING in the universe. if everything is that way, then it is for all intents and purposes "real", because that simply would be how the universe works.

a reply to: DJW001

How would you cope with the knowledge?

it wouldn't make a scrap of difference to anything. We all still have to get up and go to work so we can eat and live.

Original Thread on this subject: www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: robbystarbuck
Original Thread on this subject: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I searched for Fermilab and 2D... nothing came up, but, yes, this is essentially a duplicate thread. Mods, please close.

a reply to: DJW001

No worries at all I just wanted to give a heads up, i'm not super territorial like you find a lot of people can be. All good!

a reply to: DJW001

well, in the matrix, there was still a human body attached to and controlling the "informations" out there running around. Except of course the Agents. Maybe thats how tptb control us so well. they have the cheat codes and are working with, or are, the machines...