Black Hole holograms and...

reply to post by jiggerj


Thanks for posting this, Jig. I thoroughly enjoyed listening to this presentation.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by jiggerj

 

The greatest implication to this video is that energy is information.

Ahhh, but you missed another implication: Information cannot be destroyed.

I am curious, though, on how if information cannot be destroyed, how could it have been created?

It per-exists. The observer collapses the wave function of indeterminate probability to make a determination. What existed before was not yet determined by God until it was collapsed into reality. We are then born into this reality and have a part in the overall story by free will--the ability to collapse the 5th dimension by our will (6th dimension). God's will was the universe to engage the process. The fifth dimension is the probability space and this is governed by law. What we collapse has an immediate response from the law. It is preserved by God's ability to know the Alpha from the Omega. God's original part cannot be changed. That is his will and his collapse of the wave function. He was there in the beginning and there at the end before us. Paradise is made for us from our choices.

Matthew 18

"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Midrash

Future bliss can neither be imagined, explained, nor described. We know nothing of its nature, form, greatness, or beauty, its quantity or quality. This much one should know, the phrase, "the world to come," does not imply that it is a world yet to be called into existence; it exists already, but the phrase is employed to describe the life into which those who are in the present stage of existence will be transposed when they throw off this mortal coil.

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by jiggerj

 

The greatest implication to this video is that energy is information.

Ahhh, but you missed another implication: Information cannot be destroyed.

I am curious, though, on how if information cannot be destroyed, how could it have been created?

what do you mean information cannot be destroyed ?

I just wrote a 4 page letter on paper...... noone knows what i wrote..... I just put the letter in an envelope and burned it..... I dont remember what i wrote and could not rewrite it..... how can we find out what I wrote?

Please note that this principle in physics is not my idea, but I'll go with: The information you wrote is still on that paper. Though burned and irretrievable by us, the information is still there.

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by jiggerj

 

Thanks for posting this, Jig. I thoroughly enjoyed listening to this presentation.

Really? I kind of half-enjoyed it. Though Susskind admitted that analogies suck, I grew more and more frustrated with his analogies.

With his two-fish analogy he says that the Alice fish is both, alive and dead at the same time. Bob fish sees her parts flying off and perceives Alice to be dead, while Alice is actually still alive in the event horizon, but cannot be seen by Bob.

My frustration comes from the fact the Bob's perception has nothing to do with the truth. He could perceive Alice as a giant mushroom tree with human ears for leaves, but this has no bearing whatsoever on the true state of Alice. She is either dead or alive. I cannot see how she can be both.

nevermind

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by jiggerj

 

Good questions.
I have one to add. If the Universe is a hologram - so what?

I love JiggerJ because he is a different kind of smart. See, there are some people who just know the answers. But Jigger....while he may not know the answers, he seems to know the right questions.

And Phage, while I was reading the OP I kept thinking, "Man, I hope Phage comes through and gives some insight".

Good job Jigger....you stumped Phage.

All I've done is offer a series of points within an infinite set (e.g. Universal - Chaos Math). When you source the page you'll read further:

"The cube is homeomorphic. It is a cube by representation alone. In actuality this is the torus..."

Hence, the graphic below. Now you'll have more of a visual concept I hope.


Post

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by jiggerj

 

If this holographic stuff is true, though, it would benefit us a lot more to pursue this than religion or any of that metaphysical crap.

How so? The Universe is as it is or is there something within the holographic model which would allow us to alter the very structure of space-time?

Quite so... Cohering much larger groups.

OK, I'll try to answer the OP's question here. I didn't watch the video, but I am well versed in the theory being discussed.

The problem with your question is that it mischaracterizes the theory. The theory isn't that the universal hologram is stored in the event horizon of a black hole -- a black hole's surface is just the most useful way to illustrate the principles involved (and it was considerations of such that led to the formation of the theory in the first place). Not to say that that couldn't be the case -- Lee Smolin's work shows pretty clearly that the "interior" of a black hole could indeed be a new universe. How? Well, the math and concepts are pretty tricky, but, to give a slightly hand-wavey simplification, when the black hole initially forms, spacetime distends and bends further and further until it punches out of our universe entirely. From "inside" this tear, it looks like a big bang, with the new spacetime manifold expanding out into the bulk of 5 dimensional space, like a teardrop hanging off a rubber sheet. Interestingly, the laws of physics in the child universe are close to, but slightly different than, those of the parent universe. This makes universe generation an iterative process with feedback which means evolution comes into play and you evolve sets of physical law to be more likely to produce black holes. And that's a level of complexity that pretty closely matches what's needed to have life, thus neatly complementing the Anthropic Principle. But none of that is required by the Holographic Interpretation. That just says that the nature of the universe is not what we think it is -- it's a two dimensional surface not a three dimensional volume. What that surface surrounds (if anything at all -- no reason to think there's anything more than the surface itself in existence) is irrelevant, be it black hole, another universe, or a league of etheric wombats. The information in that surface is the only thing relevant to our universe.

If that explanation is unsatisfying to you, then... think about this: a singularity is infinitely dense. It can likewise contain infinities, like other black holes. Does that work for you?

Someone above made remarks to the effect that "well of course information is destroyed when you chuck something in a black hole"... well, no. Not exactly. To an outside observer, able to watch the thing chucked in all the way down to the atomic level for its whole trip to the event horizon would see the chuckee's time slow down as it neared the horizon. The exact moment it "hits" the horizon is the exact moment when its time (to the outside observer) stops cold, forever. From that perspective, every particle that ever went in is just sitting right there at the surface, as is any information it encodes. Hence the realization that the information in a volume is limited by the volume's minimal surrounding surface area, and thus the core impetus behind the idea.

It's not stuck in a black hole. I don't even fully believe in black holes. Its a hologram, ie testing ground, like reading a book in school in our heavenly home or entering into the computerized movie/practicum.

If there are black holes, and they don't fit into the Electric Universe Theory, they're waste basket, like a windows one, for only the pigrments in the hologram, nothing to do with souls.

I am curious since he thinks we're close to this mythical black hole, where he thinks its located.

Some think that the Abyss, or Gateway To the Shadow Realm or High Security Jail or whatever that might be considered, is called Nibiru and its a kind of diminsional black hole, but not exactly quite, more of a gravity thing (so similar) that is opposite of the Sun/the Light Streaming in from Home, through the stargates, but its not really like anything science can depict, that the bloodlines are trying to lower earth's frequency to put us all in danger of being near. While others are holding light, to raise LOVE to bring us out of the duality altogether.

I don't consider anything in this computer, any pigmentation, any construct, even if there were black holes, to be real.

Only Love and Goodness is real, ie, the Thoughtscape of Infinite Soul, and That Infinite Being of Goodness that we may all be the Infinite Cells of or Something that we mysteriously Call God/Goodness.

Anything else is distortion, insanity, illusion, shadow. Dispell all such thoughts with thoughts of Joy, Abundance, Happiness, Kindness and Equality.

You are an infinite portion of infinity and much bigger than this universe.

I'm wondering about Susskind's use of the term "entropy" -

1. Symbol S For a closed thermodynamic system, a quantitative measure of the amount of thermal energy not available to do work.
2. A measure of the disorder or randomness in a closed system.
3. A measure of the loss of information in a transmitted message.
4. The tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity.
5. Inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society.

At around 16:40 he says, "What is entropy? You've all heard that entropy has to do with confusion . . . "

Why would a physicist start out with the word "confusion" when answering what "entropy" is?

Originally posted by Unity_99
It's not stuck in a black hole. I don't even fully believe in black holes. Its a hologram, ie testing ground, like reading a book in school in our heavenly home or entering into the computerized movie/practicum.

If there are black holes, and they don't fit into the Electric Universe Theory, they're waste basket, like a windows one, for only the pigrments in the hologram, nothing to do with souls.

I am curious since he thinks we're close to this mythical black hole, where he thinks its located.

Some think that the Abyss, or Gateway To the Shadow Realm or High Security Jail or whatever that might be considered, is called Nibiru and its a kind of diminsional black hole, but not exactly quite, more of a gravity thing (so similar) that is opposite of the Sun/the Light Streaming in from Home, through the stargates, but its not really like anything science can depict, that the bloodlines are trying to lower earth's frequency to put us all in danger of being near. While others are holding light, to raise LOVE to bring us out of the duality altogether.

I don't consider anything in this computer, any pigmentation, any construct, even if there were black holes, to be real.

Only Love and Goodness is real, ie, the Thoughtscape of Infinite Soul, and That Infinite Being of Goodness that we may all be the Infinite Cells of or Something that we mysteriously Call God/Goodness.

Anything else is distortion, insanity, illusion, shadow. Dispell all such thoughts with thoughts of Joy, Abundance, Happiness, Kindness and Equality.

You are an infinite portion of infinity and much bigger than this universe.

edit on 16-10-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

What the hell are you doing in the science part of ATS, seriously ?

This is not Disneyland.

Published on Nov 4, 2011 by tvochannel

Leonard Susskind of the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics discusses the indestructability of information and the nature of black holes in a lecture entitled The World As Hologram.

The YouTuber is TVO, which is a Canadian public educational media organization, according to the Channel page.

I'm curious to know why the description of the video doesn't give us any information about the date of the lecture or under whose auspices the lecture was presented. Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics? Or TVO? Something else?

reply to post by Stunspot


"To an outside observer, able to watch the thing chucked in all the way down to the atomic level for its whole trip to the event horizon would see the chuckee's time slow down as it neared the horizon. The exact moment it "hits" the horizon is the exact moment when its time (to the outside observer) stops cold, forever. From that perspective, every particle that ever went in is just sitting right there at the surface, as is any information it encodes. Hence the realization that the information in a volume is limited by the volume's minimal surrounding surface area, and thus the core impetus behind the idea."

how does this make sense? whats the idea behind whatever falls into a black hole is preserved at the horizon forever? how and why?

what happens when spiral galaxies collide and then their supermassive black holes collide? or does the initial act of collision have an effect on the black hole at the center before the 2 centers can touch?

Originally posted by ImaFungi
"To an outside observer"..."From that perspective"
how does this make sense?

It has to do with the perspective of the observer which is a safe viewable distance away from the black hole. From the perspective of the observer the information freezes as soon as it crosses the Schwarzschild radius of the black hole because gravity and light cannot escape it. Therefor, the image from the black hole will never make it back to the observer.

All that is only from the perspective of the observer. It all looks and behaves differently inside the Schwarzschild radius.

I'm not a teacher so I'm probably not doing the best job explaining. Nor have I watched the video in the OP. But I have read some Susskind and seen several of his college lectures. So, no promises that I'm doing this type of talk justice but that's the core of it.

Susskind is one of the best minds in physics. I havent watched that particular video, but I have seen a few of his summer lectures for laymen at stanford in 2007-08. I also saw him speak with another great physicst jacob beckenstein in Boston in 2003 on related black holethermodynamics while I was an undergrad.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I'm wondering about Susskind's use of the term "entropy" -

1. Symbol S For a closed thermodynamic system, a quantitative measure of the amount of thermal energy not available to do work.
2. A measure of the disorder or randomness in a closed system.
3. A measure of the loss of information in a transmitted message.
4. The tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity.
5. Inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society.

At around 16:40 he says, "What is entropy? You've all heard that entropy has to do with confusion . . . "

Why would a physicist start out with the word "confusion" when answering what "entropy" is?

Entropy is really complicated. Especially in the context of fundamental physics.
The normal idea of entropy, given to lets say engineering majors learning thermodynamics is the idea of confusion or mess. When I first took my first physics block in college I got an analogy about a messy room with a nice picture. I couldnt find that same picture on google, but I found this one. Now, this may or may not help you understand entropy in blackholethermodynamics, but it will help you understand why "a phsyicst would use the word confusion"

You could throw the bricks a billion times and the bricks are almost always going to land in a messy pile or a higher state of entropy. A lower state of entropy is the bricks all ordered in a pile, because there is only one location that each brick can be in for it to be called a neat pile. The lower state of entropy can only be achieved by external force or energy. As in you picking the bricks up and putting them in their place. They will almost never land in a neat pile randomly tho.


But In the context of black hole thermodynamics entropy should be thought of as information.
Think of every possible bit of information describing that pile of bricks.

Susskind wrote a great book that I have suggested maybe 3 times in the last few weeks on ATS, called "the black hole war, making the world safe for quantum mechanics" its a great book and it touches on the entire history of blackholethermo dynamics and how the idea that the world is a hologram came about. (it displays the genius of the fundamental physicists of our time, and their ability to work together in a competitive atmosphere to do successful science)

reply to post by ubeenhad


Why didn't he focus on this definition to start out with? It sounds more physics-like to me than "confusion."

Originally posted by Mary Rose

. . . For a closed thermodynamic system, a quantitative measure of the amount of thermal energy not available to do work.

reply to post by Mary Rose

No, that's exactly, precisely the right place to start. Most people hearing the lecture will have heard the word 'entropy' before and virtually none of them will have a complete understanding of it. It's an inherently confusing subject with a lot of overloaded jargon and categorical disagreement. It's really truly only explainable in mathematics and even then, it's still not complete. The definition you quoted is only applicable for a narrow range of applications and is nowhere near a complete definition. It's correct in the right context, but woefully incomplete for considerations of the information distribution of the universe.

When you really dig down, "entropy" is the negative inverse of "information". Entropy's the same "stuff", the same class of structure as what we normally call "information", but it's the information we can never access* that's generated by any interaction.

You get a totally different kind of answer if you're talking to a computer scientist, a power plant engineer, a radio transceiver operator, or mathematician.

(*Because you actually CAN recover that information, but in doing so, create a lot more unreadable information in the universe than that which you recover. That's the second law of thermodynamics, right there.)

Originally posted by ImaFungi
how does this make sense? whats the idea behind whatever falls into a black hole is preserved at the horizon forever? how and why?

Well, to be honest, it DOESN'T "make sense". Nevertheless, it turns out to be the case. It all comes from General Relativity. GR says that the rate at which time passes for two folks comparing observations depends upon the strength of gravity in the places where they made their observations -- as you experience more gravity, as you go "deeper into the gravity well", you experience less time than someone not in that state.

It's weird, but it's so. Provably. The difference in the time rates experienced by GPS satelites and GPS receivers has to be taken into account or GPS would get progressively worse every day. (The Air Force actually DEMANDED that NASA include the option to "ignore relativity" in the software `cause they just couldn't accept that this is the world we live in. Quickly discovered that with the GR on, GPS works, otherwise it doesn't.) This is observed fact.

There is a lot of other evidence for time's variable nature w/r/t gravity, but this is one most people have seen work on their phone or car.

When you look at what happens to time around black holes, you get the result that at the event horizon, for an infalling body, time will STOP as measured by a distant observer, Zero time. End of line. No change, no radiation emission (don't talk to me about Hawking radiation -- whole other deal), complete End Of Line. Things would look a lot different to the body itself, but that doesn't matter because it can never ever ever EVER communicate those sights to anyone outside the event horizon. They are completely informationally segregated from the universe and can have absolutely no causal relation to any event in the universe.

Another way to think about it is that in a black hole, all the information about a system is copied before it is ejected from the universe irretrievably.

Originally posted by ImaFungi

what happens when spiral galaxies collide and then their supermassive black holes collide? or does the initial act of collision have an effect on the black hole at the center before the 2 centers can touch?

Ok, first, the singularity isn't "at" the center of the black hole -- it IS the center of the black hole. Geometrically. It's a a place, not a thing. Specifically, it's the place where the math explodes and cannot adequately model what happens. You just wind up with infinite infinities to the infinite power all over the place.

What happens with very large mass additions/collisions to black holes? The black holes get bigger. Or rather, the event horizons, the surface we've been discussing and the place where light cannot escape the gravity, expand. What's interesting is the _rate_ at which this grows. It turns out that the relevant relation isn't "this much mass = this much volume growth" but rather "this much information = this much surface area growth". These might look similar, but mathematically they're VERY different.

But, in general, nothing special would happen in your scenarios. I mean, sure, lots of fireworks when it happens, gravity waves and relativistic matter streams and such, but that's mostly just about the delivery method for your mass. No, the once the sparks stop flying, you just get a bigger black hole.

Now, Quantum Mechanics says that black holes will slowly return their mass as completely unorganized Hawking radiation, letting them boil away, slowly. But the rate is dependent upon black hole surface area (yet again) and for a star-sized black hole, you'd have to wait many trillions of years for it to evaporate (maybe quadrillions? don't remember the exact order, but gigantonormous) and even then, all the information that went in is now gone, hence the whole discussion. They're trying to see if the hawking radiation can become patterned in its emission, "picking up" the "stored" information at the event horizon, but no one really knows which way it'll go.

Basically, that's the limit of human knowledge about our context as systems encoded in the universe. We'll need to move a lot closer to a Theory of Everything, reconciling QM, GR, and information theory to move any further on the questions.