‘Compelling Evidence’ Says Our Universe Is a Hologram

hologram

Our universe is a hologram. That’s the latest theory from numerous accredited scientists. In an article published recently in the science journal Nature, “compelling evidence” is provided by multiple studies that our universe may operate as a hologram. The evidence found by the studies, say experts, confirms some of the previous data found for string theory; a model for how the universe works that was born out of theoretical physics and proposed to the scientific community as far back as the 1960s.

Theoretical physicist Juan Maldacena is a prominent scientist who has made a career exploring string theory. In 1997 he developed a theory that advanced string theory and allowed physicists to reconcile laws of gravity with the growing field of quantum mechanics. These two independent branches of scientific thought were finally joined-at least in some respects-by Maldacena’s theory, which also supported the idea of our universe being a hologram. The most recent hologram studies were completed by Japanese scientist Yoshifumi Hyakutake, who led a team of colleagues at Ibaraki University.

Of course, the scientific process is always one of repeated testing. Theories get tested and re-tested; tweaked and re-tweaked until a definite consensus is reached by the scientific community and a working theory is put into place. String theory has had its detractors, but now, with two new papers validating that our universe may indeed be a hologram, string theory could be on the verge of getting an absolute proof.

While the journal Nature stopped short of calling the hologram theory a “proof” of string theory, the journal says the hologram theory provides “if not an actual proof, at least compelling evidence that Maldacena’s conjecture is true.” Maldacena himself has reviewed the papers and, regarding the findings, stated to the journal Nature:

It seems to be a correct calculation. (The papers) are an interesting way to test many ideas in quantum gravity and string theory. The whole sequence of papers is very nice because it tests the dual [nature of the universes] in regimes where there are no analytic tests.

While Hyakutake and his colleagues along with Maldacena are confident in the study’s calculations, other scientists are warning that before declaring the universe a hologram, it’s important to keep in mind a couple of key components regarding the research. First, say detractors, the study was done using theoretical models of fictional universes; not our own universe. The simulations Hyakutake and his team used, and the theory they formulated, says Slate reporter and scientist, Matthew R. Francis, do not “constitute a mathematical proof that these two systems are equivalent, and (don’t) demonstrate that similar methods can work for our real universe, but it’s a step further along in showing that the holographic principle could be fruitful in understanding the cosmos.”

Scientist Brian Koberlein, in an article entitled Why Our Universe Is Not a Hologram, comes right out and puts the smack-down on Hyakutake’s papers, saying, “The universe is not a hologram, certainly not in the way people think of holograms.” Koberlein also cited a Tweet from Astrophysicist Ethan Siegal, who mocked newspaper reporters’ headlines about Hyakutake’s research. The Tweet seemed to suggest that reporters’ headlines are too sensational, and that a better headline would be “Important idea of string theory shown not to be mathematically inconsistent in one particular way.” Luckily, however, physicists don’t have to do the job of journalists, and vice versa. There is “compelling evidence” that our universe is a hologram, say scientists, but there will always be opposing points of view until a definite consensus is reached. Until then, the research will continue, and so will the headlines.

By: Rebecca Savastio

Nature

Slate

Universe Today

13 Responses to "‘Compelling Evidence’ Says Our Universe Is a Hologram"

  1. Judith Woolworth Donahue   December 29, 2013 at 8:02 pm

    Would that not be a way To explain how god could be good yet STill not do anything about bad things? IF its not real it leaves God free from evil? If all was only a hologram than the ONLY evil is thought since action is null…God could easily know the mind of a man by how he acts when he percieves something is real…yet no actual crime or offense could be committed…WHO better to create the ultimate hologram ,,,,GOD…

    hmmm if someone could figure out the codecs…..could de program age,,, remove illness…just like going into the programming of a video game…

    Judith Woolworth Donahue

    Reply
  2. John   December 29, 2013 at 7:27 pm

    This just proves that unless you can touch it, you can not prove it is real. Even then, what you feel could be argued as interpretations in your brain. Like people that have their toes itch on a leg that is not there. Sometimes we are just so smart we are stupid.

    Reply
  3. David Wolf   December 19, 2013 at 9:47 am

    It would be helpful to see an explanation of what it means that the universe is a hologram (if it is.) The common understanding of holograms is that they are 3D projections of images into or onto special substrates, such as etched reflectors. In other words, the hologram is a representation of something that is not “actually there.” So how does this relate to the idea that the entire universe is a hologram? What are the implications?

    Reply
    • MRasheed   May 16, 2014 at 1:17 pm

      It implies that the physical universe is a finite illusion, while the eternal spirit realm mentioned in sacred scripture is the only real place.

      Reply
  4. Jack   December 18, 2013 at 10:07 pm

    Stfu.

    Reply
  5. Gaibo   December 18, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    Wow, you’re a genius. Before mapping out mathematical equations, maybe you could start by getting a clue about what you are talking about. Aggregating content of other sources does not make your article contribute to anything.

    Reply
  6. tabitha quat   December 18, 2013 at 4:54 pm

    Holograms would be more fun than either this article or the comments posted about it. For these reasons, I believe the universe is a fun house mirror, rather than a hologram: the former is always strange and disappointing, like a grade six dance, or (again) this article and posted comments.

    Reply
  7. Kim Ruble   December 18, 2013 at 9:58 am

    Great story, Rebecca! I really enjoyed reading it. Such an interesting topic!!

    Reply
  8. Rebecca Savastio   December 17, 2013 at 11:47 am

    Michael, since you weren’t able to comprehend an overview of the evidence from the article, here is the abstract for your convenience. I’m sure it will make perfect sense and fill in all the missing gaps in my article: “We investigate a bunch of D0-branes to reveal its quantum nature from the gravity side. In the classical limit, it is well described by a non-extremal black 0-brane in type IIA supergravity. The solution is uplifted to the eleven dimensions and expressed by a non-extremal M-wave solution. After reviewing the effective action for the M-theory, we explicitly solve the equations of motion for the near horizon geometry of the M-wave. As a result we derive an unique solution which includes the effect of the quantum gravity. Thermodynamic property of the quantum near horizon geometry of the black 0-brane is also studied by using Wald’s formula. Combining our result with that of the Monte Carlo simulation of the dual thermal gauge theory, we find strong evidence for the gauge/gravity duality in the D0-branes system at the level of quantum gravity.” Further, additional information is listed in the sources section for those with superior minds such as yourself. Feel free to read both papers, which are available within the sources. Being that the layperson is not a theoretical physicist I attempted to present the information in a concise manner. I see now that the Hoi Polloi is simply beneath your level of intellect.

    Reply
    • Aston   December 17, 2013 at 11:17 pm

      Nice try Rebecca. Listing a bunch of science mumbo jumbo, which you clearly do not understand, doesn’t justify your lack of filling in a few simple details you should have in your article. Michael is correct, we’re both just pointing out your poor journalism.

      Reply
    • John   December 18, 2013 at 1:13 pm

      LOL!

      What a b!tch you are.

      You didn’t really dive into any simple details on the evidence, nor on the implications.

      I AM a theoretical physicist, and you could’ve done better on this writing project of yours.

      Reply
  9. Michael   December 17, 2013 at 9:41 am

    So… just what is this compelling evidence? What would the hologram idea imply? Does it mean that what Kepler is looking at isn’t really stars, nebulae, galaxies, etc? Is there a reason why this article doesn’t go into the meaning of the headline? Or is the article’s intended audience estimated to be too dumb to understand these answers?

    Reply
  10. MissCurious   December 17, 2013 at 8:44 am

    Brian Koberlein is right on this I do agree with what his written about Universe being Hologram !! I got excited when I came across this news but I don’t agree with half of the stuff here happening after reading it.. Even if we start to think of it the 1st most question arises is whose on the other end …

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.