Information in the Holographic Universe

Math toy

"Math toy" ?

Strange reply.

"But it is another aspect of the holographic bound that is truly astonishing. Namely, that the maximum possible entropy depends on the boundary area instead of the volume. "

In other words the amount of information contained within anything in three dimensions is defined by its area rather than its volume.

By toy I asume you mean "frivolous", "petty", "irrelevant to important matters" ?

I don't think the results of this study are completely useless but they only have validity if the beginning assumptions are correct. Do actual relativistic black holes exist? If they do then the study is useful, if they don't then the results are just a math headgame. The problem with these kinds of "discoveries" is that they are purely theoretical and touted highly by other true believers in the previous dozen "discoveries". We need more actual discoveries through telescopes and fewer from the blackboard.

Jeremy,

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote><b>We need more actual discoveries through telescopes and fewer from the blackboard.</b><hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>


Here, here.



Knowing to believe only half
of what you hear is a sign of
intelligence. Knowing which
half to believe can make you
a genius.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>...the amount of information contained within anything in three dimensions is defined by its area rather than its volume.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I read this story in the magazine and found it to be credible from this standpoint:

The entire universe is ... alternatively ... only as big as approximately the radius of a proton. By <i>alternatively</i>, I mean that we know nothing about the universe except by means of the information immediately upon us. We don't see other galaxies but rather detect light on the retina. Same thing for a particle of matter ... i.e. a proton "knows" the rest of the universe (and hence its rules) from whatever information is immediately upon it.

Thus, the universe we see ... from the standpoint of information ... is what is played out on the surface of a sphere with the individual observer at its center. So, from the "extension denial" point of view, the information content has much to do with a <i>surface</i> rather than a volume which accepts physical extension as real.

I believe that there is no way to determine absolutely if physical extension is real or apparent ... though it wouldn't make much sense to think of the world as <i>played out on the surface of a sphere</i> as a newborn would do.

I'm not sure the amount of information contained in something is a clue to anything other than its nature. With a hologram you have information in the form of interference lines (or strings) on a 2D surface that produces an effect that at some 'superficial' level has properties comparable to our normal experience of 3D, such as perspective being fundamentaly relevant. New and different information is presented depending on concepts that (excitingly to me) equate in a small way with relativity. You don't need to visit quantum mechanics to get the idea that everything has both a subjective and objective reality. The thing everyone seems to miss is that the objective reality only exists when the subjective one is deliberately eliminated. Only when you 'decide' where and when you're observing something, can that thing have its objective properties. So maybe einstein had sussed the qauntum world, but couldn't remove his final barrier of "pure objectivity".

Subjectively light is a particle, objectively it is a wave.

Discuss