YHK - yet another hacker news clone

Gravity Seems Holographic. What Does That Mean for Reality?

24 points ibobev 1 hour ago 26 comments

yepyoukno 1 hour ago | parent

Gravity is half spin hyperdimensional vector torsion. I have decided to accept “half spin torsion” as “vortex” and see gravity as the torsion interference along a G <timespace> dimensionality.

There are other dimensionality!

The dimensions are like origami, not parallel universes, however the relationships are as though such (all origami pieces then hyperdimensionality relate.)

If we call the underlying “universal potential” and whatever we think our universe as, is a plane for hyperdimensional coordinates, much of this will begin to make sense.

Gravity (and space time) is a “universal field” that “falls” Around the distributed mass (vector torsions of mass particles) and mass particles are universal potential (same stuff as measured energy in a photon) is half spin vector locked discrete amounts.

Sub-atomic particles may then be discrete spin lock configurations and not distinct in any other way.

This would make the Higgs particle a lie, and the Higgs field this deformation of gravitational surface area.

Just what I’ve come up with. Existential reality (universal potential distributing) is holographic and gravity is half spin vector torsion on a plane of universal existence.

krapp 59 minutes ago | parent

Physics threads on HN can be so entertaining.

copperx 47 minutes ago | parent

Any HN thread where real thought is required devolves into insanity quickly.

yepyoukno 28 minutes ago | parent

How is your pedophile America crusade going?

Get to the bottom of who is running it all yet?

Den_VR 46 minutes ago | parent

What if you half spin the other direction?

yepyoukno 30 minutes ago | parent

Why would it matter?

A torsion to the right, a torsion to the left mate in circular momentum.

Sounds like complementary spins.

classified 40 minutes ago | parent

> Sub-atomic particles may then be discrete spin lock configurations and not distinct in any other way.

Using a spin lock is wasteful and not the best move in times of rising energy prices. Use a mutex to put the waiting thread to sleep.

yepyoukno 29 minutes ago | parent

Spin lock traps potential, requiring more energy than available to release.

That trapped potential in time and space is mass rather than radial propagation.

done_lurking 13 minutes ago | parent

This is an interesting theory, but I think it has less explanatory power than the Sugon framework for gravity.

glenstein 1 hour ago | parent

As a non expert who's just curious about science but also tries to talk like a normal person, from what I can tell holography really seems like it's now the leading candidate to be the next big conceptual revolution in physics.

There's not necessarily any breakthrough right around the corner and we shouldn't rush to coronation preemptively, but there's a lot of physics "voting with their feet" for holography as the article says, and I think it's officially time to start getting hyped. It could have sanity-restoring answers to questions of quantum weirdness, albeit at the rather expensive cost of giving up even more on our day to day intuitions about space and time in favor of an apparently informational substrate.

String theory had a generation of great science communicators writing its books and singing its praises, but holography doesn't yet have equivalent public champions, and I hope that's something that changes sooner than later.

ck2 26 minutes ago | parent

isn't holographic universe a similar concept to string theory in that they both propose higher dimensions projecting into lower dimensions

string theory, 11 dimensions, is bonkers though, it's what happens when people are too smart for their own good imho lol

auntienomen 23 minutes ago | parent

I don't think the distinction between holography and string theory is as clean as you're making it. The vague idea of holography predates string theory, but most of the working examples we have of holography come from string theory. That's what AdS/CFT is: It's an explicitly holographic description of superstring theory in an anti-Desitter space. It's frankly bizarre that the author of this article doesn't mention that fact. I suspect we are seeing a popular science rebranding of string theory without the word strings.

phailhaus 50 minutes ago | parent

> Holography implies that you can do that — reconstruct every fold, vessel, and neuron in three dimensions — without actually looking inside. Simply photographing the surface of the brain somehow suffices.

Gah I am not a fan of pop-sci simplifications like this for the sake of a soundbite. The author goes onto explain how no, a picture is not enough, you need to actually measure the distortion of spacetime at the surface. Somebody is going to walk away thinking this stuff is possible, that maybe psychics really can detect something wrong with them.

glenstein 29 minutes ago | parent

I know what you mean and I think you're right, but I take it as the cost of doing business when trying to turn frontier physics into layperson analogies. You're not going to use an analogy to successfully complete a calculation of black hole entropy, you're going to use it to convey the high level intuition that "stuff on inside = stuff on boundary".

Because if we litigate the imperfections of analogies all day long, then you're going to react to videos titled "black holes described at five levels of difficulty" by saying the first four levels were all wrong, which may in a sense be technically true but not in the spirit of the exercise.

Razengan 41 minutes ago | parent

<Layperson>

Just as acceleration through space causes [the same effect as] gravity, could regular gravity be the movement through TIME?

Could gravity be a facet of time as electricity is to magnetism and vice versa? and the reason we cannot "isolate" gravity is because it's interwoven with time?

But then it would be weird that photos who don't experience time are affected by gravity..

Or maybe space, time and gravity are a trinity?

(no I'm not high, but maybe I should be)

condour75 31 minutes ago | parent

is this why i increase in mass and volume every year?

Razengan 6 minutes ago | parent

Do you also attract more things?

hughw 38 minutes ago | parent

When I read "But holography really starts to bite only after..." my LLM-dar goes off. Everything I read up to that point was comprehensible, but man, I have developed a shudder reaction to any language suggesting AI was involved ibn its creation.

burnte 27 minutes ago | parent

I find AI written stuff to be hard to read. Part of my career is being a writer and I take great pride in my outout. AI written materials is a slog because you can see how it's pumping out words to hit various metrics rather than what's needed for the task.

haitchfivee 31 minutes ago | parent

My nitpick is with something the author said in passing about Hawking. Yes, around 1970 Hawking and the scientific community at large still used to believe nothing could escape a black hole, and between 1971 and 1973 Hawking along with Penrose and others expanded their evolving understanding and consequences of of Albert Einstein's breakthrough work.

But then Hawking argued back the opposite case, which in simple terms means that some things can, indeed, escape an event horizon. In fact, name dropping Hawking just to mention his views as they stood before his 1973 work, and his 1974 model of Hawking radiation seems dangerously incomplete journalistic reporting.

In 1974 Hawking formulated what we now know as Hawking Radiation, which is the *exact opposite* of what was previously believed about the impossibility of anything coming back from a black hole. Whilst still not conclusively proven as a physical fact, this did win him the Special Fundamental Physics Prize in 2013. specifically for his discovery of Hawking radiation from black holes and his deep contributions to quantum gravity and quantum aspects of the early universe.

glenstein 25 minutes ago | parent

I find myself not agreeing with a lot of nitpicks, but this is a good one! The article says "Contrary to what Stephen Hawking argued, black holes are not inescapable prisons." But information escaping black holes is named after him! He definitely, in the full scope of his career, was perfectly agreeable to the idea of information escaping black holes.

GodelNumbering 29 minutes ago | parent

This reads like someone asked the LLM to write an article with "but write in first person". There are factual errors, wrong definitions, misleading intuitions. Entropy is not a "measure of how much stuff fits inside an object”, gravity does not allow you to "infer the one real arrangement of stuff inside from the warping of space-time at the surface of your box" (many different configurations will measure the same on the surface), De Sitter space do have “boundary surface” (at past/future infinity).

For a scientific article, I would expect a lot better, and you'll probably have a better learning experience talking to a frontier llm

jumploops 26 minutes ago | parent

> “You can ‘compress all of the three-dimensional world into two dimensions.’”

Would this imply that time is the third dimension?

stronglikedan 19 minutes ago | parent

Wouldn't time be one of the two resulting dimensions - the other being space?

toddmorey 15 minutes ago | parent

Aside: Quanta magazine always has excellent design & visuals.