gungasnake wrote:The major feature of a hologram is that you can't destroy one part of it individually, all such an attempt does is degrade the entire hologram on a percentage basis. Sort of like an insurance company if you think about it.
Physical reality doesn't behave like that. Individual structures can in fact be destroyed.
Joe Nation wrote:Is the Universe a Hologram? Maybe the tiny part we can see is, the visible matter, about 4% of everything in the Universe. The vast majority of the stuff in the Universe isn't stuff, it's either dark matter (about 22%) or dark energy (74%).
You guys are misunderstanding what they mean by "hologram". They are not referring to the shiny images you might find on a credit card. They only mean that we live in a flat two-dimensional universe that maintains the illusion of having three dimensions.
farmerman wrote:as a 2D world, wed always face the same way.
Maybe we do. We don't really perceive our 2-D existence. We only perceive the illusion of a 3-D reality.
But maybe in those 2-D processes behind the 3-D illusion, we are not coherent organisms that could be said to be facing anything at all.
rosborne979 wrote:I like theories that help us understand some of the big questions in cosmology, like "what exactly is Dark Energy", and "what exactly is Dark Matter made up of"?
I wish people would stop naming stuff "dark something".
"Dark matter" made a bit of sense as a label. "Dark energy", not so much. Subsequent attempts at "dark something" haven't really taken off (thankfully), but now it seems like every time someone identifies a new issue in cosmology, they try to name it "dark something".
rosborne979 wrote:Unfortunately, String Theory and Hologram Universes don't really do much more than make the math look more neat and tidy.
"Having the math work well" is a very important part of a theory.