Is The Universe A Hologram?

Is The Universe A Hologram?

[INTRO MUSIC] What if I told you
were a hologram? Or maybe I’m getting
ahead of myself. In my quest to become better
acquainted with reality, I decided to get the
perspective of someone who devoted their life to
discovering the true nature of the universe. Leonard Susskind is one of
the founders of string theory and Scientific America’s
bad boy of physics. I’m a professor of physics
at Stanford University. And I think about physics. CRAIG: Like many
physicists, Susskind spends his days
trying to understand how the universe works. But physicists
don’t always agree. And about 40 years
ago, a major battle began in the physics community
that lasted for decades. And winning the battle
required rethinking the very nature of reality CRAIG: There are two
prevailing theories, the theory of relativity
and then quantum mechanics, that seem to be at
odds with each other. Well, Yeah, they do seem to
be at odds with each other, and always had from the get go. But they can’t be at
odds with each other, because they’re both true. We’ve got to make them fit. We’ve got to make
them fit together. CRAIG: So in 1915,
Albert Einstein published his general
relativity theory, which explains how gravity
and space-time work. And quantum mechanics was
developed a few years later by these people. LEONARD SUSSKIND: You
know, quantum mechanics is about very, very
small and light things which are so delicate that
any way that you touch them or any way that you
observe them, they change. Relativity is about gravity. Gravity is about
very heavy objects. MATT: So relativity
is great at explaining the motions of big things,
like stars and planets, but not so good at tiny
things, like particles. CRAIG: Yes. And physicists are always on
the lookout for one theory that explains everything. But in the day to day life of
a cosmologist or a particle physicist, you’re usually
dealing with very big things or very small things. So for the time being
two theories was OK. That is, until a young physicist
who was studying black holes had a brilliant idea that
screwed everything up. LEONARD SUSSKIND:
Stephen Hawking put his finger on
a very important, what’s called a paradox. A paradox means something which
apparently looks contradictory. What he recognized
is that things that fall into a black
hole are lost completely. They’re lost, and they
can never come out. On the other hand,
quantum mechanics says, and this is one of its very,
very basic ingredients, that nothing can
ever really be lost. Information, the
distinctions between things, can’t really be lost. But what does he
mean by information? I mean, I lose
information all the time. I can’t remember
where I parked my car, my dog ate my book report. That’s a little different. When Susskind talks
about information, he’s referring to
the distinctions between the fundamental
particles that make up the atoms in our bodies
and the rest of the universe. For instance, I could take
this book and burn it. Hey, I’m not
finished with that. I’m not going to burn it. But if I did, you wouldn’t
be able to read it, because it would be a
pile of ash and smoke. However, from a
physics perspective, the atoms that make
up the paper and ink in the letters and
the tragic love story would still be there and could,
theoretically, be recombined if we had the right tools. In fact, I think
of it as more basic than any of the other
principles of physics. The most basic
principle of physics is that distinctions
never disappear. Now, take that same book,
toss it in a black hole, and you’ve got
yourself a problem. According to Hawking,
all that information is irretrievably lost. Why is that, exactly? Well, it has something to do
with what Hawking discovered about black holes. Well, maybe we should explain
what a black hole is first. Go for it. A black hole is a
region of space composed of super densely packed matter. Because of it’s mind-boggling
density, it’s pull of gravity is so strong that nearby planets
and stars can get sucked in. And nothing, not even
light, can escape once it’s gone beyond the
black hole’s event horizon. So it’s a point of
no return, in a sense. It’s a point of no return
in which when anything falls through it, it simply
cannot get out, because in a sense space is
moving inward at faster than the speed of light. So in 1974. Stephen Hawking basically said
that all matter and information that goes into a black
hole is lost forever. And I guess Susskind
wasn’t too happy about this. No way. He actually wrote
a book about it. The Black Hole War, My
Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe
for Quantum Mechanics. Yeah. Right. Could you describe
this battle, and why it was a war you felt it
was necessary to fight? Well, as I said, Stephen was
basically a gravity physicist, a general relativist. And he believed
in the principles of general relativity. Nothing else mattered. I was always a
quantum physicist. And when Stephen said that
it looks like black holes, because they lose
information into them, violate the principles
of quantum mechanics, I and a couple of my friends,
in particular a physicist by the name of Gerard ‘t Hooft,
a very famous Dutch physicist, said, no, that can’t be right. And we didn’t know
why he was wrong, but we knew he was wrong. He held his ground. We held our ground. But eventually, we began
to make sense of in what way Hawking was wrong. It’s a basic
principle of the way we think of classical
physics, that a thing can only be in one place. If it’s here, it’s not there. If it’s there, it’s not here. What was going on is
that, in some funny sense, quantum mechanics
was requiring that it could be in the sense in
two places at the same time. What? How is that even possible? Yeah, what’s he talking about? We begin to get the idea,
in particular, ‘t Hooft and myself, that what was
going on on the horizon of a black hole was
similar to a hologram. That the surface
of the black hole, the horizon of the black hole,
was like a photographic film. And what fell into
the black hole was like the image created,
a three-dimensional image created. CRAIG: So their idea
was that any matter that falls into a black hole
remains trapped inside. But at the same
time, an exact copy is perfectly preserved
on the horizon. This by itself was a
revolutionary idea. But Susskind and his
crew soon realized that the holographic principle
doesn’t necessarily only apply to black holes. Once we understood
that what was inside falling into the black
hole, inside the black hole, was a kind of projection
of the horizon, we began to understand
the idea was more general, that the entire three
dimensionality of space is a projection of a
very distant horizon that surrounds us. And not the horizon
of a black hole, it’s the horizon of the universe. And instead of being
on the outside of it, like we would be if there
was a black hole here, we were on the inside of it. And so you could say that
we on the inside of it are a projection of this
film-like thing that’s on the boundary of the universe. So while we stand here
in The Good Stuff studio, and while you watch this
video at home, or at work, or in prison awaiting trial,
whatever you’re doing, we are actually projections
of equivalent versions of ourselves that live on the
outer surface of the universe. Whatever happens here,
happens there, and vice versa and vice universa. So I’m a hologram? This isn’t real? Oh my god. Is the real me just
a battery that’s powering a universe-wide
simulation? No, Matt, you’re
not in the Matrix. There is no spoon. It’s just that you’re here,
and you’re sort of over there as well. Well, if we’re here and also
there, are we the projection, or is the outer
surface the projection? Which one’s reality? Are we on the inside
of the universe, or have we actually been in the
outer surface this whole time? That’s your choice. You decide. But the mathematics
says they’re equivalent. I feel like I’m here Yeah, but so does your
image on the boundary. It’s also saying, I
feel like I’m here. Oh, man. Right, right. But the mathematics doesn’t care
which way you think about it. It says there’s an equivalence. That’s about all we can say. Physicists do not
like the word reality. We may talk about
it all the time. But when it comes
down to it, we really don’t want to say this is
reality and that’s not reality. There are mathematical
connections between things. And that’s got to be it, because
we don’t have insight enough to be able to tell
which is reality. That’s pretty wild. It is pretty wild. And not surprisingly, the idea
of the holographic principle was initially met with
a bit of skepticism. This was a wild idea at first. Nobody really accepted it. I think for the most part the
reaction of our colleagues were, those guys used
to be smart guys. I think they’ve
lost their marbles. The world is a hologram? That’s too crazy. Eventually, the idea got put
into a very, very precise form by a young Argentinian physicist
by the name of Juan Maldecena. Juan Maldecena is now one of the
great physicists of the world, maybe the greatest
physicist of the world. It’s now gone from being
a wild-eyed conjecture to being an every-day
working tool of physics. After Juan Maldecena’s
mathematical realization of the holographic principle,
Hawking conceded defeat. He admitted that he was
wrong about information being lost in a black hole, calling it
his biggest blunder in science. So how does Susskind
feel about Hawking after he admitted he was wrong? All of these ideas were
put in place as a response to a very, very deep question
Stephen Hawking asked. He was incredibly
perceptive to see that there was this tension there. And all of the ideas
of modern physics that are exciting
all of us now trace right back to his question. So to say he was just
wrong is a pale reflection of what really happened. So does Stephen Hawking
now fully support the holographic principle? As far as I can tell
he supports these ideas. But that’s kind of irrelevant,
because the rest of the physics community does. You know, we get old. Steven gets old. I get old. At some point it doesn’t
matter what he or I think. OK, so the physics
community generally accepts this is a
plausible theory. That’s all well and good, Craig. But how can something so
insane-sounding be true? Well, maybe you just
don’t understand it. I don’t understand it. Well, why is this stuff
so hard to understand? When people ask me
about these things, I always give the same answer. Our neural wiring, the
thing that we inherited from our ancestors,
and I don’t mean our ancestors our
grandparents, I mean, you know, the worms in the muck. Through evolution, the neural
wiring that we inherited was not built for
quantum mechanics. It was not built for
higher dimensions. It was not built for thinking
about curved space-time. It was built for
classical physics. It was built for
rocks and stones and all the ordinary objects. And it was built for
three dimensional space. And that’s not quite
good enough for us to be able to visualize
and internalize the ideas of quantum mechanics
and general relativity and so forth. So instead, what do we do? We use mathematics. Eventually, in time we
develop intuitions out of the abstract mathematics. We get better at it. And we begin to think that way. But that can be
extremely frustrating when trying to explain
to the outside world. The outside world
by and large has not had that experience of
going through the rewiring process of converting
their minds into something that can
deal with 5 dimensions, 10 dimensions, or the quantum
mechanical uncertainty principle, or whatever
it happens to be. And so the best we can do is
to use analogies, metaphors. And the holographic
principle is a metaphor. The way I’ve described
it in terms of a hologram is not precise. It’s not exactly accurate. It’s close. It captures some of the ideas. But there is a whole raft
of mathematics behind it that I can’t easily
transfer to you. Yeah. I should’ve paid more
attention in math class. Well, it wouldn’t
have been enough. Yeah. I know what you mean. Like, even learning
about relativity, just learning about
how time works and how time is a dimension, it
took me a while to fully grasp. No, you would get it. You would get it if you
took a couple years. I mean, I don’t know what your
level of mathematics is, but– I was good in high school. That’s good enough. If you were good in
mathematics in high school, then within a year
or two of effort these ideas could be conveyed. Yeah. But to do so in my living room
here in an hour, all we can do is try to use metaphors
and analogies. Right. So it’s possible that
after a few years of rigorous
mathematical training, we could potentially
understand these principles. Still, Susskind admits
that not everyone will be able to understand,
or even want to. And that’s OK. In my experience there’s
a lot of people out there who understand that they
can’t understand it, and are very glad
that somebody can. There’s also people
who are very resentful. They’re resentful. They think there
is a conspiracy, a conspiracy that the priesthood
of science is hiding something. Can you tell them no? Can you tell them? No, no, no. We’re not hiding anything. We want more than
anything else that people should listen to us, and
understand what we’re saying. But we’re stuck with this
obstacle of mathematics. So if you want to
understand the universe beyond the basic stuff
that we can see and touch, you gotta learn the math. Right. But it’s also OK if you don’t
know the math, because there are people out there
who have devoted their lives and
years of research to understanding this stuff. And they’re doing
a pretty good job. Science is a constantly
evolving field. But there is plenty
that they do know. And they’re getting better and
better at making predictions. So what did Susskind
think is in store for the future of physics
and our understanding of the universe? Yeah, I think this
holographic idea is permanent in the
vocabulary of physicists. It’s in the textbooks. It’s going to stay
in the textbooks. But how the whole story
is going to play out, the universe, how
quantum mechanics fits together with
gravity and so forth, I think there’s only one
thing that’s certain, that there will be surprises. Some of them will
come from experiments. Some of them will come
from giant telescopes. And some of them will come from
mathematical and theoretical thinking about how
things fit together. And I think one
can be pretty sure that anybody who thinks that
they have the final answer now is smokin’ something bad. Or maybe they should be
smoking something better. Ha-ha-ha. Don’t do drugs, kids. But I think
there’s every reason to believe that the future
will hold surprises. So for me to sit here and to
predict how physics will evolve in the next century or so
is a total waste of time, because I’ll be wrong. Good answer. So there’s still a
lot to be discovered. But there’s no way to
know how our understanding of the universe is going
to change in the future. And, as we’ve learned
throughout the episode, it’s hard to even know
what’s happening right now. So what are we supposed to do? Well, I guess we
just have to trust that there are people out there
who are diligently working to figure out how our world
works, where we come from, and where we’re going. And at the same time, we
have to be a little cautious dealing with people who claim
to have all the answers. Great summation, Craig. Thank you. Pretty nice day out. Want to go outside and
throw the football around? That’s some classical physics
I can wrap my head around. Let’s go buddy. Hey, guys, wait for me. Thanks for watching our Seeing
Isn’t Believing playlist. If you, or the other you on the
outer surface of the universe, liked this video, consider
clicking Like down there. And if you want to be notified
when our next video comes out, subscribe. And if you’d like to support
our show and keep it going, visit our patreon page, and
you can get a cool perk. Go long, Craig! Longer. Even longer. Don’t stop. It’s going to be a bomber. [MUSIC PLAYING]

Only registered users can comment.

  1. I'm sorry, but these physicists sound like loons. They talk all day about stuff they can never prove and things they can't see. How are they really any different than Jews, Jesuits, Mormons and Muslims? These physicists are primarily priests of a different persuasion.

  2. To the writers, good work but on, say 2:31 you don't need to elaborate these things too much…less is more-even with humor.
    (I'm speaking in general, not trying to target that line…it wasn't bad lol. Everyone gets carried away though so you know, keep on keeping it real)

  3. Susskind needs to be in some kind of Mafia movie at some point. "Look, kid, the way I see it, we all die. Maybe you today; maybe me tomorrow. So, what's it gonna be?"

  4. Humans were wired through evolution to limit their reasoning in 3 dimensions.

    Which is why AI Machines will evolve to be superior.

  5. This guy is Professor at a Prestige School and still can't grasp Einstein was wrong, that gravity does not exist, that we're not floating around in a vacuum. Lol. Weird world we live in.

  6. once we pass on…we will know and we will understand..,, maybe as we speak ,,,we might be inside a black hole….maybe a black hole is used as filters to cleanse the universe…kool video…lol

  7. A nice little dose of propaganda…why not? some comedy to start the day? science fiction turned out to be a good choice,it put a smile on my face.

  8. Summary

    Hawkings: Black holes empty the Universe's Recycle Bin.

    Susskind: No, black holes copy and paste all of the files and store one set in a back-up folder.

    Hawkings: Control+Z.

  9. No – it’s just a figment of our imagination wrapped up in the great big crochet into which we are all inextricably interwoven – and stuff – who cares about the the theory of relative titties anyway errr – hmmmm 🤣

  10. I am so glad he addressed the infantility of the people who believe there's this grand conspiracy to hide the shape of the Earth.

  11. I loved the part on 10.52 "Eventually in time we develop intuition in place of abstract mathematics. " I always felt mathematics is also a language built for a specific purpose. You can write down in maths stuff that you can't visualise.

  12. as string theory already collapsed, L.SUSSKIND is bullshit, just an old man jealous of S.Hawking.

  13. Once, while having a hardcore manic episode, I put my arm in and out of a wall without making a hole, or leaving a mark.

    I even gave the finger to a guy standing on the other side, and he confirmed it for me after he came rushing into the room, all freaked out.

    To find out whether or not it truly happened, you'd have to check with the doctors and nurses, and the camera behind the giant mirror; 'cause there's always a camera behind the giant mirror.

  14. I can prove it is very real with a ball bat, a knife or a bullet. Thank you for coming tonight.

  15. Discredited scientists. "Gravity". Lmao. Density. NO GRAVITY.. Thats an invented "theory" by a Catholic priest. He is totally wasting his time trying to work out the universe when it doesn't exist like he has been Brainwashed into believing. And he thinks the "Theory" of gravity is real , even tho no real evidence is available :. Density debunked gravity.. Electromag levitation disproves gravity as the only force needed to overcome is electromagnetic force and not gravity… He is wasting time amd money, all he does is invent shit according to his indoctrinated logic, it isn't evidence based. He thinks he knows it all. Light cannot travel through the void of fake space because it needs a medium to travel along the same as sound and radio… Light dissapears instantly when the source is stopped or it is cut off from the source. Impossible for light to be coming from distant dead stars…. He should know that. Especially about light because that is part of quantum physics… He's either uneducated, therefore a nobody worth listening to or a liar and deciever also a nobody worth listening to.

  16. So Stephen Hawking said, black holes erase information. Then he said he was wrong. So how did he KNOW back then? sigh

    It's guessing and speculation. The scientists are delving into things the human brain isn't wired to understand. And they will guess wrong many times before getting it right.

  17. This genius mind states it is impossible for man to comprehend the mechanics of the that one should then conclude the "average man" was not meant to and just give up trying….This is what is called a gate-keeper folks. You don't understand the machine by using logic and math…They are meant to be dead ends, wasters of your life and energy only to arrive at the same point you were before only older maybe richer…who cares.. Fact of the matter is you are still in the box..A prison for every aspect of your being…This is so simple a child can understand it…and meant to.

  18. Thanks guys, great interview. The way i see it, we can learn a vast majority about physics and how the world works by learning about the concepts. But if one wants to be able to do any calculations and predictions in physics then that is where the maths comes in. I am terrible at maths but pretty good with the concepts.. Susskind obviously is excellent at both ! 🙂

  19. There's a paradox here. Jus the fact that you reason you are just a projections from an identical you living on the boundary of the universe, but that you feel you are here, inside, and that's real, doesn't make sense because that would mean the real you, if that's true, on the boundary, say exactly those words (as you say them) although you should reasonably have completely different perspective from the outside or boundary, still you reason like you ARE inside the projections. People projected on film don't reason they are on film, if they are just a recorded and then projected version of real people in 3D space. So no, although this could perhaps be derived mathematically, logically (in a philosophical sense) doesn't hold water…

  20. They are BOTH "reality.".
    As they ARE 'equal.'.
    So that means there IS a bridge between ALL things.
    THAT would be an interesting space.. .

  21. Reality is the physical form of consciousness. The human body is a flesh and bone vehicle for the spirit, an avatar for consciousness. As The Bible says "We live in God and God lives in us" we are all one in the same. Love always.

  22. Body self and BIG ultimate reality self, like fractals self-similar. Which is real, the roots or the tree?

  23. Sounds exactly like we have a magnified curved screen right above us at the edge of the universe, which projects to the outside, what is going on in the inside. This really fits with the bible

  24. After watching many videos on NDEs and listening to different professionals state their opinions, I feel a sense of obligation to finally share my experience, which, with the help of Hubble, has definitely been verified…

    My NDE happened over 47 years ago when I was struck by lightning while talking on the telephone in my living room. According to several doctors at the hospital, it was a miracle that I was not physically damaged in any way. When I was able to talk, I kept telling them about the beautiful light and the magnificent journey that I'd taken through the stars etc, to meet it, but none could explain where I'd been. It was my home doctor who later suggested that I had possibly been momentarily dead. I described the unforgettable Light to many people in the years that followed – some seemed to understand but most thought it was probably just an illusion. 

    During the 80s and 90s, a lot of doctors who made comments on NDEs described them as something that was programmed within the mind to take place during death, in order to help people deal with the dying process. This came as a big disappointment to me because my beautiful experience with the multi-coloured Light had taken away the fear of death and helped me move towards a path that would eventually allow me to understand much more about myself and the world/universe around me than anyone had ever taught me. I reluctantly began to accept the doctors' explanations with deep regret, until one day in 2003, I was glancing through a newspaper and came across a picture taken by Hubble of the Cone Nebula. The picture was in colour and instantly took my breath away – I trembled and my head spun. It looked exactly like the Light that I'd visited in 1970 and had been describing to people ever since – (even Today, it seems like I was there only a moment ago). 

    The Light was the most beautiful experience of love and security, that even after all these years nothing has compared. It felt like I'd found my way home after being lost in a scary jungle. The Light's multitude of vibrant colours all blended together in what seemed to be perfect harmony. Each of the colours seemed to be intelligent – it was as if they were alive and sending me a loving welcome. Then I was sucked backwards away just as quickly as I'd arrived. I burst back into the bubble that I'd burst out of before I'd entered space to head to the Light. 

    From then on, I began questioning everything that I'd been taught about God. It was as though something inside me had been switched on, exposing me of a far-distant extension of my reality and it was very scary. I was left with a huge void to fill and no knowledge of how to fill it. Motivated by an underlying driving force, I began searching for something with no idea of what it was. I went from one country to the next and to add to my dilemma, I seemed to arrive just in time for a disaster, including revolutions, typhoons and earthquakes etc. There were so many times that I could have been killed like the many others around me that were. 

    Then one day while I was napping in Hong Kong, I had a dream and in it I was informed that there was, even more, chaos to confront before my destiny would take me to a country, where I would meet my best friend (future friend that is) who would take me to the foot of a great pointed mountain. Once there I would find the truth that I needed to find. I told friends about the dream, who laughed and joked about it – I also laughed with them. Not long after the strange dream 500 hundred people were killed by landslides all around me – an apartment building a couple of doors away from mine, fell over knocking the top 5 floors off the empty building being built beneath it – there were cries of horror and the smell of rotting bodies. Unable to cope, I jumped on a plane and headed for Manila, arriving just in time for a record-breaking flood and the revolution that ended the Marcus ruling. I had to run for my life and leave all my belongings behind to get on a rescue flight back to Hong Kong. 

    By then I was drinking heavily and so depressed that I was even thinking of suicide. An agent was in Hong Kong looking for a replacement vocalist for an American band that was playing in a Tokyo club. Next thing I knew, I was in Japan trying my best to perform with a very wild heavy metal band (no easy task for a cabaret singer). At the club, I met someone who became the best mate that I'd ever had. He taught me to chant the words Nam-myoho-renge kyo and took me to a beautiful temple at the foot of Mount Fuji (I knew right away that it was the pointed mountain that I'd been told about in my dream). As most religious groups do, the organisation promoting the chant, claimed to be the only ones right while all the others were wrong. The chant had an amazing effect on my daily life – it was like an awakening and somehow it connected me to the beautiful Light – there were even moments while chanting, that I experienced some of the wonderment that I'd felt at the Light.

    I stuck with the organisation to learn as much as I could and then spent years trying to divide what the actual teaching was from the added politics of the organisation. I eventually left the organisation and have since depended on my own volition to sort things out. In doing so, I have studied other beliefs and discovered that some of what they teach is almost the same as what Nichiren taught (Nichiren was the first person to chant NMRK and teach it to others). The one thing that became more and more obvious to me was that the three major Laws of (Nature – Cause and Effect – Communication or oneness of past/present/future) represented by myoho-renge-kyo, represent the underlying fundamental Laws of everything, no matter what we choose to believe or not. I also gained a better understanding of the teachings of Jesus (not by what was written about his lessons by his disciple's (who all denied even knowing him when he was arrested) but by the example that he set 'between the lines'. He also taught Nature – Cause and Effect (reap what we sow) and prayer = communication. But it appears that the disciples didn't get it right, even though when they asked where the Kingdom of God was and Jesus told them that it was within their own lives, they still believed and taught others to believe that God was a man in the sky.I also got to understand that, minus all the added misconceptions, Nichiren taught many of the same things as Jesus did. 

    Scientists now say that our solar system was born out of a nebula – that physically everything, including ourselves, is made out of stardust and that energy never disappears or ends. Nichiren taught that our body is a small planet, which relies on Earth's environment to exist, and that our life-force is a small universe that contains 'everything' that exists, even though we are only awake to a very small part of it. Like Jesus taught that the Kingdom of God is within (which obviously must mean that's where God is also) Nichiren taught that Enlightenment (Buddhahood) is within. He also taught that there are millions of other worlds like ours with their own mountains, rivers and moons and that there are also places that are wonderful far beyond our present comprehension to conceive and understand. In the physical sense, they are scattered all over the universe – in the spiritual sense, they are all located within each of us. (one way to understand this is how TV works etc.) It doesn't matter how many TVs there are, they are all able to present the same thing if tuned in. 

    The one thing that confused me after seeing the pictures of Cone Nebular, taken by Hubble back in 2003, was how could I have possibly travelled that distance and back, as even at the speed of light it wouldn't have been possible. Yet, long before Hubble was even built, I accurately described the Cone nebular to so many people. It's only in the last few years that it has finally made sense to me. I went there and back within my own life-force – I travelled across the universe that each of us contains within – not physically but spiritually. I now know that NDEs are journeys we make beyond our physical/Earthly limitations, into our own unknown selves. I also believe that, by way of continuous physical rebirths, we are on a journey to within to eventually discover our true selves – reach a point where we can understand life as it truly is and awaken the wisdom to comprehend and know the real meaning of 'God

  25. David Bohm pioneered this idea, though he was highly overlooked by the physics community for having a voice of his own.

  26. I wonder if there's any theory on Dark (Transparent) Matter being a Hologram of the rest of the Information encoded in the Boundary of our Universe as in Holographic principle suggests, 4% of the information could make all the matter, aside from Dark Energy, the almost 70% left could make up Dark (Transparent) matter.

  27. Yeah but who would win a fight between Hawking and Susskind? Only one way to find out: FIIIIGHT!!
    Americans be like "WTF is this guy talking about??" 😀

  28. Although this theory is probably much more complicated than they make it out to be in the video, this idea seems ridiculous to me.

  29. I'd argue that black whole definition isn't completely true. Some supermassive black holes aren't dense at all, but rather have a density similar to that of water

  30. So, brain is like a black hole, because everything that goes in there is a real event in time, and the memories are like the hologram, the exact replica of the information on our event horizon, keeping the illusion of reality intact in us?

  31. This was a pretty good and, most of all, funny video on a not so easy subject. Thanks, even though I didn’t understand the mathematical part of it 🙂

  32. Life is a simulation. The game of life is to evolve your consiosness and gravitate towards becoming love. Your WELCOME

  33. if you can, let the Clever Doctor know Doctor Ramanujan + Sir Roger Penrose == new and expanded number system. Either way, I'll let the Academy know in 2020. Just owe him some amends for being a real Richard

  34. I don’t know… looks like somewhere someone fucked up the math. I would like to know what particles make this hologram? And what defines the distance between the hologram and its projection?

  35. Dimension has not been defined. Also, I don't buy the idea that math alone can really explain things sufficiently. This is becoming more like religion.

  36. A simulation possibly, Hologram, no. Holograms don't have physical mass. Problem solved. When does the ginger beard do anything except spout one liners?

  37. In your great video, you did not make something clear enough: the paradox arises because information fallen into the BH is ultimately lost because of evaporation. The radiation emitted can't have captured it (as in your burnt book example) because it's on this side. That's the original paradox.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *