3 ms·

The original post doesn't appear to misuse the technical term holographic. If a journalist twists their story into "reality is virtual" or "we might live in th

by zargon 16y ago

The original post doesn't appear to misuse the technical term holographic. If a journalist twists their story into "reality is virtual" or "we might live in the matrix" then they would be reporting their sensationalist (perhaps intentional) misunderstanding, and this guy would be right. But I don't see how it applies to this article. It could be better explained, but it doesn't completely misrepresent the science. The holographic principle is legit physics. Did you post this for the comments that explain the difference between the holographic principle and Star Trek?

9ec4c12949a4f3 16y ago
I'm willing to bet the only people who don't connect "holographic universe" with "The Holodeck" are people like us that live on the internet and slept on a pile of physics books 10 years ago.
jessriedel 16y ago
> The original post doesn't appear to misuse the technical term holographic. If fact, the lead sentence is exactly such misuse: "The 3D universe in which we appear to live is no more than a hologram." I don't think I've ever heard a physicist use the word "hologram" to talk about the holographic principle, so that word can only be interpreted as an actual, star-trek style hologram.
- zargon 16y ago
  Such phrasing is not all that uncommon. But I agree the following few paragraphs could do a better job explaining what the word means. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHgi6E1ECgo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHgi6E1ECgo
  - jessriedel 16y ago
    Frankly, I'm more inclined to fault Bousso for using misleading language. That's a lecture for a general audience. The word "hologram" isn't used in physics articles except for poetic fluff. For instance, in Bousso's much-cited review article, the word is used exactly once in the main text: "Holographic screens with this information density can be constructed for arbitrary spacetimes—in this sense, the world is a hologram." This is mostly marketing.

by zargon 16y ago

9ec4c12949a4f3 16y ago

I'm willing to bet the only people who don't connect "holographic universe" with "The Holodeck" are people like us that live on the internet and slept on a pile of physics books 10 years ago.

jessriedel 16y ago

> The original post doesn't appear to misuse the technical term holographic. If fact, the lead sentence is exactly such misuse: "The 3D universe in which we appear to live is no more than a hologram." I don't think I've ever heard a physicist use the word "hologram" to talk about the holographic principle, so that word can only be interpreted as an actual, star-trek style hologram.

zargon 16y ago
Such phrasing is not all that uncommon. But I agree the following few paragraphs could do a better job explaining what the word means. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHgi6E1ECgo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHgi6E1ECgo
- jessriedel 16y ago
  Frankly, I'm more inclined to fault Bousso for using misleading language. That's a lecture for a general audience. The word "hologram" isn't used in physics articles except for poetic fluff. For instance, in Bousso's much-cited review article, the word is used exactly once in the main text: "Holographic screens with this information density can be constructed for arbitrary spacetimes—in this sense, the world is a hologram." This is mostly marketing.