3 ms·
None of the HN commentors have a background in theoretical physics. These are low quality bike shedding comments. The ny times article itself is of a much high
by random314 4y ago
None of the HN commentors have a background in theoretical physics. These are low quality bike shedding comments.
The ny times article itself is of a much higher quality. The holographic principle has been established for decades now. HN is not the place where you will find useful discussions on physics.
- choxi 4y agoAre there better channels/forums?
- random314 4y agoAsk physics reddit might be better. But I have never engaged there. I am a physics novice too, but I am familiar with Electro magnetic field theory and special relativity. Any physics discussion on HN is bike shedding, if not outright wrong. Veritasium on YouTube is probably the best educational physics resource out there.
- wrycoder 4y agoIt has not been established. It’s just interesting and popular to play with. For one thing, our universe is not an anti-deSitter space, and the attempts to move the AdS models to flat space have not been successful, so far. If you have a reference showing that the holographic “principle” conforms to objective reality, please post it.
- random314 4y agohttps://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/122540/why-are-anti-de-sitter-spaces-so-interesting-when-we-believe-the-universe-is-exp https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/122540/why-are-a...