3 ms·
They took two different universe models, neither of which match the one we live in, and mathematically produced the same black holes. The key differentiators be
by Sakes 13y ago
They took two different universe models, neither of which match the one we live in, and mathematically produced the same black holes. The key differentiators being that one universe has gravity and multiple dimensions while the other has no gravity and 1 single dimension.
While the article likes to take a logical leap and assume this supports the theory that our universe is a hologram, what was actually proved by this numerical experiment is eloquently explained in the article's quoting of theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind.
"They have numerically confirmed, perhaps for the first time, something we were fairly sure had to be true, but was still a conjecture — namely that the thermodynamics of certain black holes can be reproduced from a lower-dimensional universe"
- Leonard Susskind
- proofofconcept 13y agoWhen I see "experiment X backs up/supports/proves conclusion Y" in a headline I always mentally correct it to "experiment X does not definitively disprove conclusion Y" where X and Y are random variables operating on whatever the actual scientific experiment and conclusion respectively are.
- gjm11 13y agoIn fairness, the way even the most firmly established scientific theories get firmly established is precisely by having a lot of experiments done that fail to disprove them. (Disclaimer: That's a bit of a simplification. In practice the acceptance of a theory also has something to do with how explanatory the theory feels, how elegant it is, what prejudices the highest-status experts have, etc.)