Re: Scott-What is a "Holographic" Universe?

[rayilynlee <rayilynlee@xxxxxxx>]

Thank you, Scott, I sort of understand it.  Your P.S.. really strikes a
cord.  This is why I gave up on Religious Science - there are some things
you can't think away...and my ovarian cancer went away with no "good"
thoughts at all!!
Ray
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott E. Antes" <Scott.Antes@xxxxxxx>
To: <PARKINSN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: Scott-What is a "Holographic" Universe?


> Hi Ray!  I forget the judge's name, but when he was asked to define
> pornography, he said, "I know it when I see it."  This is not my area of
> expertise, but I know a hologram when I see it.  The particular type of
> hologram the author describes below is a projected 3D image of a material
> object.  It looks "real."  One can view it from any direction, and there
> it
> is.  Yet, it is only an image.  It's not a tangible thing.  One can't
> touch it
> (in the sense that most of us think of touch), because it is non-material.
> Yet, as we look at it, we see something "real."  On Star Tek: The Next
> Generation, the Enterprise had a "holodeck," where crew members could dial
> up
> any kind of situation with which to interact, containing like-real humans
> and
> like-real settings, but it was all imagery.  (Of course, in the Star Trek
> version, crew members could "touch" these images as if they were material
> things.)  I think what Lanza is saying is that much of our individual
> reality
> consists of what we perceive as being "there," but isn't necessarily
> "really"
> there, in the material sense.  Speaking of sense, did I make any?  Scott
>
> PS: To many people on this planet, PD--like every other malady--is only an
> illusion.  Maybe so, but as an illusion myself :-), I'd hate to be the one
> to
> tell that to the sufferer.  The "illusionary" response would break my
> "illusionary" heart.
>
> > ===== Original Message From Parkinson's Information Exchange Network
> <PARKINSN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> =====
> > Scott, can you explain in simpler terms than expressed in this article
> > what
> > "holographic" or a hologram means?
> > Thanks, Ray
> >
> >
> > Biocentric and Holographic Universe
> > I recently stumbled across an intriguing interpretation of the
> > implications
> > of quantum physics. I thought this fit rather nicely with some other
> > theories I've come upon, so I decided to attempt to integrate them.
> >
> > In the American Scholar article "A New Theory of the Universe", Dr.Robert
> > Lanza tells physicists they've been barking up the wrong tree. Lanza is a
> > leading expert in tissue engineering, cloning and stem cell research. He
> > is
> > not a physicist and so is likely to be ignored by the physics community.
> > Yet, he may be on to something.
> > "The urgent and primary questions of the universe have been undertaken by
> > those physicists who are trying to explain the origins of everything with
> > grand unified theories. But as exciting and glamorous as these theories
> > are,
> > they are an evasion, if not a reversal, of the central mystery of
> > knowledge:
> > that the laws of the world were somehow created to produce the observer.
> > And
> > more important than this, that the observer in a significant sense creates
> > reality and not the other way around. Recognition of this insight leads to
> > a
> > single theory that unifies our understanding of the world.
> > ..As unimaginable as it may seem to us, the logic of quantum physics is
> > inescapable. Every morning we open our front door to bring in the paper or
> > to go to work. We open the door to rain, snow, or trees swaying in the
> > breeze. We think the world churns along whether we happen to open the door
> > or not. Quantum mechanics tells us it doesn't.
> >
> > The trees and snow evaporate when we're sleeping. The kitchen disappears
> > when we're in the bathroom. When you turn from one room to the next, when
> > your animal senses no longer perceive the sounds of the dishwasher, the
> > ticking clock, the smell of a chicken roasting-the kitchen and all its
> > seemingly discrete bits dissolve into nothingness-or into waves of
> > probability. The universe bursts into existence from life, not the other
> > way
> > around as we have been taught. For each life there is a universe, its own
> > universe. We generate spheres of reality, individual bubbles of
> > existence."
> > I think this fits well with the notion of a holographic universe. Consider
> > a
> > transmission hologram. At first it appears to be simply an interference
> > pattern, but when illuminated with a laser a fully realized 3D object pops
> > into view. In a similar way, the universe exists as an interference
> > pattern
> > of probability waves. When a portion of the pattern is "lit up" by an
> > observer it generates what we perceive as physical reality. Perhaps each
> > bubble generates an "image" of the whole universe, just as individual
> > pieces
> > of a hologram that has been cut apart retain the entire image, but with
> > some
> > loss of detail.
> >
> > There is some theoretical support for a holographic universe. Per
> > Wikipedia,
> > "The holographic principle is a speculative conjecture about quantum
> > gravity
> > theories, proposed by Gerard 't Hooft and improved and promoted by Leonard
> > Susskind, claiming that all of the information contained in a volume of
> > space can be represented by a theory that lives in the boundary of that
> > region."
> >
> > I'm going to try and paraphrase the Wikipedia description of the reasoning
> > so we don't get too bogged down:
> >
> > The entropy that can be contained in any given volume of space can not be
> > any larger than the entropy of the largest black hole that can fit in that
> > space. The more massive the black hole, the larger the surface area of the
> > event horizon. This means the maximum entropy for any region of space is
> > determined by surface area, not by volume. This is counter-intuitive
> > because
> > entropy is an extensive variable, being directly proportional to mass,
> > which
> > is proportional to volume (all else being equal, including the density of
> > the mass). If entropy of ordinary mass is also proportional to area, this
> > implies that volume itself is somehow illusory: that mass occupies area,
> > not
> > volume, and so the universe is really a hologram which corresponds to the
> > information encoded on its boundaries.
> >
> > Then there are the philosophies of David Bohm, the quantum physicist who
> > wrote "Wholeness and the Implicit Order"
> > Bohm suggests that the whole universe can be thought of as a kind of
> > giant,
> > flowing hologram, or holomovement, in which a total order is contained, in
> > some implicit sense, in each region of space and time. The explicate order
> > is a projection from higher dimensional levels of reality, and the
> > apparent
> > stability and solidity of the objects and entities composing it are
> > generated and sustained by a ceaseless process of enfoldment and
> > unfoldment,
> > for subatomic particles are constantly dissolving into the implicate order
> > and then recrystallizing.
> > More on David Bohm later.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
> > mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>
> Scott E. Antes
> Department of Anthropology
> Northern Arizona University
> Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5200
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
> mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn