Connect with us

Space

Physics Breakthrough: Is The Universe A Giant Hologram?

Physics Breakthrough: Is The Universe A Giant Hologram? 86

Scientists have found the “clearest evidence yet” that the universe we inhabit is a giant hologram, paving the way towards reconciling one of physics’ most pressing issues: the relationship between Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum physics.

In other words, we could be living inside a giant 3D projection of what is actually a two-dimensional space, similar to an IMAX movie theater screen or a painting. Or one could simply imagine the experience of looking at a three-dimensional object from various angles and seeing it change shape according to the point of observation.

The new experimental simulations proposed by Japanese scientist, Yoshifumi Hyakutake, and his team at the Ibaraki University of Japan tackle the varying energies of black holes discovered in parallel universes. But it also goes a long way towards marrying Einstein’s theory of general relativity and the theory of quantum mechanics as the two main theories describing our universe.

The findings were published in the journal, Nature, on December 10.

In physics, the ‘holographic principle’ is a property described in string theory. It represents a volume of space whose entire information can be imagined as encoded on a boundary of that selected space. The holographic principle started by first observing black hole thermodynamics. There, it was noticed that the informational content of all the objects that got sucked in by the hole can be seen in a scaled sense on the hole’s event horizon.

Einstein, in his collective theorizing, posited that space and time are related and should be considered and calculated in relation to each other, and that the measurements of objects will be relative to the velocity of the person observing them. It is very empirical and observable.

Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, deals with particle behavior on an infinitely small scale and therefore cannot belong in Einstein’s empirically testable worldview for the simple reason that it is too abstract and theoretical.

Though both suffer from certain inconsistencies: Einstein’s theory, for instance, breaks down when one imagines the middle of a black hole – an object in which time and space both collapse – the theories have been competing each other and generally hardly viewed as parallel. Scientists have been looking for a linking theory.

Hyakutake’s model explains some inconsistencies between the two big models, furthering the research first carried out in 1997. Then, theoretical physicist, Juan Maldacena, catapulted ‘string theory’ into the spotlight providing a reliable realization of the holographic principle.

That theory – which is widely said to explain the nature of everything – believes that the universe is made of tiny, immeasurable ‘strings’, or one-dimensional objects that vibrate and fluctuate, and in so doing account for the activity of all matter and time.

The theory goes that the strings exist in nine dimensions of space and one of time. But because their scale is so difficult to measure – and yet they are believed to control everything – they are said to ‘project’ their activity onto a much simpler, flat space with no gravity whatsoever.

This produced a world without gravity laws. However, it did not yet prove the universe is a hologram.

Furthering the string theory, Hyakutake wrote two papers.

467383main_pia10093
Artist concept of a growing black hole, or quasar, seen at the center of a faraway galaxy. (NASA/JPL-Caltech)

In one, he measures the internal energy of a black hole – specifically, the place where the hole meets the universe, otherwise known as the ‘event horizon’. He measures the activity of its visible properties (made up of visible particles) based on string theory and the effects of virtual particles, which at times appear and then disappear – many scientists even consider them a purely mathematical tool.

In the second paper, Hyakutake and his team calculated the same activity at lower dimensions (without gravity involved) and the results matched the measurements of the first paper.

The two new papers take Maldacena’s findings further by proposing an extra dimension. That tenth lower dimension has no gravity and its particles neatly line up in a set of strings oscillating in harmony, attached to one another – and not in chaos, which is what we had until now.

And now, the scientists finally seem to have laid hands on mathematical proof that the universe can be measured according to both approaches – one that involves gravity and one that does not. If they are as identical as they seem, Maldacena himself predicts that we could one day use just quantum theory alone to explain the nature of everything in the universe.

Maldacena has already voiced his excitement at Hyakutake’s calculations, saying that they appear to be correct. He told Nature that “the whole sequence of papers is very nice because it tests the dual [nature of the universes] in regimes where there are no analytic tests.

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,” said Leonard Susskind, a theoretical physicist at Stanford University, California, who was one of the first proponents of the theory of the universe as a hologram.

Source:

RT

Comments

Space

KOI-5Ab, the curious planet that orbits in a system of three suns

KOI-5Ab, the curious planet that orbits in a system of three suns 99
Photo: (Caltech / R. Hurt (IPAC))

To us, the Sun alone seems perfectly normal, but our solar system is actually a strange exception.

Most stars in the Milky Way galaxy have at least one companion star. In a system 1,800 light-years away, astronomers have finally confirmed the existence of a gas giant planet orbiting stars in a triple star system.

Called KOI-5, the system is located in the constellation Cygnus, and the exoplanet was confirmed ten years after it was first detected by the Kepler space telescope.

In fact, the planet – now known as KOI-5Ab – was discovered by Kepler when it began operations back in 2009.

“KOI-5Ab was dropped because it was difficult and we had thousands of other candidates,” astronomer David Siardi of NASA’s Exoplanet Science Institute said.

“There were lighter dives than the KOI-5Ab, and every day we learned something new from Kepler, so the KOI-5 was almost forgotten.”

Exoplanet hunters tend to avoid the complexities of multi-star systems; of the more than 4,300 exoplanets confirmed to date, less than 10 percent are multi-star systems, although such systems dominate the galaxy. As a result, little is known about the properties of exoplanets in multi-star systems compared to those orbiting a lone star.

After Kepler’s discovery, Chardy and other astronomers used ground-based telescopes such as the Palomar Observatory, Keck Observatory, and the Gemini North Telescope to study the system. By 2014, they had identified two companion stars, KOI-5B and KOI-5C.

Scientists were able to establish that the planet KOI-5Ab, is a gas giant that is about half the mass of Saturn and 7 times the size of Earth, and is in a very close five-day orbit around KOI-5A. KOI-5A and KOI-5B, both of roughly the same mass as the Sun, form a relatively close binary system with an orbital period of about 30 years.

KOI-5Ab, the curious planet that orbits in a system of three suns 100

A third star, KOI-5C, orbits the binary system at a much greater distance, with a period of about 400 years – slightly longer than Pluto’s 248-year orbit.

“By studying this system in more detail, perhaps we can understand how planets are created in the universe.”

The discovery was announced at the 237th meeting of the American Astronomical Society.

Continue Reading

Space

Why the universe does not fit into science

Why the universe does not fit into science 101
Photo: YouTube

Science can be compared to an artist painting what he has never seen, or to a writer describing other people’s travels: objects that he has never seen, places where he has never been. Sometimes such scientific “arts” turn out to be beautiful and interesting, but most of them will forever remain only theories, because they are beyond human capabilities.

In fact, science has the right only to speculate: how our universe appeared, how old it is, how many stars and other objects it contains.

Universe model

Why the universe does not fit into science 102

How many stars are there in the sky?

With an unarmed eye, a person can see about nine thousand stars in the sky in one cloudless and moonless night. And armed with binoculars or a telescope, much more – up to several million. However, this is much less than their true number in the universe. Indeed, only in our one galaxy (the Milky Way) there are about 400 billion stars. The exact amount, of course, is not known to science. And the visible universe contains about 170 billion galaxies.

It is worth clarifying that scientists can see the universe 46 billion light years deep in all directions. And the visible (observable) universe includes the space accessible to our eyes from the moment of the Big Explosion. In other words, only this (accessible to human perception) space science refers to our universe. Science does not consider everything that follows.

It is believed that there are supposedly a ceptillion (10 to 24 degrees) stars in our universe. These are theoretical calculations based on the approximate size and age of the universe. The origin of the universe is explained by the Big Bang theory. This is why the universe is constantly expanding and the more time passes, the more complex the universe and its components become.

Why the universe does not fit into science 103

It is not entirely correct to consider and perceive this scientific theory “head-on”. Scientists always claim that that explosion was not exactly an explosion, and the point that exploded was not the only one. After all, it was everywhere, because space did not exist then. And in general – everything happened quite differently from what is described in the Big Bang theory, but all other descriptions of the origin of the universe are even more incredible and inaccurate.

Separate but interconnected

That which is beyond the reach of human perception is usually discarded by science, or recognized as non-existent. Recognizing one thing, science does not want to recognize the existence of the other, although everything in our world is interconnected and is not able to exist separately – by itself.

Each object of the universe is a part of it much more than an independent, separate object.

Any person, like any material object of our world, consists of components: organs, cells, molecules, atoms. And each of its constituent parts can represent the whole world. Separate, and at the same time connected with all the others.

However, science, as a rule, perceives all the components of the universe – people, animals, plants, objects, the Earth, the Sun, other planets and stars – as separate subjects, thereby limiting itself.

Why the universe does not fit into science 104

Even what is considered the visible universe, one of the atoms of which could be called our solar system, is not subject to the boundaries of human perception. But perhaps the atom is an exaggeration, and our solar system is not even an atom, but one of its elements!

How, being so far from the truth, can one reason about something with the degree of probability with which science tries to reason about the origin of the universe?

Continue Reading

Space

An unexplained wobble shifts the poles of Mars

An unexplained wobble shifts the poles of Mars 105

The red planet sways from side to side like a whirligig when it loses speed. The new study allowed scientists to notice that the poles of Mars deviate slightly from the axis of rotation of the planet. On average, they move 10 cm from the center with a period of 200 days.

Such changes are called the Chandler Oscillations  – after the American astronomer Seth Chandler, who discovered them in 1891. Previously, they were only seen on Earth. It is known that the displacement of the poles of rotation of our planet occurs with a period of 433 days, while the amplitude reaches 15 meters. There is no exact answer why this is happening. It is believed that the fluctuations are influenced by processes in the ocean and the Earth’s atmosphere.

Chandler’s wobbles on Mars are equally perplexing. The authors of the study discovered them by comparing data from 18 years of studying the planet. The information was obtained thanks to three spacecraft that orbit the Red Planet: Mars Odyssey, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and Mars Global Surveyor. 

Since Mars has no oceans, it is likely that the Red Planet’s wobbly rotation is due to changes in atmospheric pressure. This is the first explanation that researchers have shared. In the future, there should be new details about the fluctuations that have so interested the scientific community.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

DO NOT MISS

Trending