The implications of a Holographic Universe

@Satan phil,

Satan;75098 wrote:

Light and mind huh? So then how did humans evolve out of slime that didn't have any mind to speak of?

Probably by creating new things with its mind.

Quote:

You do realize that existence precedes thought, right?

This is where you have to think differently for the holographic universe. The mind (Consciousness) creates using light waves. - e.g. intersecting light wave formations creating images, just like a hologram. Matter is simply densely packed energy (quanta). This you can derive from E-mc**2.

If you think about it, I think you may be able to understand it. Thought precedes everything - including comprehension! But, if you can't get it, don't worry, there are plenty of other things to get in this world. Today I was practicing my tennis stroke. Smile

Rich

---------- Post added 07-05-2009 at 03:43 PM ----------

Alan McDougall;75102 wrote:

Hi Rich

I have often pondered if black holes are really holes or are they not just black orbs that reflect nothing. In other world do they have a diameter and circumference like a infinitely dense ball or are they just entry points into other realms of existence????

Maybe the term Black Hole is a misnomer just like the Big Bang is?

Hi Alan,

Could very well be so. As I understand Susskind's work, information is stored on the surface, in Planck size packets, and therefore information is not lost, as Hawkings claims, when the black hole collapses. It is incredibly interesting how holographic concepts of the universe can be applied in so many different realms, and for me the beauty is, that it all makes sense. Of course, turning ideas into mathematics takes time.

Rich

@richrf,

A "black hole" may be defined as: a region of space resulting from the collapse of a star; extremely high gravitational field; also as: an area of space-time with a gravitational field so intense that its escape velocity is equal to or exceeds the speed of light.
an astronomy theoretical celestial object, formed when a massive star collapses from its own gravity. A black hole has such a strong pull of gravity that not even light can escape from it. ANSWERS.COM informs us that "Some scientists theorize that rotating black holes (also know as Kerr black holes) which contain billions of dead stars lie at the centers of galaxies.
The idea of black holes was first theorized in the late eighteenth century by English geologist John Mitchell and French astronomer Pierre Simon Laplace. At one time, scientists called them "gravitationally collapsed objects." Russian scientists suggested calling them "collapsars," but it wasn't until 1969 when Princeton physicist, John Wheeler coined the term black hole. Black holes have continued to hold public interest and are a popular fixture of science fiction books and movies."

My own view is that they are breeding grounds for -- when they get massive enough -- a 'big bang.' You heard it here first. ........

@richrf,

richrf;75116 wrote:

Thought precedes everything - including comprehension!

No, it doesn't. You have no clue what you are talking about.

@deepthot,

deepthot;75346 wrote:

My own view is that they are breeding grounds for -- when they get massive enough -- a 'big bang.' You heard it here first. ...

Hi there deepthot,

Thanks for the brief description ... and thanks a lot for the warning!! Smile

Rich

---------- Post added 07-06-2009 at 10:48 AM ----------

Satan;75357 wrote:

No, it doesn't. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Hi,

Thanks for the strong Ad Hominem argument. Usually it works but this time, I feel, I am still unconvinced. Smile

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75358 wrote:

Thanks for the strong Ad Hominem argument.

Actually, it seems you don't know what that is either. That's OK though. Maybe tennis is more your speed.

I was going for a baseless assertion much like yours. Let me know when you've got evidence that goes against what science already knows, namely, that matter precedes thought.

I don't much care for people that turn science into pseudoscience just so they can have the comfort of a warm blanket.

@Satan phil,

Satan;75366 wrote:

Actually, it seems you don't know what that is either. That's OK though. Maybe tennis is more your speed.

I was going for a baseless assertion much like yours. Let me know when you've got evidence that goes against what science already knows, namely, that matter precedes thought.

I don't much care for people that turn science into pseudoscience just so they can have the comfort of a warm blanket.

Sorry we can't be friends. Nice knowing you anyway.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75367 wrote:

Sorry we can't be friends. Nice knowing you anyway.

Rich

I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to engage in rational thought. Let me know if you're ever interested.

@richrf,

I am not at all sure what "matter proceeds thought" (or the converse) means, but if ii implies that there were people and thoughts before there were a Sun, Moon, and Stars, that is clearly false.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;75371 wrote:

I am not at all sure what "matter proceeds thought" (or the converse) means, but if ii implies that there were people and thoughts before there were a Sun, Moon, and Stars, that is clearly false.

If you say so, then it must be true - for you. Clearly.

Sigh - so much Truth in this one little corner of the universe. How was I so lucky to happen upon it?

As for me, I just keep plugging away.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75376 wrote:

If you say so, then it must be true - for you.

So you don't let little things like reality get in your way?

@richrf,

richrf;75376 wrote:

If you say so, then it must be true - for you. Clearly.

Sigh - so much Truth in this one little corner of the universe. How was I so lucky to happen upon it?

As for me, I just keep plugging away.

Rich

You think there were people before there was even an Earth? I wonder where they were before the was an Earth? And how they got to Earth.

@Satan phil,

Satan;75379 wrote:

So you don't let little things like reality get in your way?

Don't tell me. You also have the truth. Should be interesting to see what happens when you bump into someone who disagrees. My guess ... some more Ad Hominem. Seems to be an universal attribute for those who hold the truth.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75383 wrote:

Don't tell me. You also have the truth. Should be interesting to see what happens when you bump into someone who disagrees. My guess ... some more Ad Hominem. Seems to be an universal attribute for those who hold the truth.

Rich

If and when someone disagrees, you show how they are mistaken to do so. Disagreement does not mean there is an impasse. Even if there is disagreement, one of the sides is usually correct.

@richrf,

richrf;75383 wrote:

Don't tell me. You also have the truth. Should be interesting to see what happens when you bump into someone who disagrees. My guess ... some more Ad Hominem. Seems to be an universal attribute for those who hold the truth.

Rich

It also seems that acting offended and playing the hurt feelings card is a universal attribute for obscurantists and pseudoscience mystics.

Of course, we could keep insulting each other all day but what would that really accomplish? I'm sorry I bruised your ego but if you want people to think you know what you're talking about, the easiest way would be to actually do some studying.

---------- Post added 07-06-2009 at 12:00 PM ----------

Come to think of it, I think I know why obscurantists are in such a hurry to be offended. That way they can excuse themselves from the discussion without having to face the reality that they are uninformed and that their pet theories are full of holes.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;75382 wrote:

You think there were people before there was even an Earth? I wonder where they were before the was an Earth? And how they got to Earth.

Exactly. Things to wonder and think about.

Rich

---------- Post added 07-06-2009 at 12:39 PM ----------

kennethamy;75384 wrote:

.. one of the sides is usually correct.

Yep. Usually both sides think the other is incorrect.

Sometimes people just disagree.

Rich

---------- Post added 07-06-2009 at 12:41 PM ----------

Satan;75386 wrote:

Come to think of it, I think I know why obscurantists are in such a hurry to be offended. That way they can excuse themselves from the discussion without having to face the reality that they are uninformed and that their pet theories are full of holes.

Not offended at all. I have no idea what you are talking about.

You think you know the truth, and you are not the first person I have run into that thinks this way. If you have the truth, then lucky you. I am still exploring while you can relax - unless of course your new mission is to have other people into embracing your truths. Now, that may take more time than the first part mission. But good luck anyway.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75403 wrote:

You think you know the truth, and you are not the first person I have run into that thinks this way.

I think it's presumptuous to tell people what they think. Usually it's polite to let them tell you what they think. I think you are not a mind reader so you have no clue what I think.

Science does not give us truth. Science gives us fewer false beliefs. That's something I think you could use.

Let me know when you want to have an actual discussion instead of this petty bickering. I know quite a deal about the holographic principle which is why I know it has nothing to do with consciousness.

You could start by getting your science from actual scientists and not from a psychic palm reader's website. It seems you think this is all a big joke but it's not. It's serious business. :thats-enough: :bigsmile:

@Satan phil,

Satan;75409 wrote:

I know quite a deal about the holographic principle which is why I know it has nothing to do with consciousness.

Thanks for sharing with me your views.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75413 wrote:

Thanks for sharing with me your views.

Rich

It's not just my view. It's the view of the majority of credible scientists. Maybe you know better than we do and if so, you should write a paper on it so we can learn from you instead of the other way around.

@Satan phil,

Satan;75417 wrote:

It's not just my view. It's the view of the majority of credible scientists.

I didn't realize that you were speaking for other scientists (credible ones as judged by you, of course) and telling me what they are thinking. Thank you for your further insights.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;75418 wrote:

I didn't realize that you were speaking for other scientists (credible ones as judged by you, of course) and telling me what they are thinking. Thank you for your further insights.

Rich

Credible as judged by peer review. I don't need to speak for other scientists. Their results are published in actual scientific journals.

You seem really bitter against intellectual authority. I wonder why that is. Is it because the reality of the world contradicts your chosen fantasy?

It's a shame but eventually you will grow out of it I hope. Thanks for the attitude though.

Philosophy Forum

The implications of a Holographic Universe

Quick Links

My Account

able2know