'Holometer' to Determine If Reality Is Just an Illusion

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 3:22 pm
Location: Bunnin a fat one at ya mams haha

PostTue Nov 02, 2010 5:16 pm » by Chrisfryfyi


Fermilab is Building a 'Holometer' to Determine Once and For All Whether Reality Is Just an Illusion

Researchers at Fermilab are building a “holometer” so they can disprove everything you thought you knew about the universe. More specifically, they are trying to either prove or disprove the somewhat mind-bending notion that the third dimension doesn’t exist at all, and that the 3-D universe we think we live in is nothing more than a hologram. To do so, they are building the most precise clock ever created.

Image

The universe-as-hologram theory is predicated on the idea that spacetime is not perfectly smooth, but becomes discrete and pixelated as you zoom in further and further, like a low-res digital image. This idea isn’t novel; recent experiments in black-hole physics have offered evidence that this may be the case, and prominent physicists have proposed similar ideas. Under this theory, the universe actually exists in two dimensions and the third is an illusion produced by the intertwining of time and depth. But the false third dimension can’t be perceived as such, because nothing travels faster than light, so instruments can’t find its limits.

This is theoretical physics at its finest, drowning in complex mathematics but short on hard data. So Fermilab particle astrophysicist Craig Hogan and his team are building a “holometer” to magnify spacetime and see if it is indeed as noisy as the math suggests it might be at higher resolution. In Fermilab’s largest laser lab, Hogan and company are putting together what they call a “holographic interferometer,” which – like a classic interferometer – will split laser beams and measure the difference in frequencies between the two identical beams.

But unlike conventional interferometers, the holometer will measure for noise or interference in spacetime itself. It’s actually composed of two interferometers – built one atop the other – that produce data on the amount of interference or “holographic noise.” Since they are measuring the same volume of spacetime, they should show the same amount of correlated jitter in the fabric of the universe. It will produce the first direct experimental insight into the fundamental nature of space and time, and there’s no telling what researchers delving into that data might find out about the holographic nature of the universe.

So enjoy the third dimension while you still can. Construction on the first instrument is already underway, and Hogan thinks they will begin collecting data on the very nature of spacetime itself by next year.

Image

source : http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2 ... t-hologram
Image

Initiate
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:52 pm

PostTue Nov 02, 2010 5:22 pm » by Unitb166er


But what data can you trust as a result in the observer effect.

In information technology, the observer effect is the potential impact of the act of observing a process output while the process is running. For example: if a process uses a log file to record its progress, the process could slow. Furthermore, the act of viewing the file while the process is running could cause an I/O error in the process, which could, in turn, cause it to stop.

Another example would be observing the performance of a CPU by running both the observed and observing programs on the same CPU, which will lead to inaccurate results because the observer program itself affects the CPU performance (modern, heavily cached and pipelined CPUs are particularly affected by this kind of observation).

Observing (or rather, debugging) a running program by modifying its source code (such as adding extra output or generating log files) or by running it in a debugger may sometimes cause certain bugs to diminish or change their behavior, creating extra difficulty for the person trying to isolate the bug (see Heisenbug).

Any thoughts on this?
:sunny:
Designed To Give A Damn!

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2788
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:39 pm
Location: Oceanic 815

PostTue Nov 02, 2010 5:56 pm » by Epicfailure


unitb166er wrote:But what data can you trust as a result in the observer effect.

In information technology, the observer effect is the potential impact of the act of observing a process output while the process is running. For example: if a process uses a log file to record its progress, the process could slow. Furthermore, the act of viewing the file while the process is running could cause an I/O error in the process, which could, in turn, cause it to stop.

Another example would be observing the performance of a CPU by running both the observed and observing programs on the same CPU, which will lead to inaccurate results because the observer program itself affects the CPU performance (modern, heavily cached and pipelined CPUs are particularly affected by this kind of observation).

Observing (or rather, debugging) a running program by modifying its source code (such as adding extra output or generating log files) or by running it in a debugger may sometimes cause certain bugs to diminish or change their behavior, creating extra difficulty for the person trying to isolate the bug (see Heisenbug).

Any thoughts on this?
:sunny:


my only thought is that I agree,

the mechanical failure rate is 0%, the only reason we get readings and failure in mechanics and technology is because man's failure rate is impeccable, and the machines they create to monitor these studies are only as valid as the failure rate of human creations.

but to comment on the fermilab, I am quite disappointed in them. Hogan is always trying to find new things to poke holes in already well understood theories (most times rushing too quickly with unproven claims), just to throw a wrench in the mix. I have seen studies that indicate the "static universe" but once again there is that observation failure and that human understanding / failure rate that gets in the way...

these experiments are all great but I really think visual demonstration is necessary instead of "data" to prove theories. after all, if a mathematician has proven a formula for a theory, that theory must be put into practice and proven in a physical world in order to be passed as a law!

will be interesting to see the results of this experiment, but I will wait to pull out the red carpet for me being a simple mindless hologram, until it can be shown physically.

still fun to think about, I just have my doubts...but then again I have my doubts about things I believe in firmly from time to time.
Image

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10823
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:08 am

PostTue Nov 02, 2010 6:07 pm » by Boondox681


super.
i'll put it right next to my...
Image
Image
"Doing stuff is overrated.Like Hitler.He did a lot.But don't we all wish he woulda' just stayed home and gotten stoned?"



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook