• Existensialissue
    4
    Greetings, my main questions are, do these 2 studies/ articles provide substantial proof that we live in a hologram or simulation?

    Here is the first article title "The Universe as a Hologram": http://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/science_holographicuniverse.htm

    The main gist of it says "In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram." (http://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/science_holographicuniverse.htm)

    The second article is titled "Journal of Theoretics, Empirical Evidence Supporting Macro-Scale, Quantum Holography in Non-Local Effects" and here is the link: http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/articles/2-5/benford.htm

    Does the second article suggest or is saying that we live in a simulation or a hologram?

    -So my main questions are, does Alain Aspect's 1982 study I mentioned above really prove that we live in a hologram or a simulation and does Alain Aspect's 1982 study show enough evidence for us to say that we do live in a hologram or in a simulation?

    -Lastly, does the second article about Quantum Holography etc show proof that we live in a hologram or simulated reality? Many thanks.
  • Rich
    3.2k
    I don't believe that the Aspect experiments (which have been duplicated many times since on a much larger scale) prove anything, however quantum entanglement does provide supporting evidence for a wave/holographic model of the universe in which the brain doesn't store anything, instead what it does is create a reference beam for observing what is real "out there". Stephen Robbins out together a series of videos presenting this POV in the context of Bergson's model:

    Bergson's Holographic Universe
  • SophistiCat
    2k
    Here is the first article title "The Universe as a Hologram": http://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/science_holographicuniverse.htmExistensialissue

    I read your quote as far as saying that "Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them." This is not true, and I didn't bother reading the rest.

    The second article is titled "Journal of Theoretics, Empirical Evidence Supporting Macro-Scale, Quantum Holography in Non-Local Effects" and here is the link: http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/articles/2-5/benford.htm

    Does the second article suggest or is saying that we live in a simulation or a hologram?
    Existensialissue

    This "Journal of Theoretics" is (was?) a crackpot publication. Anyway, I don't see what quantum holography, which apparently is a real thing, could possibly have to do with the idea that we live in a simulation.
  • Existensialissue
    4
    so quantum entanglement provides support, but does quantum entanglement prove that we live in a simulation or a hologram, or again, we are not sure yet. Thanks for the answers!
  • Rich
    3.2k
    A holographic universe is an idea, and one can see how entanglement might dovetail this idea. Bergson actually conceived of this image, via intuition, many decades before holography was discovered. Others, like Bohm, had similar ideas. But it is just a concept.
  • jkop
    533
    ...proof that we live in a hologram or simulation?Existensialissue
    Hologram or simulation of what?

    If it is a hologram or simulation of reality, then it is a hologram or simulation of the reality in which we live. It would be nonsense to ask whether we live in a hologram or simulation of the place in which we live.

    Furthermore, if the question makes no sense, then talk of proof or references to QM are irrelevant.
  • Existensialissue
    4
    I was just wondering if the 1982 Alain aspect study/experiment I linked above proved that our universe is a hologram or a simulated reality as many articles claim that Alain Aspect's finding shows that we live in a hologram.
  • jkop
    533


    What is there to prove when the assumption, that it would be possible to live in a hologram or simulation, is incoherent?
  • Wayfarer
    16.3k
    many articles claim that Alain Aspect's finding shows that we live in a hologram.Existensialissue

    It doesn't make any difference to the price of real estate, though.
  • Existensialissue
    4
    Unfortunately not, but honestly, this has beem causing
    me severe existensial anxiety. The 1982 aspect study that I linked above is apparently proof that the universe is a hologram. The only thing I would like to know is if this is really, truly proof that we live in a hologram?
  • Bitter Crank
    11.1k
    If a simulation is complete, and completely convincing, how could one possibly know that it was a simulation? Likewise with divine creation: How could one know that a divine entity had or had not created the universe?

    The most sensible theory about existence is the simplest and most parsimonious explanation: this world really exists; we are really in it.

    It could be that the world is a simulation; it could be that the divine being said to have created the world is running the simulation; it could be that we exist in a video game of enormous complexity and are not real. But one has to bend over backwards and turn one's self inside out to think that this is so.
  • unenlightened
    7k
    The only thing I would like to know is if this is really, truly proof that we live in a hologram?Existensialissue

    The best it could possibly be is hologrammatical proof, not real or true proof. If one is in the desert, one might reasonably be anxious that the oasis one seems to see in the distance might be a mirage, but to be anxious that the desert itself is a mirage seems extravagant, indeed meaningless.
  • TheMadFool
    13.9k
    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy...Shakespeare

    I don't think the world is as obvious as it seems to some. Then again I don't think we have enough reason not to think it as obvious as it is.
  • dipstik
    5
    It does not prove anything. A professor once said "There are as many theories as there are theorists," and I tend to agree. There are many interpretations of quantum mechanics that are vying for popularity, all of them with their own explanation of entanglement and the measurement collapse problem.

    DeBroglie-Bohm is one interpretation (Bohm was quoted in your article), in which pilot waves guide the particles, and is considered a hidden variable theory. Interestingly enough, hidden variables were put to test by John Bell, in experiments called Bell tests, which relate to Bell inequalities, which state the bounds of joint probabilities for a given quantum setup. The assumptions were locality, causality, realism, hidden variables and a variety of other things that would later be called loopholes. Experimenters such as Aspect conducted experiments which showed violation of Bell inequalities, which means that one of the assumptions does not hold. Oddly enough, Bell was somewhat of a fan of Bohmian mechanics because of its holistic properties (there is not measurement collapse because the entire universe is a single wavefunction), so Bell and Bohm were willing to give up locality to keep hidden variables. There are other loopholes to these experiments that experimenters are trying to close. In 2015 there was an experiment that showed Bell violation while closing three loopholes, namely detection, memory and locality (Hansen et al.).

    Back to the topic at hand, the experiment you quoted does not prove anything other than Bell's inequalities were violated, which can be explained by there being no causality, or no locality, or no realism, or no hidden variables. A more grounded understanding of where Bohm is coming from can be gleaned from his books on the topic of quantum mechanics, such as " Wholeness and the Implicate Order" or "The Undivided Universe". Based on your reaction to his quote, I think you might dig them, so to speak.

    The second article starts with aether and ESP, so I'm not going to touch that.
  • Michael Ossipoff
    1.7k


    No.

    A simulation couldn't create a possibility world or possibility story such as ours.

    That's because they're already there, without a simulation.

    All a simulation could create would be an opportunity for the programmers to observe such possibility stories & worlds.

    Michael Ossipoff
  • Jake Tarragon
    342
    If we are a simulation then I suspect our knowledge of mathematics would be deliberately limited by our builders.....
  • noAxioms
    1.1k
    If we are a simulation then I suspect our knowledge of mathematics would be deliberately limited by our builders.....Jake Tarragon
    If they (simulation runners) are deliberately changing what we know, then it wouldn't be us that they're simulating.
  • fishfry
    2.6k
    If the world is a simulation ... what is it a simulation of?
  • WISDOMfromPO-MO
    753
    How could a simulation or part of a simulation know that it is a simulation or part of a simulation?
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.