Is the Universe REALLY a Hologram?

Is the universe a hologram, a projection of a higher-dimensional space? String theorists think it is. How does a hologram work, what is the holographic principle, and what do they have in common? I will explain all that in this video.

Want to make your own holograms? There's a Kickstarter project for a 3D hologram printer here

#science #physics #education

0:00 Intro
0:16 What is a hologram?
2:02 How do holograms work?
5:40 The holographic principle
8:41 Optical holography vs the holographic principle
9:55 Sponsor message

[LouisGedo]

get the sense that you're very skeptical about the current model of String Theory

[SwissPGO]

This really reminds me of my matura exam at the end of my atheneum (high school) in 1984. In belgium, you had to pass such an exam in order to do university studies.
My topic was holograms, and I had made several myself to present during the exam. While waiting in the class to do my presentation, I wanted so show my treasure holograms to a girl sitting next to me. Moments before I was called to pass my exam, the envelope with the holograms fell... scattering the content to pieces. I ended up using the catastrophic event to demonstrate the difference between a thorn photograph and two shards of the hologram. My teachers were impressed by the demonstration.
The girl that was sitting next to me also ended up becoming a professor.
Thank you Sabine for reminding me of these events through your video's.

[DanEllis]

"So now that you know how real holograms work..." — whoa, let's not jump to conclusions!

[Mike_]

In science channels in TV they always throw around that term ''Holographic Universe'' without much explanation, which left me puzzled. Thank you for clearing that up!

[sulijoo]

I'm starting to think that every time Sabine poses a question, the answer is either going to be: a) Yes, but it's more complicated than that and b)no of course not, don't be silly.😜

[ricktownend]

Many thanks for this - I'm a lot clearer on this issue now, though I may need to watch it again a few times...

[elgaro]

Clear, easy to follow, straight forward, anti-sugar coated explanations on every video. I like it

[jamielondon]

Dr. Hossenfelder (at the end): "Now you know exactly what that means …"
Me: …" ;-)

[darioinfini]

The way even science leaning media reports this information, it really sounds like they didn't understand it at all. Even I don't despite your explanation. But it's clear that when the media reports "scientists say the universe is a hologram", the impression they give is not at all what scientists are actually saying. Again, due to the extraordinary ignorance of journalists in reporting on anything. YOU are our journalist, and I'm grateful for you and others like you.

[aniksamiurrahman]

Sabin: "Now you know just exactly ...."
Me: Yah! I forgot just exactly what I forgot. What am I called anyway?

[SuperLol]

Sabine is the kind of aunt that we all wished to have in a family party when everyone is either gossiping or straight out boring.

[u.s.a.citizen]

We need teachers in university like you. Students would learn much better.

[thumper]

When Sabine says "String theorists think we do." I can taste the salt in the air.

[davidmaiolo]

i really do like your style. it seems any video of yours that I watch, I get the the entire jist of what you're trying to say by the end. You have to admit to yourself, most people struggle to understand these concepts themselves. Yet you find a way to master them and communicate them out to others so well. excellent work, Sabine!

[robmorgan]

AdS/CFT works for superconductors but they are also 3d objects not 2d embedded in a 3d manifold. I think the key with understanding holographic principles is they represent a reduction in degrees of freedom in a mathematical/geometrical sense not necessarily a literal sense. This discussion represents a microcosm of "the trouble with physics". Namely it stems from a lack of nuanced understanding of analysis (Re and C), geometry, algebra, and topology and the physical origins of quasi mathematical concepts like probability and information theory. This toolkit is given to physicists and they're told how to employ it but the pedagogy is insufficient to build or discover new and better tools which is the very essence of what Newton, Euler, Gauss, Einstein, Boltzmann, Plank, and Feynman did and why they are so remarkable. So progress that requires new tools moves SLOWLY progress that requires us to apply new tools moves quick, it's the low hanging fruit of science. Hence the Cambrian explosion of technology in the 20th century.

[ravensnflies]

i could listen/watch Sabine talk about this subject for hours.

[simonhanson]

Thank you Sabine. I am gathering that physics and cosmology are brim full of deep insight and similarly of fairytales, and it is not always easy to tell which is which. I try to imagine sometimes what a 'science' of 500 years from now might look like, or five million years . . . we mustn't think for a moment that we are getting close to a complete understanding of things - but that doesn't stop me from loving the magical mystery tour . . .

[LowellBoggs]

Another great presentation! I always look forward to your videos.

[gyozakeynsianism]

That seemed ... surprisingly understandable. SH really is good at explaining this stuff! That or I just don't understand at all lol ...

[sbwhddv]

Dear Sabine,
THANK YOU for the clearest explanations I've ever heard on these TWO subjects. I saw my first photographic hologram in 1964 at ITT technical institute, then again at the 1964 World's Fair and have been fascinated my them ever since.

IN ALL THAT TIME, including ALL the books and videos I've seen, your explanation of 2D recording of 3D holographic imagery is the clearest and most concise.

Likewise, I LOVE the way you explained the "holographic principle" so well and with no "Gobbledygook."
Frankly, we have another term for "gobbledygook" here, and it's initials are B.S.

Ever since hearing about string theory decades ago, I've always had the sense that, although beautiful, it doesn't quite agree with reality.

Even with my limited math background, I see the hubris of Mathematicians who proclaim such absurd ideas as: "The Universe IS MATH", or that "GOD speaks to us in the language of math."

Certainly, Mathematics is beautiful, powerful, flexible, dynamic. Math can HELP REVEAL nature's deepest secrets. Math can DESCRIBE and PREDICT Nature.
But math is NOT Nature and Nature is NOT MATH.

Which is why String theory and "the holographic universe" leaves me hanging... That all seems to be the hubris of mathematicians.

Which reminds me of a JOKE:

A famous mathematician DIES and goes to Heaven. Upon entering, he sees an Indian man feverishly working with complex physics formulas on a HUGE blackboard.

The mathematician asked a nearby Angel, "Is that Srinivasa Ramanujan, the world's greatest mathematician?"

The Angel replied, "Who HIM? Hell no! That's GOD. He just THINKS he's a mathematician!" ;-)