A Thin Sheet of Reality: The Universe as a Hologram

What we touch. What we smell. What we feel. They’re all part of our reality. But what if life as we know it reflects only one side of the full story? Some of the world’s leading physicists think that this may be the case. They believe that our reality is a projection—sort of like a hologram—of laws and processes that exist on a thin surface surrounding us at the edge of the universe. Although the notion seems outlandish, it’s a long-standing theory that initially emerged years ago from scientists studying black holes; recently, a breakthrough in string theory propelled the idea into the mainstream of physics. What took place was an intriguing discussion on the cutting-edge results that may just change the way we view reality.

This program is part of the Big Ideas Series, made possible with support from the John Templeton Foundation.

The World Science Festival gathers great minds in science and the arts to produce live and digital content that allows a broad general audience to engage with scientific discoveries. Our mission is to cultivate a general public informed by science, inspired by its wonder, convinced of its value, and prepared to engage with its implications for the future.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel for all the latest from WSF.

Original Program Date: June 3, 2011
MODERATOR: John Hockenberry
PARTICIPANTS: Gerard ’t Hooft, Leonard Susskind, Raphael Bousso, Herman Verlinde

John Hockenberry's Introduction 00:15

Participant Introductions. 06:32

What is the Holographic Principal? 08:43

Are we real or are we just holograms? 11:40

Why can't information just go away? 14:53

How was the debate with Stephen Hawking? 18:53

Can we map every element in the known universe? 21:30

Where did you find the information being stored? 26:09

Finding the exact amount of information in a black hole? 33:02

Physics can describe everything in a 0 or 1 bit per Planck area. 40:10

What excites you about the Holographic principal? 46:58

Who thinks the Holographic Principle is rubbish? 57:24

Is there a more basic state that quantum mechanics? 01:05:44

What position do you all take on the Holographic Principal? 01:09:54

The universe is a giant computer. 01:18:30

The limits of knowing everything. 01:24:30

[WorldScienceFestival]

Hello, YouTubers. The World Science Festival is looking for enthusiastic translation ambassadors for its YouTube translation project. To get started, all you need is a Google account.


To create your translation, just type along with the video and save when done.

The World Science Festival strives to cultivate a general public that's informed and awed by science. Thanks to your contributions, we can continue to share the wonder of scientific discoveries with the world.

[michaelward]

It really doesn't matter what kind of reality you think you're living in. One thing for sure you are witnessing the greatest magic show in our universe. The here-and-now 👁

[ChildOL]

It's like video game characters tying to figure out the truth of their existence as video game characters but using video game physics to describe the computer they run on. It's impossible, which is why there is a conflict (unless of course the designer put the information there that describes it)

[skybellau]

Suss-Kind has the name, looks and mind of a wizard. We are blessed with his lack of arrogance (and all these gentlemen) whilst attempting to connect vast fields of complex knowledge, then carefully stepping it down for us plebes to comprehend some semblance of it. These are early days in the scheme of things. Great marvels to come.

[SeanMauer]

The question at the end, "Do you think we are just a projection...do you think we are actually real?" the problem is, a projection is just as real as anything else. It's just a matter of mechanics used to accomplish reality.

[bernae]

The level of passive-aggressiveness among these physicists is ASTRONOMICAL

[RikaMiarunua]

I got two for you all.
1: What is the Relativity of Reality?
"How can you deny my reality, when it is the only reality that I know?"
2: What is the result of a Light Prism being Refracted?
"Take a basic Light Prism such as those crystals my grandma used to hang in the kitchen = to make the room glitter with rainbows of color when the sun's light hit them. Take that concept of conversion and combine it with the fallowing:
We all know that if you face two or more mirrors twords each other they will infinitely reflect further and smaller each time. Then you mix that aspect, with the aspect of what happens when you fracture something. Say something like a simple slab of glass. For this example say it is a 3d rectangle slab of glass, This would mean a possible total of 6 sides. but many forget that if you were on the inside viewing out rather than from the outside in you would also have 6. So, now you have 12 sides. What would happen if that slab of glass shatter? How many possible sides of view could you get? That is the second aspect needed to create the concept of a term I coined "Refracted / Refraction"
Therefore with all that in mind, what would the possible results for something like Light, visuals, energies, vibrations, ect. be if such had to go through a scenario like that?"

I am serious about getting other peoples thoughts on these questions. I have wondered these things all my life, even as far back as before preschool. I just did not have a way to convey or understand completely all the terms, equations, and such at that time. I still find new ways to understand and associate things ect.

Please let me know by replying below with your, "Ponder this thoughts.""

[StaticBlaster]

It's 3 in the morning on a Monday in July 2020 and I'm binging these science festivals. I think I have a condition. Perhaps... Science-philia.

[jasonlasalle]

The idea of the universe being described as bits at the plank level makes sense when you think about the books and digital media.
You can have a billion digital books that fit on a disk the size of your hand. Apply that on a cosmic level and you can describe the universe using far less space to encode the information. Incredible...

[yuda]

"So, you're saying you guys are friends ?" - This is the moment when I realized this guy is a damn genius. Incredible and enjoyable presentation, thank you.

[suyapajimenez]

It took me half of my life to understand Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, thanks to the evolution of information it was pretty fast to get what Hawking meant with his radiation but I don’t think I’ll have life enough to see the demonstration of this idea. However I have great respect and gratitude for all those beautiful minds. I wish you well.

[nems]

This host is an absolute G. He kept this hilarious. Man if you're out there thanks for the entertainment factor.

[MrVikingsandra]

It is absolutely fascinating to be hearing all this coming straight from the sources who worked directly on this theory!

[efleishermedia]

It's quite astounding how deeply ancient alchemical and Gnostic elements have become embedded in our most "cutting edge" science.

The holographic nature of information was noted by many of the first alchemists.

And indeed, almost the entire intro to this forum was steeped in ancient mysticism. Several times the speakers highlighted the importance of the Hegelian dialectic in physics, though they didn't call it that. It's a historical fact that Hegel was an alchemist, and one can draw almost exact parallels between alchemical principles and Hegel's dialectic.

Even the idea of the "singularity" is a deeply Gnostic concept.

There is a kind of Eschatological strain in technocratic elites today, from Elon Musk to Ray Kurzweil. I can't help but thinking that computer technology has revived a kind of new cybernetic school of alchemy that is just as mystical as it is rational.

I'm wary of any elites that push Eschatological ideas, because these ideas always lead to the Eschaton... otherwise known as "the apocalypse".

I think the archetype of the mad scientist should seriously be explored by more critical thinkers today before we let a group of high priests lead us into an unnecessary apocalypse. It's at least worth exploring, one would think.

[mamashell]

Me before watching this video- "Oh this looks silly but I'm bored. I'll give it a listen.."
Me after watching this video- "OMG THE UNIVERSE IS A HOLOGRAM!!!!"

[asafbeeri]

So nice to see Professor Susskind, I wish my math teachers in high school were even a little like him.

[LearnThaiRapidMethod]

My 0.02 cents: I’ve been mulling over a pet theory of mine for several years, but I don’t know enough physics to put into robust terms.

It’s the notion that the universe exists in two separate but interrelated phases, a bit like roadways. There’s a kind of “construction” phase, where the roads are laid out and connected to each other; and then there’s a “usage” phase, where vehicles pass along the roads in a predetermined way (now that the road system has been solidified).

But it’s not static, more like how volcanoes come into being. The “construction” phase is very chaotic and random, but once solidified the laws of physics can only follow certain paths.

And then there’s new construction and maintenance (of the roads, say). It’s kind of messy because you need to construct on top of existing structures, or destroy (or transform) the previous structures. This is happening continuously, but not everywhere. In our part of the universe, it’s all ordered and stable… but perhaps in pockets (or centers of galaxies or in black holes) new construction is happening. [There’s something inconsistent or not quite right about this part of the idea, and it may not even be relevant…]

It may be that the Big Bang was a time of massive construction and now we’re at a stage of the universe where everything is orderly and deterministic (mostly) throughout the universe.

But, remember, like volcanoes, the “construction” phase of the universe is random. There’s no “designer” (like the engineers planning a road system). It just happens, and coalesces into a way of being that must follow the “paths” or “laws” that have been laid down. But there are pockets of randomness, where things happen without antecedents or anything to cause it. They may be constructive (as happened in the Big Bang, but in a localized fashion), or they be destructive [or maybe not].

And, like a movie (that’s being produced live, e.g. a reality show), the “information” evolves as part of the “construction” phase, but they way the information is being projected into “reality” is determined by the structure that was “constructed” to make the movie visible to the audience. Another analogy is a record. (Does anyone remember what these are?) The sounds are etched into the structure of the vinyl, but don’t become “real” until the record spins and a needle connected to a playback system is put into action. The record is “fixed” (once constructed, but is dynamically formed during the construction phase); and the sound that is played is dynamic (and can be replayed over and over again, coz it’s just the emergent property of the record).

Something like that anyway.

[DrFuzzyFace]

John Hawkenberry and I have at least two things in common: (1) We are both well educated people, and (2) neither of us are qualified to sit as moderator for such an important occasion.  His commentary was too often banal and self-serving, and his attempt at humor was (not infrequently) an embarrassing distraction.  Among the moderator's responsibilities is to "direct traffic" - he is not there to be educated while the audience observes his education.  John was too often inclined to articulate his command of the subject instead of quietly listening (without interrupting) while his educators were allowed to enlighten and, well, educate.  In short, as intelligent as Hawkenberry may be, he is decidedly not a physicist and rarely knew what to make of the information these brilliant minds advanced.  Brian Greene or Lawrence Krauss would have been far better suited for the occasion.

[TheEnigmaUniverse-vtpm]

I was born with many difficulties in my life. Although I am not fully educated, I have a strong love for science and the universe. Thank you for bringing it to me. Love you

[mookiezebra]

As Gerard stated at 1:04, maybe information is lost to us as observers but ultimately is not lost because it branches off into another reality that we can not observe.