Quantum entanglement from the holographic principle
2. 2. 2019https://arxiv.org/abs/1109.3542
… gravity and quantum mechanics somehow cooperate not to violate each other and there is a deep connection between them.
According to the holographic principle there is redundancy in the bulk bits Bα. They are not independent of each other. Simply ignoring some bulk bits could not be a solution, because the boundary bits should be able to reproduce arbitrary configuration of the bulk bits, at least probabilistically.
Which would mean that the projection contains less data than +1D dimensional bulk?
The world is not made of separate degrees of freedom at each point in space.
The nonlocality of quantum entanglement is also intimately related to that of the holographic principle. Since the size of the bulk bits are always larger than that of the corresponding boundary bits, some of the correlated bulk bits should be spatially further separated than the boundary bits do.
The -1D definition or pattern has a different spatiality (or some other property)?
Thus, even if the boundary bits have the locality, the corresponding bulk bits apparently do not. However, even in this case, entanglement does not allow superluminal communication, because the inside observer cannot choose the specific outcome of measurement.
Superluminal is faster than light :).
Holographic principle ↓
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle
The holographic principle was inspired by black hole thermodynamics, which conjectures that the maximal entropy in any region scales with the radius squared, and not cubed as might be expected.
However, there exist classical solutions to the Einstein equations that allow values of the entropy larger than those allowed by an area law, hence in principle larger than those of a black hole.
What is fundamental (Sean Carrol) ↓
http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/11/10/against-space/
Space not, time might be.
Some other time than our space-time I assume?
http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/10/18/is-time-real/
The question of whether time is fundamental or emergent is, on the other hand, crucially important. I have no idea what the answer is (and neither does anybody else). Modern theories of fundamental physics and cosmology include both possibilities among the respectable proposals.
Entropy (Information?) ↓
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/information-in-the-holographic-univ/
Thermodynamic entropy and Shannon entropy are conceptually equivalent: the number of arrangements that are counted by Boltzmann entropy reflects the amount of Shannon information one would need to implement any particular arrangement. The two entropies have two salient differences, though. First, the thermodynamic entropy used by a chemist or a refrigeration engineer is expressed in units of energy divided by temperature, whereas the Shannon entropy used by a communications engineer is in bits, essentially dimensionless. That difference is merely a matter of convention.
Shannon entropy (mostly On or Off states of microchips) is vastly smaller than thermodynamic solution for the same chip.
There could be more levels of structure in our universe than are dreamt of in today’s physics.
Isn’t that contradicting the holographic principle a bit?
The World as a hologram (Leonard Susskind) / 1994 ↓
http://inspirehep.net/record/376940?ln=en
The two dimensional description only requires one discrete degree of freedom per Planck area and yet it is rich enough to describe all three dimensional phenomena.
In a certain sense the world is two dimensional and not three dimensional as previously supposed.
grep -e 'black hole' 9409089.txt | wc -l
33
33 is the number of times that ‘black hole’ is mentioned in the paper.
