Forum discussion for Talbot's holographic theory.
Perhaps someone can post a few brief lectures on the topic first (you tube? other?).
Tags:
Thanks Joe for posting the interview.
To understand this I had to go through and take notes. I hope I am responding to the major issues.
My basic complaint is the Truth versus the Model of the Analogy. The Science doesn’t back the concept that this is a proven fact that we live in a holographic Universe.
I have always liked the Analogy of a Holographic Memory, so I actually side with that model as a good one to hopefully become integrated into neurology of the Brain. Unfortunately, Neuroscience seems stuck on the local chemistry effects and not the workings of the whole brain. Neuromania has actually become a word and it is a fitting as far as I can tell. I am out of my league on this, so I am speculating as well <G>
The Physics of Bohmian Mechanics (Bohm’s QM and Interpretation) does not really fit as well when trying to get the analogies correct.
The first issue I have is the idea that the particles form a whole with no separation between them in the Universe. In Bohmian QM his approach is to work within a (Mathematical) Space called a Phase Space. Physics uses Phase Space concepts alot. Primarily it is fundamental to defining Entropy (another topic not taken up here). So – what is a phase space? It is strictly a tool where the three spatial coordinates and the three spatial values of (usually) Momentum are each given their own axis in a Cartesian coordinate system. Hence, for ONE particle, a 6 dimensional space is used. Each point in the space has coordinates, say (x, y, z, Px, Py, Pz) giving the position and momentum (P) at a particular instant. The entire knowledge of the particle at a specific time is a single point in the space. The particle state has 6 dimensions. If we take two particles we get another set (additional 6 coordinates) of spatial and momentum coordinates for that particle. This is an additional 6 coordinates to the system. The phase space for the 2 particle system is then 2*6=12 dimensions large. A single point in the 12 dimensional phase space has the information for both particles. So the Point P has coordinates (x1,y1,z1,P1x,P1y,P1z, x2,y2,z2,P2x,P2y,P2z). On can place any system of particles into a phase space where any single point in the space represents the entire system of particles (as a single point!). For a gas, say a few cubic centimeters of air, one easily gets~ 6*(10,000,000,000,000,000,000 particles) or a space with a dimension of 60,000,000,000,000,000,000. A single point in the space defines what everything that is happening to all the particles. All in ONE point. The Point moves around in time which describes the entire state of the whole system and how it changes. Bohmian Mechanics uses the Phase space as a real entity to apply the QM dynamics on. So, yes – everything exists as a single point. Nothing separates them because thaey are all in that point. However – it is in a HUGE dimensional space that is a mathematical construct. (Not ontologically Real, either).
I can get pictures for the above if needed? Please ask if you want them (try Wiki maybe). I’ll find some.
Second part is why holographic?? Holograms are indeed a technique where a three dimensional object can be encoded within a 2 dimensional film (flat sheet). I believe he is referring to the quantum wave (which is a complex wave). A 2-dimensional complex wave is actually a 4 dimensional wave of real numbers. The wave interacts through slits very similar (an anology) to a wave passing through slits. One gets interference patterns. Where the wave overlaps, troughs and peaks add together – these are complex numbers representing a trough or peak. That does yield a complex interference pattern very much like a hologram works. The particles follow the interference waves. Peaks are the most likely places where the electron (or other type of particle) will land. One can (liberally) make this analogy of the hologram.
Why does the mathematician, Fourier, come into play? He proved the following: Any pattern in a function (say a wavey-wave function) can be exactly represented by an infinite number of classic sine, or cosine, waves. Hence any bit of matter that can be constructed as a wave is made of an infinite number of standard sine or cosine waves. I think that is why he mentions this.
If one looks at the above, it may be considered as a good Analogy, however the whole Analogy is built from many various analogies. All these analogies are not a “whole” as ONE Analogy. They are all separate and different Anologies which make a hodge-podge collection of analoges. Science has nowhere “Proven” this is Fact. It actually is a bad analogy when all are put together.
One point gets rather slipped in that is really false. The fact that Bohmian mechanics is “The” QM/Interpretation that fits all of these analogies is also false. The wave functions are the same in any other QM approach as in Bohm’s QM. There is nothing special here.
The one “Bohmian” piece is that he does use a Phase-Space as the entity upon which the physics is performed. This is the piece that yields his unique way of creating non-local forces. Calling this Ontological is a bit of a stretch for me. But the is just a personal opinion.
I apologize for the delay and long answer. Please ask questions. Much of this is likely new ideas to most people.
Second Apology: I had to reverse engineer from words in the Video. I think I got it right.
© 2018 Created by Theosophy Network. Powered by