Does the holographic principle remove the need for dark matter

[Lino]

I appreciate that the holographic principle is just a theory, but if I accept it and the related aspects of string theory, does it do away with the need for dark matter (since I think that the mass approaches infinity as one changes the reference frame in which one observes the the mass)?

(I'm asking this based on my reading of Susskind: The Blackhole War, and specifically the analogy of Alices' Airoplane.)

Regards,

Noel.

 

[Chalnoth]

I appreciate that the holographic principle is just a theory, but if I accept it and the related aspects of string theory, does it do away with the need for dark matter (since I think that the mass approaches infinity as one changes the reference frame in which one observes the the mass)?

(I'm asking this based on my reading of Susskind: The Blackhole War, and specifically the analogy of Alices' Airoplane.)

Regards,

Noel.

The holographic principle isn't really a theory. It's a mathematical equivalence: it's a statement that the exact same laws of physics in some number of dimensions are exactly equivalent to a different set of laws of physics in one less dimension. This only works with certain, specific laws of physics.

Because it is an equivalence, one description is equally as real as the other. If it turns out that the laws of physics that describe our own space-time can be reduced to a different set of laws on a surface, then that in no way means that our own understanding of our world as a three-dimensional world (four including time) is invalid: it just say it's one way of looking at things, though there are others.

So no, there's really no way that holography can say much of anything about the existence (or not) of dark matter.

 

[Lino]

Thanks Chalnoth.

Regards,

Noel.