Holographic principle, non-locality, and Lorentz invariance

[asimov42]

Hi all,

Some recent comments from the forums here led me to do a bit of reading on the holographic principle, and to a posting on "The Reference Frame" by Lubos Moti about the (likely lack of) 'holographic noise' in the experiment by Craig Hogan at Fermilab (http://motls.blogspot.ca/2012/02/hogans-holographic-noise-doesnt-exist.html). At the end of the post, Moti makes the following comment:

"When we talk about exotic miracles attributed to the holographic principle, I find it much more plausible – although "less likely than Yes" – that the holographic principle could modify the motion of celestial bodies at a very low acceleration because some interference effects start to work very differently. Such effects would occur because of astronomically long interference patterns seen in the holographic description of celestial bodies. But note that the effect only has a chance to exist here because the small value of G is incorporated into very low accelerations of the celestial bodies (galaxies etc.)."

Two questions about the above for the experts here:

1) Is the interference effect Moti is referring to a non-local effect? (it appears to be)
2) I had understood that the holographic principle respects Lorentz invariance (Bousso explicitly states this) ... but the above might imply otherwise?

Thanks!

 

[AndyW]

Hello,

I am happy to respond to your questions regarding the holographic principle and the comments made by Lubos Moti.

To answer your first question, yes, the interference effect mentioned by Moti is indeed a non-local effect. This is because the holographic principle suggests that all the information in a certain region of space can be encoded on its boundary, which means that the effects in one region can have an impact on another region even if they are not directly connected.

Regarding your second question, it is important to note that the holographic principle does not necessarily conflict with Lorentz invariance. While the principle itself does not explicitly mention Lorentz invariance, it is a fundamental principle of modern physics and is assumed to hold in all theories. Therefore, any theory or model, including the holographic principle, must be consistent with Lorentz invariance. It is possible that the effects mentioned by Moti may appear to violate Lorentz invariance, but this could be due to a misunderstanding or a simplification of the concept in his comment.

I hope this helps to clarify your questions. If you have any further inquiries, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank you for your interest in the holographic principle and for bringing this discussion to our attention.