Reading the February edition of the New Scientist (about space-time being possiblly quantized in its own right) I read that the event horizon of a black hole is a 2-dimensional entity that may possibly encode all the information to describe the 3- 0r ->3 dimensional universe inside.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

That is interesting of course but am I right to wonder how the surface of the black hole can be described as 2-dimensional in the first place?

In my poor little mind it would only qualify as 2 dimensional (and then only in theory) if it was purely idealised as a surface with zero width.

This would be impossible unless the black hole was to exist in isolation to the rest of the universe.

To my mind 1- ,2- 3- dimensional obnjects are all idealisations from the established 4- or higher dimensional setup we work in at the moment.

That seems to be my main point: I can cope with gazillions of hypothetical extra dimensions but not with any subtraction of those we already seem to be dealing with.

Have I got things by the wrong handle somehow or am I just naturally obtuse (or both obviously) ?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Objects in 2 dimensions

Loading...

Similar Threads for Objects dimensions |
---|

I Physical Interpretation of Compactified Dimensions? |

B String theory, Calabi–Yau manifolds, complex dimensions |

A Max number of extra dimensions |

I Basic Kaluza-Klein towers |

I Testing string/m-theory extra dimensions prediction |

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**