Understanding the Holographic Principle

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Holographic Principle and its implications for gravitational attraction in two-dimensional (2D) masses. A lecturer asserted that gravity does not exist in 2D, describing it as an illusion, which aligns with the views of certain physicists from Princeton. The conversation highlights the complexity of understanding gravity's nature and its relationship to dimensionality, prompting participants to seek simpler explanations and reliable sources for further study.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Holographic Principle
  • Basic knowledge of classical mechanics
  • Familiarity with gravitational theories
  • Ability to interpret scientific literature
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Holographic Principle in detail
  • Explore classical mechanics and its principles
  • Read about the implications of gravity in different dimensions
  • Investigate the works of physicists discussing gravity as an illusion
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, educators, and anyone interested in theoretical physics, particularly those exploring the nature of gravity and dimensionality.

pythagoras88
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Today in a classical mechanics lecture, we were posed a question on whether there will be gravitational attraction between masses if the 2 masses were squashed into a 2D masses(so is flat). At first, i thought the force should still exist, since the force only depends on masses, so maybe can just do a surface integral instead of volume integral.

But, the answer given was that, gravity is an illusion that do not exist in 2D and the lecturer said this is linked to holographic principle.

Hmmm, the online sources seems to be a bit too esoteric for me, is there a simpler explanation for this? and, which book or online source should i refer to for more information?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your lecturer actually stated that as a fact?
 
He quoted a physicist(i guess) from princeton that says that gravity is illusion, so i guess he kind of agree with him.

Is this stance still debatable?
 
pythagoras88 said:
He quoted a physicist(i guess) from princeton that says that gravity is illusion, so i guess he kind of agree with him.

I'm pretty sure he is talking about this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/science/13gravity.html"

Is this stance still debatable?

Yes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Graduate The holometer - experimentally testing the holographic principle?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
Graduate Twistors and celestial holography
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
Graduate Exploring the Holographic Principle: Space Recession and Inflation
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Work - Energy Principle Application to Fluid Flow
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
Graduate "The 7 Strangest Coincidences in the Laws of Nature" (S. Hossenfelder)
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
High School Does Gravity Act on Everything? Fundamental to GR?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School How to shorten this speech about BH?
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
Graduate MOND Theory Primer: Stacy McGaugh's Research Program Explored
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Graduate An odd question regarding Bernoulli's Principle
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Graduate How Do Garrett Lisi's Theories Challenge Current Physics Paradigms?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K