Why no attribution to Bohm regarding holographic principles

  • Thread starter Thread starter rjay
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Holographic
AI Thread Summary
David Bohm is recognized for his contributions to the concept of the Holographic Universe and the Holomovement, yet he is often not credited by contemporary physicists like Leonard Susskind and Lee Smolin. The discussion highlights a perceived disconnect between Bohm's ideas and modern interpretations of holography, suggesting that Bohm's theories may not be taken seriously in current scientific discourse. Critics argue that Bohm's interpretations add unnecessary complexity without enhancing predictive power. Additionally, the distinction between Bohm's holistic view of interconnectedness and Smolin's focus on localized information is emphasized. Overall, the lack of attribution to Bohm may stem from differing conceptual frameworks rather than oversight.
rjay
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
As I have seen, David Bohm was the exponent of the Holographic Universe and also the so called Holomovement.

When Leonard Susskind gave a holograohic Universe solution to the information paradox, he did not credit Bohm. Nor does Lee Smolin in his book Quantum Gravity credit Bohm for saying that there are no things only happenings (no nouns only verbs)- paper is papering etc.??
Does anyone know why?
 
Space news on Phys.org
rjay said:
As I have seen, David Bohm was the exponent of the Holographic Universe and also the so called Holomovement.

When Leonard Susskind gave a holograohic Universe solution to the information paradox, he did not credit Bohm. Nor does Lee Smolin in his book Quantum Gravity credit Bohm for saying that there are no things only happenings (no nouns only verbs)- paper is papering etc.??
Does anyone know why?
Despite the similar names, I don't think Bohm's idea of "Holomovement" had anything at all to do with the modern idea of a holographic universe. I don't think anybody takes Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics seriously any longer, as it adds a number of features to the theory which add nothing whatsoever to its predictive power.
 
A quick skimming in wiki did not turn up any reasons why Bohm should be credited...but I did not read it all...Seems Bohm's idea about brain function is related to holograpic ideas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm#The_holonomic_model_of_the_brain

Lots about him there..and some funny stuff like how he was barred from his own PHD thesis because it became classified...

In the above section, "holomonic model" has more...
 
rjay said:
When Leonard Susskind gave a holograohic Universe solution to the information paradox, he did not credit Bohm. Nor does Lee Smolin in his book Quantum Gravity credit Bohm for saying that there are no things only happenings (no nouns only verbs)- paper is papering etc.??
Does anyone know why?

Because they are talking about two different things with confusingly similar names.

Bohm's principle was that everything is connected with everything else. Smolin is quite the opposite, you can know everything about a location in space by looking at the surface.
 

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
View full post »

Thread 'Hubble Constant, Dark Energy and the Expanding Universe'

Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?
View full post »

Similar threads

B Can the Holographic Principle make predictions
Replies
2
Views
3K
I Multiple (Non-Interacting) Universes?
Replies
11
Views
3K
A Information encoding in the Holographic principle
Replies
14
Views
5K
I Holographic Principle discussion in Sean Carroll's book
Replies
8
Views
3K
What is Lee Smolin's Maximal Variety Principle in Quantum Mechanics?
Replies
10
Views
3K
Quantum Uncertainty in the Holographic Principle
Replies
6
Views
4K
A Twistors and celestial holography
Replies
21
Views
5K
Is Paul Steinhardt's Statement "Rather Pathetic"? Why?
3
Replies
114
Views
19K
How Do Garrett Lisi's Theories Challenge Current Physics Paradigms?
Replies
3
Views
3K
Why the Multiverse? Evidence of Many Universes
Replies
28
Views
10K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top