Has science proven that the Universe is in reality just a hologram?

[Baldseagull]

Newton's Theory of Gravity is not "wrong". Einstein expanded it to cover things Newton didn't know about - the fundamental parts of Newton's Theory are still used because they are correct, and essentially identical to Einstein's when applied for 'everyday' use. Even Einstein's Theory breaks down in certain circumstances (black holes, etc), but it doesn't make the rest of it 'wrong'. If and when someone discovers a more accurate way to describe gravity (probably at a quantum level) then Einstein's theory may go the same way as Newton.

A Theory in science is the strongest possible term - nothing is ever described as 'fact'. 'Theory' does not mean guess - that's a hypothesis.

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that any two bodies attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the sum of their masses, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Einstein demonstrated that this is not true, or "wrong". But as I said close enough not to matter most of the time. I know a theory is not a fact but it is possible to prove that a theory is incorrect, or "wrong".

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

This is a response to David in Southampton, and is a good one. I come at this from philosophy with a limited understanding of the philosophy of science, rather than as a scientist, but this is well put. The depiction of theory here also illustrates that the claim 'that's a fact' and the belief that facts are watertight and sacrosanct and superior to theories (as many users on NSC maintain) is problematic.

Was it? I hadn't noticed.

Or given that it is pantomime season, maybe I should say "Oh no it isn't!"

But to be fair, the post to which this alluded was relatively comprehensible, but it did have words of more than one syllable in it. I can recognise that because I am a linguist, But I love and appreciate how this seems to have changed from a science to a philosophy thread..... although I don't like categorising things and putting them in boxes anyway.

 

[Baldseagull]

Congratulations. You've entirely misunderstood how science works.

Congratulations.You've entirely missed that my response was to the original question.

 

[symyjym]

The universe is essentially a 2d structure of information that is projected into the reality of my front room.

 

[albionite]

So is David Icke not as much as a nutter as I first thought, hasn't he been saying this for years? All very interesting even if I don't have a clue what any of it means.

Not payed too much attention after his theories that reptiles are in control of us.

http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/56826-david-icke-mass-hypnosis/

 

[LargeHadronZugzwang]

No implications really. They blew all credibility at this point..

' In one paper, Hyakutake computes the internal energy of a black hole, the position of its event horizon (the boundary between the black hole and the rest of the Universe), its entropy and other properties based on the predictions of string theory as well as the effects of so-called virtual particles that continuously pop into and out of existence'. Knob.

eh? Not at all, nobody understands quantum vacuum or quantum wave fluctuations. Such pedantic dismissive comments are not really constructive. If the physics and maths stack up, then the theory is entirely plausible.

 

[The Truth]

The most mind blowing and spiritual drugs grow out of the ground my friend.

Here's a book on the various topics on this thread- Graham Hancock - Supernatural meetings with the ancient teachers of mankind.
He is an anthropologist amongst other things, who actually tries these 'natural drugs' and gains insight to help us learn more about our universe and what we can't always see.

http://www.grahamhancock.com/archive/supernatural/

 

[readingstockport]

No implications really. They blew all credibility at this point..

' In one paper, Hyakutake computes the internal energy of a black hole, the position of its event horizon (the boundary between the black hole and the rest of the Universe), its entropy and other properties based on the predictions of string theory as well as the effects of so-called virtual particles that continuously pop into and out of existence'. Knob.

Erm, actually that is fairly well experimentally proven. By observing the results of particle interactions it can be shown that those interatcions can only have occured by 'theorised' particles having come into existance, interacted, and then gone out of existance. Positron/electron annihilation and positron/electron pair production is a completely accepted phenomenon in high energy physics and is observed many times on a daily basis in high energy experiments such as DESY and CERN.

note - by can only have occured I am talking 5 sigma so not TOTALLY certain but almost.