Itoero

Senior Members
  • Content count

    1191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Itoero last won the day on February 6 2017

Itoero had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

40 Good

About Itoero

  • Rank
    Organism
  • Birthday 12/12/1987

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Belgium
  • Interests
    Mountains
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Everything
  • Occupation
    I take care for the pigeons on the roof.

Recent Profile Visitors

9487 profile views
  1. This is an odd statement. You can't 'beat' evolution( change over time ). Beating 'evolution' is like beating 'time'.
  2. This will come as a surprise to most people but God does exist. A while ago he got sick of being God and he made me God. So I'm God.
  3. Quantum Entanglement ?

    I never said that. But if you think like that, it's rather 5 dimensions instead of 2.
  4. Quantum Entanglement ?

    If it's encoded on a two dimensional surface then that doesn't change the observable dimensions we live in. And it's not a 4 or 5 dimensional space since the holographic dimensions are not space....they create space.
  5. Quantum Entanglement ?

    No, you are again completely wrong. If the holographic principle is correct then that doesn't change the three-dimensional space we live in which is a geometric setting in which three values (called parameters) are required to determine the position of a point. By proving the holographic principle you don't reduce the amount of coordinates needed to specify any point within the space.
  6. Quantum Entanglement ?

    No. The ER=EPR is a conjecture in physics stating that entangled particles are connected by a wormhole (or Einstein–Rosen bridge) It''s proposed by Leonard Susskind in 2013,, a proponent of the holographic principle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER%3DEPR
  7. Quantum Entanglement ?

    The ER EPR is based on the holographic principle. But it's not literally said. The holographic principle is a supposed property of quantum gravity that states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary to the region—preferably a light-like boundary like a gravitational horizon. First proposed by Gerard 't Hooft, it was given a precise string-theory interpretation by Leonard Susskind who combined his ideas with previous ones of 't Hooft and Charles Thorn. The ER=EPR conjecture was proposed by Leonard Susskind and Juan Maldacena in 2013. Why do you say that? The H principle doesn't remove or delete things, the principle explains things, it gives extra information. Yes but dimreepr seems to think he knows.
  8. Quantum Entanglement ?

    No it doesn't but the ER EPR is based on the hologr
  9. Quantum Entanglement ?

    you're missing the point, they aren't connected So ER=EPR is wrong? I give neg rep because you deny the work of several of the 'best' physicists of this time and your example doesn't make any sense. You do know that more then two particles can get entangled?
  10. Mass in black holes (split from Mass)

    The last time you said that, a theorem backed me up. This happened very often on this forum. People always say I'm wrong yet I'm very often backed up by science. I'm talking against faith-based beliefs...believe what you want.
  11. Quantum Entanglement ?

    That's what the holographic principle provides. It states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary to the region. In my oversimplified explanation...two entangled particles are connected by 2D info. 2D info implies the absence of time and space. There is no space between entangled particles which allows the seemingly instantaneous collapse.
  12. Mass in black holes (split from Mass)

    "Inside the event horizon all paths bring the particle closer to the center of the black hole. It is no longer possible for the particle to escape." There is no evidence for this, it's the idea from a smart man a long time ago. If you knew more about how physicists like Hawking and Susskind investigate this and what the current idea's are, then you would know the idea that "Inside the event horizon all paths bring the particle closer to the center of the black hole. It is no longer possible for the particle to escape." is probably wrong. GR doesn't give the absolute truth... That's not true...science evolves you know, things change. Not everything in GR is correct. Hawking has the soft hair theory. And the holographic principle was invented by G t Hooft and it was given a stringy look by Susskind. Those are ways to deal with the black hole info paradox. The stuff the GR says about BH has not much value anymore. It states the universe is a hologram. Black hole event horizons are then boundaries which separate our observable 3D world from 2D info. Time and space are not present in 2D info...you shouldn't apply GR-logic to understand BHs.
  13. Quantum Entanglement ?

    Ok but between entangled particles the act of measuring or observing is transferred. It's spooky reaction at distance.
  14. Quantum Entanglement ?

    Yes it is. It allows us to see. Nuclear reactions in the sun form light and our photoreceptorcells absorb the photons. The most simple example is that an electron can absorb and release a photon.
  15. Quantum Entanglement ?

    It's mathematically possible to explain quantum-phenomena so the quantum-probability becomes part of a deterministic system. This is all about the holographic principle. The 2D-plane you can call an extra dimension. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle There is more and more 'evidence' that points to the holographic principle. Then the ER=EPR is imo correct. It states that entangled particles are connected by a wormhole. A wormhole implies the absence of time and space...so does the 2D info in the holographic principle.