**Ask a monkey a physics question thread**

[Eric]

Why is there so much talk about holograms when looking at black holes?


I remember on the science channel or something awhile back they said no information is lost such that there is a hologram that shows info (I think this was in the context of someone entering a black hole). The recent http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...-surfaces.html article talks about black holes themselves being holograms as opposed to just the info that gets sucked into them.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Why is there so much talk about holograms when looking at black holes?


I remember on the science channel or something awhile back they said no information is lost such that there is a hologram that shows info (I think this was in the context of someone entering a black hole). The recent http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...-surfaces.html article talks about black holes themselves being holograms as opposed to just the info that gets sucked into them.

Preface: I may be not 100% aware of all the subtleties of the holographic principle.

The holographic principle is a statement which basically says that if some 3D thing can be wholly described using information in a 2D plane, then there is no rational reason to claim that the 3D description is more real than the 2d description.

If you can't tell whether you're looking at something which is 2D or 3D, that's kinda like looking at a holograph, hence the name "holographic principle."

I'm not aware of any use of the holographic principle outside of string theories. String theories are on the fringe of physics and are not a part of the Standard Model. Some of the most highly trained physicists in the world are trying to find a string theory which is a complete description of reality, but so far, they have not been able to do so.

String theories have shown and hinted at some interesting properties of the universe, but none of those properties was a new addition to the Standard Model, just a corner that hadn't been shown to be a part of the SM.