Holographic Universe?
It’s all about the self-similarity of our universe. A hologram is nothing else than a fractal construct.

If this experiment would prove that we are living in a holographic universe, than it would also prove that we are all one. Would this change something in the way we act and think? Well, Mandelbrot mathematics has changed already our world. We have fractal antennas in our cell phones, our batteries are fractal constructs, and modern analyze software use fractal mathematics to recognize certain patterns like cancer or hearth disease in the human body.

Also in the Free Energy research Möbius Strips are recognized as recursive fractal constructs. Electrical coils like that of the mathematician Marko Rodin shows excellent values, only because it’s winding follows a fractal recursive pattern. We are just beginning to understand that mathematics is indeed the language of the universe.

> Lasers were invented in 1952, not the late 1800’s. I don’t understand this quote.

Before lasers were available, interferometers used some other kind of light source with a narrow frequency band, often a gas discharge lamp (sodium vapor makes a nice orange glow when ionized).

@gmon: the first interferometers used a split beam of monochromatic light rather than lasers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson_interferometer . This would have been accurate enough to observe the phenomenon Michelson and Morley were originally looking for (and did not find!). Modern theory predicts phenomena on much smaller scales, which is why modern Michelson interferometers use preposterously long laser beams.

So a question: if I recall correctly, there were some physicists who pulsed light through cesium, and achieved something on the order of 300 times the speed of light. There’s also what I think might be called ‘quantum tunneling’ through quartz. So, how would this knowledge affect the results from his holometer? Or is he considering that in his work?

“In the late 1800s, the interference pattern was obtained by using a gas discharge lamp, a filter, and a thin slot or pinhole. In one version of the Michelson-Morley experiment, the interferometer used starlight as the source of light. Starlight is temporally incoherent light, but since it is a point source of light it has spatial coherence and will produce an interference pattern.”

-wikipedia

I think they first started using lasers for xray interference stuff. They had to work with other ways of finding coherent light.

I’m immediately reminded of the hilarious observation I was once treated to: “You may indeed be the architect of your own reality, but you are still, nonetheless, standing on my foot.”.
To paraphrase Morpheus, “The Universe, it seems, is not without a sense of humor.”.

@gmon: Looks like a case of bad grammar. The interferometer was indeed developed in the 1800′s however wasn’t practical or accurate until the laser was invented. There were ways of isolating light beams before the laser was invented but for very short distances. The invention of holography by Frank Gabor also pre-dated the invention of the laser.

I agree with you gmon that the context of what was written is a little misleading. The classical interferometer was used in the Michelson-Morley experiment(1887) to split beams of light into two and have them bounce back to recombine, rather than somehow using time travel to use actual lasers.
On another note, this article is interesting and provokes thoughts of what would happen if the universe was actually holographic.

No, in 1991 author Michael Talbot released a book entitled “The Holographic Universe” that already elaborated this theory. This is not Craig Hogan’s original “mind-boggling” proposition whatsoever.

“The shaking of spacetime occurs at a million times per second, a thousand times what your ear can hear,”

I think 20khz is usually considered as the hearing limit. So, isn’t it more like 50 times what your ear can hear?

Talbot did indeed publish a book called The Holographic Universe. What it did however was inject large amounts of New Age hocus-pocus into some older and saner theories on the same topic developed some fifty years earlier by Karl Pibram and David Bohm.

“Black hole physics, in which space and time become compressed, provides a basis for math showing that the third dimension may not exist at all. In this two-dimensional cartoon of a universe, what we perceive as a third dimension would actually be a projection of time intertwined with depth. ”

That just changed my understanding of the universe. All those things I’ve seen that work in 2D but don’t make sense in 3D (Warp drive, wormholes) now seem a lot more possible.

“Using technology similar to that in noise-cancelling headphones, sensors outside the instrument detect vibrations and shake the mirror at the same frequency to cancel them”

Shake the mirror? Wouldn’t image-stabalization in cameras be a better analogy?

“it is only one hundredth of the size of current interferometers, which measure gravitational waves from black holes and supernovas.”

Except that so such waves have ever been measured.

“I think 20khz is usually considered as the hearing limit. So, isn’t it more like 50 times what your ear can hear?”

No because Hz is logrhythmic.

I think this article is full of holes.

“The idea that spacetime may not be entirely smooth – like a digital image that becomes increasingly pixelated as you zoom in – had been previously proposed by Stephen Hawking and others.”

I believe this idea goes back to the founders of quantum physics i.e Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Maxwell, De Broglie, Plank etc.
According to quantum physics the smallest pixel of space time is the plank constant at 6.626068 × 10-34 m2 kg / s. Below that all there exist are waves of probability. Stephen Hawking had nothing to do with that!

Aside from that we may indeed be living on the hollow deck.

Though the mirrors are being “noise-canceled”, is it not possible there is a “flexing” of the device on a larger scale that is not being accounted for? Or is the assumption that the frequency range for such perturbations is different than the predicted space-time vibrations?

And though it may be too theoretical, how was that frequency range determined? It sounds way too low for something that hasn’t been observed.

“No because Hz is logrhythmic.”

No. 1 Hertz, is one cycle per second. 10 Hertz, is 10 cycles per second. You are possibly confusing Hertz with Decibels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hertz
“The hertz (symbol: Hz) is the SI unit of frequency defined as the number of cycles per second of a periodic phenomenon.”

Give the intern who wrote this story a break. He or she is not a regular paid physics reporter, and obviously did not have the benefit of an editor.

““So a question: if I recall correctly, there were some physicists who pulsed light through cesium, and achieved something on the order of 300 times the speed of light. ”

You recall incorrectly. If the speed of light was indeed broken, I’m absolutely certain everyone here would know about it by now.”

Brycemeister, Techni:

What is commonly referred to as the speed of light (the “c” in Einstein’s famous equation, approx 186,282 miles per second) is actually the speed of light while traveling through a vacuum. While traveling through a different medium (such as air or water) the speed is different, typically slower.

I also recall reading about an experiment where light traveled faster than “c” by being pushed through some exotic medium, but it didn’t truly break the “faster than light” constraint because it wasn’t going through a vacuum. Don’t remember more details; I guess it’s google time…

A form of quantum tunnelling is used in flash memory.

If you want to consider the possibilities of faster-than-light, check out quantum entanglement. Whether it can ever be applied in a practical way to have real FTL is anybody’s guess.

As I recall the results of the Aspect experiment, they could not have obtained those without exceeding the speed of light. The experiment pitted locality against quantum Physics and quantum physics won.

I also wondered about that “mind boggling” hypothesis. I hope he has more ducks in line than it appears from that statement.

@Art: I think the point in time when all your senses, consciousness, and memory suffers systemic failure is the worst possible moment to use for experiential evidence. And no, the consistency of the experience is unsurprising to me. It’s as consistent as the fact that every adult is self-aware.

Now, how are the splitter and the mirrors going to be so precisely corrected that the only possible variance comes from space-time? Similarly, is it normal to be able to guarantee a complete vacuum in those arms? What it one beam hits a particle that the other doesn’t?

So what is the speed of dark?

So what is the speed of dark?

Well, it has to be faster than the speed of light; otherwise, the dark couldn’t get out of the way.

@continuousvariable: The light ray you are “following with your eye from the sun to the ground” might be better stated as a light ray “from the sun” that you follow “from your eye to the ground”. The light you perceive optically has already been traveling for several minutes from the sun to reach your eye. When you glance at the ground, you are actually observing the reflection of a different light ray.

However, your question about thinking faster than light is valid to ask. I know from personal experience that sometimes as I transition from sleep to wakefulness, I am able for a brief time, to see individual segments of the 7-segment LEDs in my alarm clock lighting in cycle, rather than the “complete” digit.

I’m not claiming to be thinking faster than light, rather just faster than 60 Hz. But your question about the speed of thought is well-taken, and has been undertaken by others.

@Not a wierdo:
That point in time is perfect if you are looking for experiential evidence from an NDE. I agree that there is possibility of data corruption, but while the consistency of experience is not surprising, I think Art was asking, “What is the nature of consistency?”

I believe this research into the holographic will reveal more about our relationship to the spiritual realm, and intelligent design.

@ notaweirdo: “@Art: I think the point in time when all your senses, consciousness, and memory suffers systemic failure is the worst possible moment to use for experiential evidence. And no, the consistency of the experience is unsurprising to me. It’s as consistent as the fact that every adult is self-aware.”

Consider the possibility that the mind is not the builder of a coherent subjective experience, but instead a filter. The brain senses the hum of the refrigerator, but does us the favor of not passing it to the conscious level. The better the filter is working, the less information we receive. Holistic or self-recurving kinds of experiences aren’t helpful for the physical survival of the body. Of what practical value is it to realize an attacking lion is only a holographic projection arising from the same information field from which I arise? None. So it is conceivable that as the brain starts to fail and the filtering breaks down, we are open to experiences that might actually have some basis in reality. Perhaps at a subconscious level we have access to holographic experiences, but our brain does us a favor and filters it out.

Or, consider all of the quantum phenomena we just have to accept despite their not making sense to our rational mind. There are certainly areas where our rational mind is getting in the way of itself.

I beg to disagree,

The earth is a component of the Milky Way, our galaxy, therefore, it is permeated, contained within a mass, namely, matter. After studying Einstein’s theory of special relativity, we conclude that the space among these bodies is curved.

Upon deeper reflection of the components of matter, we realize that its constituents, namely, subatomic particles are held in clusters due to attraction and repulsion given a total of seventeen dimensions. See Brian Green String Theory Super String Theory and Beyond Cambridge University Prsss http://books.google.com/books?id=-dlwLWaqlb0C&pg=PA158&dq=string+theory+and+d-brane+dynamics&hl=en&ei=v71wTLKWK8G88gbq-JHfCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=string%20theory%20and%20d-brane%20dynamics&f=false

If successful this experiment will surely prove that the world is flat, The bible is correct that God created the universe in 7 days and that once over the edge of the horizon we can lift back the shroud of reality and see the pixelated nature of the universe as it is all generated and then projected on a two dimensional machine from God’s Computer laboratory. When I first heard the analogy to a computer generated universe I had no idea what a concrete notion it was for it’s author. Hopefully the experiment will not prove to be a pre-determined conclusion. The reason I say this is I fear that the experimental controls do not exist except by definition. There is nothing natural about the generation of a laser beam and one that split or two separate ones can generate a stereo effect between them or the noise that may be detected may just be form the digital mechanics of how they are generated or even due to the temperature of the mirrors and lens involved. Calibration of such an instrument to give it a control factor that is no just an arbitrary setting on say an old fashioned analog dial is a difficult adjustment. The next problem is that no two angles in geometry are going to be exactly in perfect alignment just because two points can be as much as an agitated electron width in distance off the exact angle just because a couple of stray photons. That could give you just enough interference to plant what is being sought in the experiment before having tried it out yielding a foregone conclusion. If by happy accident the experiment fails and something accidental is discovered it might then be a greater success. It may also be a mistake to test this theory with the present theory and understanding of the nature of photons because photons are automatically deemed to control the nature of space time with their constant speed in a vacuum and the definition of net mass attributed to each one. Any mistake in the assumptions tells us that more likely the data coming from observing areas in space where super massive black holes are supposed to reside tells me that there is intervening material in space that probably blocks direct access to the photon transmissions observed here on earth. So far as i am concerned the third dimensions is actually just the same as the second dimensions because we are dealing with point and then point to point and yet another point to point. The 4th dimension is space time which is the same as distance-time. Time is then just a measurement of distance with two separate meters and not one. Einstein understood that his frames of reference were between say regular spaces in the train tracks under the train in motion verses the motion of hands on an analog watch on the wrist of the observer. This new experiment is not really that new after all even if it is thought to be more accurate as per the measurements made by a laser clock is still lacking yet another third frame of reference to observe it in. It is also lacking a control or series of control devices in the experiment as earlier stated to prevent it from becoming a foregone conclusion and then a suspect hypothesis. Now If I am wrong beware. The US Military should see this as vital technology because ultimately if proof is attained that the reality is a fanciful projection of reality and even an illusion of the third dimension then it is possible to use that as underlying theory to develop all new technologies to deprive the enemy in war of reality. Without a third dimension there can not be bomb blasts nor guns firing. That could be a really exciting prospect. I suspect the experiment is a waste of time and money until the experimental control process guarantees that any anomaly discovered is due to experimental cause and effect and not just because of no confirmation of controls in the experiment that prevent infinite margins of error.

This guy is a couple of thousand years late, in Bhagavad Gita this information was presented in a poetical form and therefore never taken seriously by the scientific community.

Strange how self-proclaimed superior intelects are never clever enough to recognize a truly superior concept.

I really hate it when people use Wikipedia as a source of facts about ANYTHING.

the wikipedia says:
Dennis Gabor CBE, FRS (original Hungarian name: Gábor Dénes; 5 June 1900 – 8 February 1979) was a Hungarian-British[1] electrical engineer and inventor, most notable for inventing holography, for which he later received the 1971 Nobel Prize in Physics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Gabor

to mr. hogan personally !

our eyes in fact are working like camera lenses and they dont have the capacity to see space. !!! space is created by the mind which works like a computer. in fact people who have stoped this false activity of the mind are reporting that they perceive the world as total flat. in fact we never see 3 dimensional because it simply never existed. first all my friends who read this, check your eyes.what they truly are, and what they can truly do, than look again. if einstein would be here, i would kill his theory in a second. good luck, for more information you can contact me.because my eyes see flat and there was a time they created space.

What is it about articles like these that bring out all the new-age wacknuts who claim that it proves some 90,000 year old proverb written by the all-knowing ancient ones? Yikes. Take a physics class or five people, please.

Anyway, it will be fascinating to see what the result of this experiment is, and if it can be verified by later experiments. It’s always exciting when something crazy about the universe can be verified in a lab.

Could the universe be a big video game? Consider the tech for modern video games which only use sight and audio will surely someday include full immersion of all the senses.
First person games are embryonic at what, 20yrs old or so?
I believe video games will evolve into ‘experiences’ where one can plug-in and be whatever they want. Experience whatever they want.
And currently, first person 3d-games are two dimensional mathematical algorithms projected into simulated three dimensionality…sight and sound for now.
Interestingly, like the universe, games only render/project what is necessary. In other words, like video games, the universe only renders when observed…
Schrodinger’s Cat. Also video games break down into pixelation upon close inspection of texture maps….but this too is changing. Compare Castle Wolfenstein to say Project Offset.
I also see this going from polygon driven to pure particle based simulation anyway, not unlike our own universe.
In some ways, the worlds in first person 3D games are mini-universes in themselves. A subset of our universe. With similar albeit primitive laws of physics.
Consider where this will be in say 200-400yrs. Imagine being born into such a simulation. Imagine investigating your surroundings, and coming up with all these theories of what drives this ‘universe’. Imagine realizing you are completely omnipotent in those surroundings.
So if the universe is indeed a holographic projection encoded as is implied, I wonder how it was encoded, and what is expressing the code. And I’m not speaking of a ‘god’, but for lack of better understanding…what is the projector?

Hey Art, I am a housewife in Kansas and I take great exception to your remark.

What I want to know is, are they saying the Universe is “like” a hologram, that is, that the Universe is similar, by analogy, to a hologram? Or are they saying that the Universe IS a hologram? If we’re IN the hologram, obviously there must be something OUTSIDE of our hologram experience acting as the “laser” beams “projecting” the hologram. If not, use another analogy.

It’s all wrong. We are just a figment of somebody’s imagination.

Nicx is correct: Susskind & t’Hooft were the originators.
However, ~18 mos. ago, one of the grav wave detectors, GEO600 was making science news. Seems they had detected this MegaHertz noise, & were trying to refine the measmt. It has dropped off the science media radar ever since. Now this.
FANTASTIC ! Theoretical physics is languishing, despite the LHC, & it needs an experimental quantum leap desperately !
Akin to the discovery of the CMB as noise in a microwave antenna, Hogan’s noise was predicted before it was noticed at GEO 600 or so the story goes. My question is: Why the new interferometer ? Was GEO not sensitive enough ? What happened to the GEO investigation ?

I think we shouldn´t waste money for the Holometer and wait till LISA, the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, gets up in space. They should rather upgrade LISA for this purpose and try detecting those frequencies in space.

It is certain that, should this hologram hypothesis prove to be true, all people are, in fact, as shallow as I’d thought.

@okuma; why wait for LISA – I don’t understand why we can’t use LIGO to act as a control, at the very least.

The idea that the speed of light was “broken” in a lab, is, in fact true:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/07/19/tech/main216905.shtml

But it doesn’t mean what seems to be implied here; (tantamaount to; all the laws of the universe as we know them are suspect. . . anything goes. . . wheeeee!)

Paradoxx’s interesting anaecdote about seeing his digital clock display flicker has some clinical basis, but I’m not going to cite – simply that in emerging from a different state of consciousness (sleep; or what was likely a delta or theta state), the brainwave frequencies very likely could be in the range of 3-5 Hz, and while all the photons from the display were hitting your retina, it may be that the neurons to process them weren’t firing continuously – so your flickering perception was probably a low-order harmonic of whatever frequency the controller chip was sending to the LED (probably *not* 60 Hz; those LED’s are driven by DC pulses coming out of a controller chip – how fast, really depends on the frequency of the chip, the LED, the desired brightness, etc). But I digress.

But not really. It’s still a great example of how a non-continuous reality (the LED flicker) can be broken down into components when the brain’s phi-effect (or what’s now being called “short range apparent motion”) which normally “stitches it together” into what appears to be a continuous reality, is not functioning normally (ie. you’re transitioning from sleeping to waking, in this case).

So; if the Holographic Theory is true, we may see that spacetime doesn’t really have a continuous, or even a 3 Dimensional character, but, instead, is composed of 2 dimensional components at the Plank scale. So now we will finally understand why after so many repeated attempts, the film industry fails, again and again, at going from 2D to 3D. But at least we’ll know that there is finally going to be an upper-limit on Television Screen resolutions.

Maxpanic Says:
October 29th, 2010 at 4:11 pm

“If our universe is a hologram, wouldnt that prove God exists?”

If the universe ISN’T a hologram, would it prove that God doesn’t exist?

Still not clear to me if they (you know, “they”) mean the Universe is LIKE a hologram, or that the Universe IS a hologram. I don’t think they know, either.

Actually, it would prove that the Matrix exists!

A 2-D Universe? Yeh, that makes a lot of sense, considering I’m surrounded by Luddites all day long. Here’s one for you geniuses to ponder – time is an artifact of mass. No mass – no time. Think about that, glasshoppah.

At last a physiciist doing a correct experiment.

Of course the cosmos is digital and made entirely from data – what else could it possibly be except numbers?

The holometer will prove what I’ve always suspected, spacetime is bipolar.

Even so, it is MY hologram; MY reality.

Make only one long leg to the Interferometer.
Source leg any length.
Split source reference leg short.
Detector leg long.
Split detector reference leg short.

What you are trying to achieve is,
comparing the time delay difference
of the short legs, to the time delay from a lone leg.

An accelerated frame needs a time refference.
Else they are near balance, and reduce or cancel differences.

Hologram or simulation? A quanta of spacetime could be due to the timing resolution of the computational system running this universe. This would certainly imply this universe was created at some level by highly powerful intelligence[s] for currently unknown reasons/purposes.

What is the equivalent of light in this universe holographic projection if that is what it is? Is it light itself or something other? I think I need to read up or holograms.

One principle of holograms is that if broken into pieces each piece of the hologram can construct the whole again. This would be a rather attractive property of a holographic theory of the Universe.

The notion of a discrete or pixilated universe is due to H.S. Snyder, Quantized spacetime. Phys. Rev. 71, 38 (1947). If the points of a scalar field are merely the cross-sections of the pathways of oscillators external to our universe, we would be unable to detect them.

This is all really interesting, but I do have one urgent curious question:

If this means that this “reality” we’re experiencing is all just illussion (ie: just holographic), then how come it feels so REAL?
Eg: being hungry is REAL isn’t it? Or is it just ‘holographic’?

So all the theories aside, how can we explain this?..
I’m curious.
Thx.

The history of a black hole is written or smeared upon it’s rippling surface, called the event horizon.
The observable universe is just the rippling skin of the real universe.

With each quantum tick of time the the skin or membrane of our universe gets bigger. Einstein tells us that the distinction between the past present and future is a stubbornly persistent illusion. This would suggest that the universe is like a set of Russian dolls nested inside of one another. They all exist but we are stepping from one to the next with every tick of time. From highly energetic and highly ordered to cold dark chaos. As it turns out this is the most likely outcome. 1/2/2011

Im not a scientist at all so apologies if this is just me being stupid but…
If the universe is holographic then where/when was the ‘picture’ taken. Its got to have happened for ‘real’ somewhere/when so does this mean that all that is happening now has already happened and we are just a copy of it?

If a 5th dimensional superstring system is taken to underpin the quantum universe and is pico-dendritic, then dimensions operating outwith the 4th (time) could avail instantaneous data transmission at the quantum level via intermediation/translation by ultrasound resonance (afterall, what distances would likely be involved in such download/upload scenarios?).

I barely got through the article’s rambling then I was subjected to the conjecture, speculation, and misguided information of the comments. Wikipedia as a reliable source of information? I can write what I want in there, no more Wikipedia.

The answer to the question of holographic universe is actually answered in math currently. True we are looking for gravitons and gravity waves now. Susskind presents a great mathematical model for the holographic universe, and above all, it needs to be accepted as just that for now. Yes, the model addresses a lot of things (like the coexistence of string theory in the “real” world and quantum theory in the “holographic” realm.

Instead of adding to this maelstrom of misguided speculation, guessing, oversimplified statements and even stereotypes, I am going to wait until the math is verified and the theory can be brought to reality. There are other theories, and all that jump into the holographic boat are welcome to, but when the truth becomes known through experimental verification, I want to be on the right one.

So, read up, keep an open mind and listen.

Where does matter come from?…

The problem may be because there is no technology that enables authentication for all these consequences. Actually there is research that seems to lead to this understanding. But there is no agreement and hopefully one day will prove these truth: there…

March 22, 2011

An interesting read today was found on the topic of Spin in an electron. Scientists studying the properties of graphene, as it was related to the up and down spin of an electron found out that spin happened from the fabric of space-time itself. It showed that space-time was not smooth, but much like a checkerboard. This finding might help to prove how dark matter and dark energy interacts with normal matter and energy creating the illusion of a 3D holographic universe

Just a thought, but if all stuff and everything we know is indeed ‘holographic’, then how can any equipment be created accurate and sensitive enough to detect any proposed ‘pixelisation’ when the equipment will also be holographic and therefor directly inhibited by the very same pixelisation?

I may have missed the point totally of course so don’t shoot me down, but it’s something I’ve been wondering since I first heard about this!

As Charles Fort Said, “Anything proves anything.”
Alas, some semi-scientific types think that if some philosopher or mystic propounded it long ago, it must be non-sense. (And maybe it is.) William Blake (the English poet, for the barbarians who never read :”Through the Looking Glass” and similar mysteries) wrote, “There is no body, apart from the soul. The body is merely that part of the soul which can be perceived by the senses five.”
Indeed, a holographic universe.
Another interesting speculation is that the universe itself grows and changes as our intellects and capabilities grow.
The world actually was flat until it was more intellectually stimulating to perceive it as round; and the sun was the center of the universe until it was more intellectually fruitful for us to imagine it as something different.
A holograph that changes as we need it to change.
How’s that for “New Age” crap for those of limited intellectual capabilities and imagination?

Well, this is what happens when physicists play to be mathematicians, rather than doing physics.

If I got it right all our “reality” would be defined in 2D. Our universe and thus ourselves live in a plane. Our universe is thinner than a sheet of paper and our perception of microscopic and macroscopic properties of matter come from “zooming in an area”.

Sorry, guys, I think that, like the quote says, you should “wake up and smell the coffee”. You are running so deep into physics that your forgot data and common sense.

Remember Einstein´s principle of causality?

MAybe the universe CAN BE EXPLAINED by using a math model that defines it as a 2D structure, but saying “the universe is a hologram” is bullcrap. Even when the math model is consistent, it does not address reality itself. Math has stopped its concern about explaining reality a long time ago (i´d say that happened with the 3rd fall of the plato´s ideal of knowledge).

Euclides, Gauss and Riemann´s maths are consistant, all of them are valid, yet they have absolutely different axioms.

MAth is dedicated to creating hypothesis and proving them, not to exploring the “real” world. If a math model does not have incongruencies and paradoxes it may be accepted, even if it said that black is white.

I think these guys at Fermilab should work in more useful things.

Paraphrasing Einstein: “Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore.”

Uhm, it seems to me that the apparatus would pick up the motion of atoms before it would pick up the motion at the pixel limit of reality – the entire apparatus is in motion at the atomic level, and the only way I know of to cancel that is to freeze the whole thing to something like -450 degrees, which stops even the atoms from moving.

My own thought experiments in this area are as follows…
If one were to travel far enough away from a star that not even a single photon from that star was detectable, 1) You have found the lowest resolution of the universe and 2) Since you are now in a segment of the universe which holds no representation of that star (not even a photons worth), does the star actually still exist?

And I have no idea if one could ever actually go far enough from a star that light from it would not exist – but it makes for good food for thought.

The last time I looked somewhat indirectly into the question of an “ultimate” resolution for space-time, I was presented with the quantum-foam idea. I’m still regarding this as a fashionable way of looking at very much non-empty “empty space.” Am I then behind the times?

Regards the confusion of the nature of Hz(linear measure, which it is, vs logarithmic… which it isn’t) it might be a confusion of decibels (which are log) and HZ.

I’m a bit confused regards the physics of producing a one million Hz audio tone. I can’t imagine anything producing such a tone and a medium for propagating it in, but I am also not able to imagine that there is something that makes it in theory a possibility. Just a question that might not be all that sensible that has occurred to me.