Connect with us

Technologies

If The Universe Is A Hologram, We May Soon Gaze Into A Black Hole

A mind-bending theory called holographic duality could lead us into the universe’s deepest, darkest voids.

If you fell into a black hole, your journey might look something like this.

First, you’d stare into the rich, red event horizon of the abyss. Beyond this barrier, light cannot escape. As you get closer, your body would stretch out like chewing gum until it spaghettifies into the void. If you’re still conscious at this point, you’d peer out the entrance and watch a warped universe grow smaller by the second. That wouldn’t be your universe anymore. The black hole would be.

In all probability, though, you’d quickly be ripped to shreds.

Because of this absolutely horrifying disaster, we’ll likely never receive firsthand evidence of what lies within these cosmic mysteries. But in a paper published this month in the journal PRX Quantum, scientists are working toward the next best thing. They developed computing algorithms to help solve a mind-bending theory in physics called «holographic duality.»

In a nutshell, holographic duality suggests that the three-dimensional universe, like space inside black holes, is mathematically strung to the two-dimensional universe, like particle planes and magnetic fields. It basically presents the fabric of spacetime as a 3D hologram «projected» by 2D webs.

I know what you’re thinking. No, this wouldn’t be like the Star Trek holodeck. Unlike classic sci-fi holograms projected by light from a screen, holographic duality is bound by pure mathematics.

«It has not been proven formally, under the point of view of rigorous mathematics, but we know many examples where this duality actually works,» says lead author Enrico Rinaldi, a research scientist at the University of Michigan, based in Tokyo and hosted by the Riken Center for Quantum Computing and the Theoretical Quantum Physics Laboratory.

If holographic duality truly dictates the universe, scientists wouldn’t have to go inside a black hole to take a picture of it. Instead, they could study easy-to-handle 2D space around the beast, then extrapolate the 3D architecture lurking inside. «It is often the case that things difficult to compute on one side are easy to compute on the other side,» Rinaldi says. «That is why this duality is very important and useful.»

He compares the idea to having a dictionary where you can look up a word on one page and find its meaning on another. We just need some sort of index to bridge the 2D space-words with their 3D space-definitions — aka, the mathematical connection. And that’s precisely what Rinaldi’s algorithms are poised to do.

However, before we can use them to unlock the inside of a black hole, there are several, pretty trippy, steps to take. «The duality, as it is right now, applies to a specific spacetime, which is different from the spacetime of our universe,» Rinaldi says.

In other words, holographic duality is confined to a sort of alternate, theoretical world that scientists use as a sandbox.

A spacetime playground

1916 was a big year for physics. Albert Einstein had published the first of many papers that would forever alter the field: a holy grail chronicle of general relativity. Since then, the theory has earned a reputation for being unbreakable. I could go on forever about its spectacular consequences, but here’s the important part for holographic duality.

Suppose you have a trampoline and drop a soccer ball into it. The flat surface will morph inward, depending on where the ball settles. Now, add a tiny marble to the scene. It’ll fall along the trampoline’s curve and nestle next to the soccer ball.

In this analogy, the marble is you, the soccer ball is Earth and the trampoline is the intangible fabric of space and time — spacetime. According to general relativity, gravity is this «curve» we fall along until we’re planted on the ground.

In our universe — which, per experts, is known as the «de Sitter» universe — spacetime’s curvature is positive. That’s a problem. A positive model isn’t great for math equations, Rinaldi explains, especially when it comes to ultra high-dimensional ones. But there’s an easy fix. Scientists simply calculate stuff in a theoretical universe with negative curvature: the anti de Sitter universe. Then they translate their results back to our realm.

Fast-forward to the late 1960s. String theory is born.

Allowing for simplification, string theory says if you break down atoms, the building blocks of our universe, into elementary particles, then pulverize those into even smaller specks, and so on, you’ll eventually get to infinitesimal vibrating «strings

Presumably, these strings make up all we know: particles, fields, spacetime. If string theory is true, even you and I are made up of the wiggling bits. That’s why this concept is such a big deal. It might well be the closest we’ve gotten to a theory of everything. On the flip side, however, some physicists consider string theory a dead end because we still haven’t found concrete evidence for its premises.

But regardless, string theory requires unfathomable 11-dimension equations — as you might’ve guessed, that means it’s rooted in the anti de Sitter universe. And per Rinaldi, holographic duality relies on string theory. Thus, it’s also rooted in the anti de Sitter universe.

«Black holes we can investigate right now, with this duality, are not the same black holes that we imagine being out there,» Rinaldi says. «These black holes are a sort of mathematical playground that we can use to formulate this duality and test it.»

Simply put: In this mathematically ideal universe, Rinaldi is observing theoretical black holes to understand holographic duality. It’s like playing a game in tutorial mode before the real level starts. Our universe.

Getting to that level, though, is the crux of this whole procedure. «If we can do it for anti de Sitter,» Rinaldi says, «then we should be doing it for de Sitter.»

«The final goal is still to be able to describe gravity and black holes in our universe.»

The road into a black hole

OK, here’s where it all comes together.

First, a quick recap: Holographic duality can show us what’s inside a black hole because it suggests the 2D universe is connected to the 3D universe via mathematics. We just have to construct an index to bridge the two dimensions. But holographic duality is based on string theory. So, first, we have to make the index’s blueprints in our sandbox universe — the theoretical, anti de Sitter universe.

How do we make the blueprints? Well, Rinaldi says, start with the easier side. That’s the 2D half. But even though this side hurts less to think about, it isn’t that simple; we still need strong numerical methods to analyze it. «That’s what we’re doing,» Rinaldi says. «The numerical part.»

Think of the universe as a blanket knitted by strings that have a bunch of points. Rinaldi’s algorithms use quantum computing and deep learning to help calculate where these points are on the blanket and how they’re attached to each other. The goal is to sort of draw out the «strings» of string theory, then put them all together, like cosmic connect-the-dots.

However, the researchers are still in the proof-of-principle stage. They solved a few prototype points with their method, but these points don’t really represent anything. In the future, though, Rinaldi says the method can scale up to study complex points really present on anti de Sitter strings, including those relevant to anti de Sitter black holes.

Then, we’ll be on our way to making the anti de Sitter 2D-to-3D index that’ll reveal the insides of these theoretical black holes.

Then, if the index is precise enough, it can be translated to our true-to-the-bone, observable universe.

Then… we can use the final index to learn about the threatening insides of real, de Sitter black holes from the comfort of our homes and tucked away from terror.

A new theory of everything?

When you think about the steps Rinaldi and tons of other researchers are taking to realize the insides of a black hole — study prototype theoretical universe strings, scale up to learn about the full theoretical universe’s geometry, zero in on theoretical black holes, take all of that and filter the real universe through it, and probably more we can’t even comprehend — a jarring question might be… why?

Why does this all matter?

«We think we are very close to explaining the information paradox of black holes,» Rinaldi says. «If information goes inside a black hole, general relativity says, OK, whatever goes in is gone forever.»

But quantum mechanics, the other founding principle of our universe, says you cannot lose information. It says information is always maintained. Perhaps it can change, transform or adapt, but it cannot go away. So what’s happening to the information plunging into these massive space-borne voids?

«Stephen Hawking came up with this idea of the evaporation of a black hole and said ‘Look, actually there is stuff coming out of a black hole, it’s just slowly coming out’,» Rinaldi says.

But even those bits coming out don’t look like what went in. Stuff still seems lost in the process. «This is a very, very big problem in physics,» Rinaldi says. «And people are using the duality to understand that paradox.» If we can understand what’s inside, then maybe we can prove so-called lost information is actually, well, inside.

«Maybe it’s not lost, it’s just in a different configuration. It’s not particles anymore; it’s not spacetime anymore; it’s something else.»

Technologies

AI Slop Is Destroying the Internet. These Are the People Fighting to Save It

Continue Reading

Technologies

The Sun’s Temper Tantrums: What You Should Know About Solar Storms

Solar storms are associated with the lovely aurora borealis, but they can have negative impacts, too.

Last month, Earth was treated to a massive aurora borealis that reached as far south as Texas. The event was attributed to a solar storm that lasted nearly a full day and will likely contend for the strongest of 2026. Such solar storms are usually fun for people on Earth, as we are protected from solar radiation by our planet’s atmosphere, so we can just enjoy the gorgeous greens and pretty purples in the night sky.

But solar storms are a lot more than just the aurora borealis we see, and sometimes they can cause real damage. There are several examples of this in recorded history, with the earliest being the Carrington Event, a solar storm that took place on Sept. 1, 1859. It remains the strongest solar storm ever recorded, where the world’s telegraph machines became overloaded with energy from it, causing them to shock their operators, send ghost messages and even catch on fire. 

Things have changed a lot since the mid-1800s, and while today’s technology is a lot more resistant to solar radiation than it once was, a solar storm of that magnitude could still cause a lot of damage. 

What is a solar storm?

A solar storm is a catchall term that describes any disturbance in the sun that involves the violent ejection of solar material into space. This can come in the form of coronal mass ejections, where clouds of plasma are ejected from the sun, or solar flares, which are concentrated bursts of electromagnetic radiation (aka light). 

A sizable percentage of solar storms don’t hit Earth, and the sun is always belching material into space, so minor solar storms are quite common. The only ones humans tend to talk about are the bigger ones that do hit the Earth. When this happens, it causes geomagnetic storms, where solar material interacts with the Earth’s magnetic fields, and the excitations can cause issues in everything from the power grid to satellite functionality. It’s not unusual to hear «solar storm» and «geomagnetic storm» used interchangeably, since solar storms cause geomagnetic storms. 

Solar storms ebb and flow on an 11-year cycle known as the solar cycle. NASA scientists announced that the sun was at the peak of its most recent 11-year cycle in 2024, and, as such, solar storms have been more frequent. The sun will metaphorically chill out over time, and fewer solar storms will happen until the cycle repeats. 

This cycle has been stable for hundreds of millions of years and was first observed in the 18th century by astronomer Christian Horrebow.

How strong can a solar storm get?

The Carrington Event is a standout example of just how strong a solar storm can be, and such events are exceedingly rare. A rating system didn’t exist back then, but it would have certainly maxed out on every chart that science has today. 

We currently gauge solar storm strength on four different scales. 

The first rating that a solar storm gets is for the material belched out of the sun. Solar flares are graded using the Solar Flare Classification System, a logarithmic intensity scale that starts with B-class at the lowest end, and then increases to C, M and finally X-class at the strongest. According to NASA, the scale goes up indefinitely and tends to get finicky at higher levels. The strongest solar flare measured was in 2003, and it overloaded the sensors at X17 and was eventually estimated to be an X45-class flare. 

CMEs don’t have a named measuring system, but are monitored by satellites and measured based on the impact they have on the Earth’s geomagnetic field. 

Once the material hits Earth, NOAA uses three other scales to determine how strong the storm was and which systems it may impact. They include: 

  • Geomagnetic storm (G1-G5): This scale measures how much of an impact the solar material is having on Earth’s geomagnetic field. Stronger storms can impact the power grid, electronics and voltage systems. 
  • Solar radiation storm (S1-S5): This measures the amount of solar radiation present, with stronger storms increasing exposure to astronauts in space and to people in high-flying aircraft. It also describes the storm’s impact on satellite functionality and radio communications. 
  • Radio blackouts (R1-R5): Less commonly used but still very important. A higher R-rating means a greater impact on GPS satellites and high-frequency radios, with the worst case being communication and navigation blackouts. 

Solar storms also cause auroras by exciting the molecules in Earth’s atmosphere, which then light up as they «calm down,» per NASA. The strength and reach of the aurora generally correlate with the strength of the storm. G1 storms rarely cause an aurora to reach further south than Canada, while a G5 storm may be visible as far south as Texas and Florida. The next time you see a forecast calling for a big aurora, you can assume a big solar storm is on the way. 

How dangerous is a solar storm?

The overwhelming majority of solar storms are harmless. Science has protections against the effects of solar storms that it did not have back when telegraphs were catching on fire, and most solar storms are small and don’t pose any threat to people on the surface since the Earth’s magnetic field protects us from the worst of it.

That isn’t to say that they pose no threats. Humans may be exposed to ionizing radiation (the bad kind of radiation) if flying at high altitudes, which includes astronauts in space. NOAA says that this can happen with an S2 or higher storm, although location is really important here. Flights that go over the polar caps during solar storms are far more susceptible than your standard trip from Chicago to Houston, and airliners have a whole host of rules to monitor space weather, reroute flights and monitor long-term radiation exposure for flight crews to minimize potential cancer risks.

Larger solar storms can knock quite a few systems out of whack. NASA says that powerful storms can impact satellites, cause radio blackouts, shut down communications, disrupt GPS and cause damaging power fluctuations in the power grid. That means everything from high-frequency radio to cellphone reception could be affected, depending on the severity.

A good example of this is the Halloween solar storms of 2003. A series of powerful solar flares hit Earth on Oct. 28-31, causing a solar storm so massive that loads of things went wrong. Most notably, airplane pilots had to change course and lower their altitudes due to the radiation wreaking havoc on their instruments, and roughly half of the world’s satellites were entirely lost for a few days.

A paper titled Flying Through Uncertainty was published about the Halloween storms and the troubles they caused. Researchers note that 59% of all satellites orbiting Earth at the time suffered some sort of malfunction, like random thrusters going offline and some shutting down entirely. Over half of the Earth’s satellites were lost for days, requiring around-the-clock work from NASA and other space agencies to get everything back online and located.

Earth hasn’t experienced a solar storm on the level of the Carrington Event since it occurred in 1859, so the maximum damage it could cause in modern times is unknown. The European Space Agency has run simulations, and spoiler alert, the results weren’t promising. A solar storm of that caliber has a high chance of causing damage to almost every satellite in orbit, which would cause a lot of problems here on Earth as well. There were also significant risks of electrical blackouts and damage. It would make one heck of an aurora, but you might have to wait to post it on social media until things came back online.

Do we have anything to worry about?

We’ve mentioned two massive solar storms with the Halloween storms and the Carrington Event. Such large storms tend to occur very infrequently. In fact, those two storms took place nearly 150 years apart. Those aren’t the strongest storms yet, though. The very worst that Earth has ever seen were what are known as Miyake events.

Miyake events are times throughout history when massive solar storms were thought to have occurred. These are measured by massive spikes in carbon-14 that were preserved in tree rings. Miyake events are few and far between, but science believes at least 15 such events have occurred over the past 15,000 years. That includes one in 12350 BCE, which may have been twice as large as any other known Miyake event. 

They currently hold the title of the largest solar storms that we know of, and are thought to be caused by superflares and extreme solar events. If one of these happened today, especially one as large as the one in 12350 BCE, it would likely cause widespread, catastrophic damage and potentially threaten human life

Those only appear to happen about once every several hundred to a couple thousand years, so it’s exceedingly unlikely that one is coming anytime soon. But solar storms on the level of the Halloween storms and the Carrington Event have happened in modern history, and humans have managed to survive them, so for the time being, there isn’t too much to worry about. 

Continue Reading

Technologies

TMR vs. Hall Effect Controllers: Battle of the Magnetic Sensing Tech

The magic of magnets tucked into your joysticks can put an end to drift. But which technology is superior?

Competitive gamers look for every advantage they can get, and that drive has spawned some of the zaniest gaming peripherals under the sun. There are plenty of hardware components that actually offer meaningful edges when implemented properly. Hall effect and TMR (tunnel magnetoresistance or tunneling magnetoresistance) sensors are two such technologies. Hall effect sensors have found their way into a wide variety of devices, including keyboards and gaming controllers, including some of our favorites like the GameSir Super Nova. 

More recently, TMR sensors have started to appear in these devices as well. Is it a better technology for gaming? With multiple options vying for your lunch money, it’s worth understanding the differences to decide which is more worthy of living inside your next game controller or keyboard. 

How Hall effect joysticks work

We’ve previously broken down the difference between Hall effect tech and traditional potentiometers in controller joysticks, but here’s a quick rundown on how Hall effect sensors work. A Hall effect joystick moves a magnet over a sensor circuit, and the magnetic field affects the circuit’s voltage. The sensor in the circuit measures these voltage shifts and maps them to controller inputs. Element14 has a lovely visual explanation of this effect here.

The advantage this tech has over potentiometer-based joysticks used in controllers for decades is that the magnet and sensor don’t need to make physical contact. There’s no rubbing action to slowly wear away and degrade the sensor. So, in theory, Hall effect joysticks should remain accurate for the long haul. 

How TMR joysticks work

While TMR works differently, it’s a similar concept to Hall effect devices. When you move a TMR joystick, it moves a magnet in the vicinity of the sensor. So far, it’s the same, right? Except with TMR, this shifting magnetic field changes the resistance in the sensor instead of the voltage

There’s a useful demonstration of a sensor in action here. Just like Hall effect joysticks, TMR joysticks don’t rely on physical contact to register inputs and therefore won’t suffer the wear and drift that affects potentiometer-based joysticks. 

Which is better, Hall effect or TMR?

There’s no hard and fast answer to which technology is better. After all, the actual implementation of the technology and the hardware it’s built into can be just as important, if not more so. Both technologies can provide accurate sensing, and neither requires physical contact with the sensing chip, so both can be used for precise controls that won’t encounter stick drift. That said, there are some potential advantages to TMR. 

According to Coto Technology, who, in fairness, make TMR sensors, they can be more sensitive, allowing for either greater precision or the use of smaller magnets. Since the Hall effect is subtler, it relies on amplification and ultimately requires extra power. While power requirements vary from sensor to sensor, GameSir claims its TMR joysticks use about one-tenth the power of mainstream Hall effect joysticks. Cherry is another brand highlighting the lower power consumption of TMR sensors, albeit in the brand’s keyboard switches.

The greater precision is an opportunity for TMR joysticks to come out ahead, but that will depend more on the controller itself than the technology. Strange response curves, a big dead zone (which shouldn’t be needed), or low polling rates could prevent a perfectly good TMR sensor from beating a comparable Hall effect sensor in a better optimized controller. 

The power savings will likely be the advantage most of us really feel. While it won’t matter for wired controllers, power savings can go a long way for wireless ones. Take the Razer Wolverine V3 Pro, for instance, a Hall effect controller offering 20 hours of battery life from a 4.5-watt-hour battery with support for a 1,000Hz polling rate on a wireless connection. Razer also offers the Wolverine V3 Pro 8K PC, a near-identical controller with the same battery offering TMR sensors. They claim the TMR version can go for 36 hours on a charge, though that’s presumably before cranking it up to an 8,000Hz polling rate — something Razer possibly left off the Hall effect model because of power usage. 

The disadvantage of the TMR sensor would be its cost, but it appears that it’s negligible when factored into the entire price of a controller. Both versions of the aforementioned Razer controller are $199. Both 8BitDo and GameSir have managed to stick them into reasonably priced controllers like the 8BitDo Ultimate 2, GameSir G7 Pro and GameSir Cyclone 2.

So which wins?

It seems TMR joysticks have all the advantages of Hall effect joysticks and then some, bringing better power efficiency that can help in wireless applications. The one big downside might be price, but from what we’ve seen right now, that doesn’t seem to be much of an issue. You can even find both technologies in controllers that cost less than some potentiometer models, like the Xbox Elite Series 2 controller. 

Caveats to consider

For all the hype, neither Hall effect nor TMR joysticks are perfect. One of their key selling points is that they won’t experience stick drift, but there are still elements of the joystick that can wear down. The ring around the joystick can lose its smoothness. The stick material can wear down (ever tried to use a controller with the rubber worn off its joystick? It’s not pleasant). The linkages that hold the joystick upright and the springs that keep it stiff can loosen, degrade and fill with dust. All of these can impact the continued use of the joystick, even if the Hall effect or TMR sensor itself is in perfect operating order. 

So you might not get stick drift from a bad sensor, but you could get stick drift from a stick that simply doesn’t return to its original resting position. That’s when having a controller that’s serviceable or has swappable parts, like the PDP Victrix Pro BFG, could matter just as much as having one with Hall effect or TMR joysticks.  

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media