by Din » Fri Jun 06, 2025 11:01 am
Joy just showed me his post on LinkedIn about making a hologram of a black hole collapse using the Oppenheimer-Snyder model. As background, Einstein first proposed, then discarded, the idea of a grvaitational collapse into a singularity in a 1939 paper. A few months later, Oppenheimer and his student Hartland Snyder studied Einstein's paper and published a paper that showed that a sufficiently massive star could collapse into a gravitation singularity ("On Continued Gravitational Contraction" Oppenheimer, J. R. and Snyder, H, Physical Review 56 (1939))
The metric they developed is the Oppenheimer-Snyder metric:
ds² = -dτ² +A²{(dR²/[1-2MR²/R(b)²R(+)]) + R²dω²}
If Dr. Hocking does bring up the aforesaid metric, then strictly speaking, he's not using mathematics to demonstrate holography, he's just using a Non-Minkowskian metric on Riemannian space-time. So display holographers can rest easy that there's still no mathematics in holography.
Joy just showed me his post on LinkedIn about making a hologram of a black hole collapse using the Oppenheimer-Snyder model. As background, Einstein first proposed, then discarded, the idea of a grvaitational collapse into a singularity in a 1939 paper. A few months later, Oppenheimer and his student Hartland Snyder studied Einstein's paper and published a paper that showed that a sufficiently massive star could collapse into a gravitation singularity ("On Continued Gravitational Contraction" Oppenheimer, J. R. and Snyder, H, Physical Review 56 (1939))
The metric they developed is the Oppenheimer-Snyder metric:
ds² = -dτ² +A²{(dR²/[1-2MR²/R(b)²R(+)]) + R²dω²}
If Dr. Hocking does bring up the aforesaid metric, then strictly speaking, he's not using mathematics to demonstrate holography, he's just using a Non-Minkowskian metric on Riemannian space-time. So display holographers can rest easy that there's still no mathematics in holography.