Talk:Fermilab Holometer
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Move: Holometer -> Fermilab Holometer
[edit]I think the article should be moved from Holometer to Fermilab Holometer. As Holometer is just a general term for Holographic interferometer (see Holographic interferometry), and there might be similar experiments in the future at other research laboratories. --helohe (talk) 08:52, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
When
[edit]When do they expect to have this built and start analyzing data? RJFJR (talk) 14:27, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
- My best estimate right now is early 2014, but things have a way of pushing themselves into the future. --IO Device (talk) 08:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
attometer sensitivity and "smallest units"
[edit]attometer is 10−18m, while Planck's length is 1,6*10−35m. So how exactly can attometer sensitivity to light fluctuations give sensitivity to Planck's units?
update, please? (dying to know ...)
[edit]Back in August of 2014 this experiment to determine whether or not reality is a hologram commenced, and we were told that the data accumulation could take up to a year. OK, its now September of 2015, and I have not been able to locate even a statement of preliminary findings. What's up with potentially the biggest news story of all time? 104.184.5.46 (talk) 15:55, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
the page is inconsistant
[edit]The opening line says the device is under construction and yet later the experiment is said to be running. Someone knowledgeable needs to do a re-write! 81.144.34.196 (talk) 17:43, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Holometer rules out first theory of space-time correlations
[edit]http://news.fnal.gov/2015/12/holometer-rules-out-first-theory-of-space-time-correlations/
On the criticism related to Lorentz invariance
[edit]I have two gripes with the paragraph as it is now: first, the criticism refers to a particular model of non-commuting position-observables. To me it's not clear that this can be cast as a criticism of "the hypothesis that holographic noise may be observed in this manner". There are a variety of other models (reviewed in arXiv:1506.06808) that also make predictions on the noise that the Holometer should see.
Moreover, the discussion of S. Hossenfelder referred to a preprint by Hogan from 2008. Since then, he has published a Lorentz covariant version of his model. In addition, I wonder if the criticism by a blogger is what should be reflected in wikipedia. Is there similar criticism in the published, peer-reviewed scientific literature? --Qcomp (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- Start-Class Chicago articles
- Unknown-importance Chicago articles
- WikiProject Chicago articles
- Start-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- Start-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- Start-Class physics articles
- Mid-importance physics articles
- Start-Class physics articles of Mid-importance