How spacetime is built by quantum entanglement

May 27, 2015
The mathematical formula derived by Ooguri and his collaborators relates local data in the extra dimensions of the gravitational theory, depicted by the red point, are expressed in terms of quantum entanglements, depicted by the blue domes. Credit: (c) 2015 Jennifer Lin et al.

A collaboration of physicists and a mathematician has made a significant step toward unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics by explaining how spacetime emerges from quantum entanglement in a more fundamental theory. The paper announcing the discovery by Hirosi Ooguri, a Principal Investigator at the University of Tokyo's Kavli IPMU, with Caltech mathematician Matilde Marcolli and graduate students Jennifer Lin and Bogdan Stoica, will be published in Physical Review Letters as an Editors' Suggestion "for the potential interest in the results presented and on the success of the paper in communicating its message, in particular to readers from other fields."

Physicists and mathematicians have long sought a Theory of Everything (ToE) that unifies and quantum mechanics. General relativity explains gravity and large-scale phenomena such as the dynamics of stars and galaxies in the universe, while quantum mechanics explains microscopic phenomena from the subatomic to molecular scales.

The holographic principle is widely regarded as an essential feature of a successful Theory of Everything. The holographic principle states that gravity in a three-dimensional volume can be described by quantum mechanics on a two-dimensional surface surrounding the volume. In particular, the three dimensions of the volume should emerge from the two dimensions of the surface. However, understanding the precise mechanics for the emergence of the volume from the surface has been elusive.

Now, Ooguri and his collaborators have found that quantum entanglement is the key to solving this question. Using a quantum theory (that does not include gravity), they showed how to compute , which is a source of gravitational interactions in three dimensions, using quantum entanglement data on the surface. This is analogous to diagnosing conditions inside of your body by looking at X-ray images on two-dimensional sheets. This allowed them to interpret universal properties of quantum entanglement as conditions on the energy density that should be satisfied by any consistent quantum theory of gravity, without actually explicitly including gravity in the theory. The importance of quantum entanglement has been suggested before, but its precise role in emergence of spacetime was not clear until the new paper by Ooguri and collaborators.

An illustration of the concept of the holography. Credit: Hirosi Ooguri

Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon whereby quantum states such as spin or polarization of particles at different locations cannot be described independently. Measuring (and hence acting on) one particle must also act on the other, something that Einstein called "spooky action at distance." The work of Ooguri and collaborators shows that this quantum entanglement generates the extra dimensions of the gravitational theory.

"It was known that quantum entanglement is related to deep issues in the unification of general relativity and , such as the black hole information paradox and the firewall paradox," says Hirosi Ooguri. "Our paper sheds new light on the relation between and the microscopic structure of spacetime by explicit calculations. The interface between and information science is becoming increasingly important for both fields. I myself am collaborating with information scientists to pursue this line of research further."

Explore further: Is the universe a hologram?

More information: Locality of Gravitational Systems from Entanglement of Conformal Field Theories, Physical Review Letters, 2015.

Related Stories

Is the universe a hologram?

April 27, 2015

Describing the universe requires fewer dimensions than we might think. New calculations show that this may not just be a mathematical trick, but a fundamental feature of space itself.

Researchers explore quantum entanglement

February 8, 2013

Albert Einstein called quantum entanglement—two particles in different locations, even on other sides of the universe, influencing each other—"spooky action at a distance."

Recommended for you

Quantum research race lights up the world

September 30, 2016

The race towards quantum computing is heating up. Faster, brighter, more exacting – these are all terms that could be applied as much to the actual science as to the research effort going on in labs around the globe.

First spectroscopic investigation of element nobelium

September 30, 2016

The analysis of atomic spectra is of fundamental importance for our understanding of atomic structures. Until now, researchers were unable to examine heavy elements with optical spectroscopy because these elements do not ...

31 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Mike_Massen
3.9 / 5 (7) May 27, 2015
Most interesting development suggesting universe is more an information system with a leap implying a simulation of immense proportions, even at least of immense perceptual intent

From the article, I quote: "Using a quantum theory (that does not include gravity), they showed how to compute energy density, which is a source of gravitational interactions in three dimensions.."

Implies gravity arises out of something other than a core aspect of force interaction & thus may be an emergent phenomena Eg aspects of thermodynamics, especially so as I recall there is a thermodynamic derivation which suggests a form of General Relativity arises from it, Eg in respect of emergence then
http://en.wikiped...mergence

ie. Gravity being so very weak may therefore be emergent aspect of the ostensibly higher order force interactions, Eg magnetism strong force etc

Re article then, this also worthy of consideration
https://en.wikipe..._gravity
Doug_Huffman
5 / 5 (9) May 27, 2015
arom
1 / 5 (7) May 27, 2015
Physicists and mathematicians have long sought a Theory of Everything (ToE) that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics….

The holographic principle is widely regarded as an essential feature of a successful Theory of Everything…


How and why ???

The holographic principle states that gravity in a three-dimensional volume can be described by quantum mechanics….


Looking at the referenced paper; it seems hopeless that we could visualize how it works, while waiting, maybe this understandable idea could help …
http://www.vacuum...=4〈=en
ideasonscribe
not rated yet May 27, 2015
I've always been a bit confused on what the Holographic concept is implying and what that looks like.
So if the universe is a hologram, then is it kind of like the holograms from Star Wars that project an actually 3-dimensional image, or is it more like a projection screen that projects light from the source onto a flat surface?

Also, if it's a Hologram, then what does this say about the 5 senses? In the holograms from Star Wars, it's simply light that projects in a certain way to make such an illusion - but with no sensations.
How does a hologram produce sensations?
Would this imply that the real sentient beings within the hologram are actually in a different location, perhaps outside of our universe? Perhaps residing in the fifth dimension?

I'm just curious.
big_hairy_jimbo
5 / 5 (1) May 28, 2015
I've always thought that the hologram they are talking about is about quantum fluctuations on an event horizon of a black hole. The universe as we see it, could be INSIDE a blackhole, but is really just fluctuations on the event horizon. So nothing inside, just a very realistic illusion based on interactions on a 2d surface. The holographic principle also accounts for the fuzziness of quantum particles too. The further from the hologram source you are, the more smeared out the image is. Note I'm not really talking about images or star wars holograms I'm talking more like the kind used in crystal x-rayography. The 2d hologram images is then computed backward to work out where in 3d space scattering could have occurred. (I think!!!!!)
Mimath224
not rated yet May 28, 2015
While not the same, 2 videos were interesting 'Forget Space-Time: Information May Create the Cosmos' from Robert Lawrence Kuhn, "Closer To Truth "via Space.com.
Includes MIT professor Seth Lloyd, string theorist Raphael Bousso, Physicist Stephen Wolfram of Mathematica and Wolfram Alpha, Alan Guth from MIT and others. Not all agree with this (A.G. for example) but it does give a view of how contemporary scientists are thinking on T.O.E. Although Quantum entanglement isn't specifically mentioned I think it's luking there somewhere. The Universe, a giant Quantum Computer, hmmmmm....
machapungo
not rated yet May 28, 2015
Or does it work like this:
"Primitive Field Theory".
Everything that is a part of physical reality is a form of energy. Therefore, space is a form of energy and not nothingness.
Space is a "space field", that is one of multiple "primitive fields", that have a range that includes the entire universe.
The sum of these fields compose a finite universe that we inhabit and outside or besides this universe there is "nothing".
Other "primitive fields" with the same range, that all interact to create manifestations that we can detect. These other possible primitive fields are probably the "electric primitive field", "magnetic primitive field", and the "gravitational primitive field". We and our tools like everything else in the universe are manifestations caused by interactions of these primary primitive fields and thus we can't detect them. The sum of these fields tie the universe together as a single inseparable eternal unit of the constantly dynamically in flux and timeless "now".
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) May 28, 2015
Most interesting development suggesting universe is more an information system with a leap implying a simulation of immense proportions, even at least of immense perceptual intent

I don't think that follows. Information is just a word that says "stuff can interact". So a sort of information is a necessity in anything that one would call a universe - completely indpendent of whether it's a simulation or not.

mplies gravity arises out of something other than a core aspect of force interaction & thus may be an emergent phenomena

One could also argue the reverse that entanglement is an emergent effect of gravity. No way to know which one is the chicken and the egg, here.
H0lly
3 / 5 (2) May 28, 2015
@ideasonscribe:
I find the term "Holographic" more or less confusing, or rather not very helpful, too.

Descriptions like "virtual reality" and "simulation" are much more concrete to me. If you understand our "physical" reality to be virtual, then you don't need something like a fifth dimension. Have you ever played a MMORPG like World of Warcraft? Because the analogy with a game like this is actually very straight forward and helpful. A game hosts a virtual reality, too - a reality just like our physical one. However, the game reality's rule-set is very primitive in comparison to the rule-set of the our physical reality, and we are much deeper emerged in the physical reality simulation.

When we play a video game, our sensory organs pick up mainly on the visual and acoustic feedback of the gaming console or computer. However, for the physical reality, this step can simply be skipped because our consciousness is emerged so deeply within the simulation.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (2) May 28, 2015
I find the term "Holographic" more or less confusing, or rather not very helpful, too.

All it means is that the full information contained in a n-dimensional space(time) can be represented in a lower dimensional form.

The thing to remember here is that a n-dimensional means "you need n coordinates to uniquely identify the state of something within such a construct" (e.g. x,y,z coordinates for a 3D space)
If you can show that you actually don't need n coordinates but less than that then you have shown that the holographic principle applies (i.e. you can show that some or all of the coordinates aren't as independent as one might think at first).

Like a holograph is a full representation of a 3D object in a 2D image - where you can get any information about the object from the 2D image that you could get from the 3D object itself.
zorro6204
not rated yet May 28, 2015
Interesting, it confirms what Leonard Susskind said was kicking around the community, that entanglement was fundamental, and quantum theory was emergent.
viko_mx
1 / 5 (4) May 28, 2015
It sound more like philosophy than real science?
Mike_Massen
4 / 5 (4) May 28, 2015
viko_mx claims
It sound more like philosophy than real science?
Beg Pardon ?

Given your immense emotional attachment to an old middle eastern book by men who only made claims and even confirmed some deity spoke in a dream, how the hell would you know what essential philosophy is as prelude to scientific enquiry & the scientific method ?

Has viko_mx EVER in whole life done anything at ALL ever close to a Scientific Method ?

So viko_mx, if a being came to you in a dream and claimed to be a deity and could only cause immense suffering and pain for billions of people for ever would you imagine its a 'loving' creator ?

Are you completely insane ?

Should the old testament bible be a sound example of how a father treats his children ?

ie your daughter is naughty and part of inevitable setup & you punish ALL her children for EVER ?

Are you completely insane ?

Nutcase, stay away from my kids, stay away from feeble intellects, stay away, go hide in cave !
zorro6204
not rated yet May 28, 2015
Not at all, for example, the holographic principle revealed a fundamental truth about three dimensional space that could have been understood a long time ago, it was rather obvious in hindsight. But that revelation came out of pure math.
OdinsAcolyte
3 / 5 (2) May 28, 2015
"Life is but a dream!"

Everything we know of modern physics today came from 'philosophy' around the coffee table.
It takes a bit of fanciful imagination to make the great leaps. Mere math and experiments will never be the vehicle of discovery. One has to imagine the 'what if' and then the 'how to'...
ideasonscribe
5 / 5 (1) May 28, 2015
It sound more like philosophy than real science?


Except that this is real science. This is based off of experimental data - not logic and reason.
AmritSorli
1 / 5 (2) May 29, 2015
time is not 4th dimension of space

http://link.sprin...i+amrit+

and quantum entanglemet is carried by the universal space itself

http://www.degruy...14-5.xml

and gravity has origin in density of space-quantum vacuum

http://www.degruy...rmat=INT
Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (3) May 29, 2015
OdinsAcolyte shows immense ignorance of history of Science
Mere math and experiments will never be the vehicle of discovery
WRONG !

There are many, just get an education in Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics & you might just get to understand there are so very many situations an observation is made or an experiment results in an unclear or counter intuitive result.

One excellent Eg is the observation of bacteria by looking closely at food etc ie Pasteur
https://en.wikipe..._Pasteur

Whilst at it, get a grip re the subtle types of Philosophy which have the best likelihood of maming advances, these tenuous issues are hard to understand for most but, do have a basis its terms of the methodology that arises from a particular type of 'what-if' scenario, one example of which is
https://en.wikipe...racelsus

One key issue & especially so these days is that maths is an absolutely essential pre-requisite as all subtle effects demand it
viko_mx
1 / 5 (3) May 29, 2015
@Mike_Massen

The policy of the ostrich is not too far sighted. But when this suits you repeat your favorite mantras...Meditate, practice yoga, go fishing... It is not my problem that you are immune to the truth.
machapungo
not rated yet May 29, 2015
Math is a closed system of static rules and that is why it is capable of proofs. But, these proofs extend beyond that system only by implication, which can be and have been wrong.
We have no direct conscious contact with reality and can only invent abstract models which seem to represent reality, but only until new evidence is considered.
Using QM math to produce an analogous model of spacetime, which itself is just an abstract model, is simply math magic that produces an abstraction of an abstraction.
Space is a physical reality, spacetime is not because time is not. If you claim time is, I say prove it and you will win a Nobel prize in physics!!
Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (3) May 29, 2015
viko_mx claims
.. policy of the ostrich is not too far sighted
Damn right, can't see beyond the mindless emotional attachment to single book which is ONLY consistent with claims of men !

Where is this deity of yours viko_mx, this creator that loves everyone yet punishes all, for all time !

viko_mx mutters
But when this suits you repeat your favorite mantras
You FAIL to notice I have many times asked YOU to explain just why YOUR creator doesn't communicate or even how it communicates, its ONLY by an old middle eastern book tshowing setup of a girl to explain why all creatures for ever & ever ONLY suffer & NEVER get any unequivocal communication from any deity ?

viko_mx claims
Meditate, practice yoga, go fishing... It is not my problem that you are immune to the truth
Meditation is fine but, it must be detached for best effect otherwise all it does is re-inforce conditioning & emotional hypnosis so you remain ignorant

viko_mx learn Physics PLEASE !
Mike_Massen
3 / 5 (2) May 29, 2015
machapungo claims
Math is a closed system of static rules and that is why it is capable of proofs
NO !
Not closed at all, its a problem, see
http://en.wikiped..._theorem

machapungo claims
We have no direct conscious contact with reality and can only invent abstract models which seem to represent reality, but only until new evidence is considered
ALL are subject to evidence re maths in time & depends how you define 'conscious' ?

machapungo claims
Using QM math to produce an analogous model of spacetime, which itself is just an abstract model, is simply math magic that produces an abstraction of an abstraction
NO !
QM is remarkably good re predictions, it is based on comparative probabilities...

machapungo claims
Space is a physical reality, spacetime is not because time is not
Eh ? We start within the bounds of our perceptual framework, please get a grip on essentials re phenomenology
Mike_Massen
3.3 / 5 (3) May 29, 2015
zorro6204 offered
..., the holographic principle revealed a fundamental truth about three dimensional space that could have been understood a long time ago, it was rather obvious in hindsight. But that revelation came out of pure math
Which raises a problem re information content ie static vs dynamic & in respect of degrees of freedom

ie. In a conventional film holographic plate it surely can only encode a subset of all data initially presented. ie When a laser is shone upon it, it can only reproduce a series of (static) images at a much lower resolution than that it was exposed in the beginning

ie. In 3D spacetime we have 3D motions all directions at once, for there to be accurate rendition in a 2D hologram of that 3D space, all that 3D equivalent information must also be encoded. A nice idea as a thought experiment & may be useful in some transitional framework but, its incomplete & superficial, though not to most who like the idea there is no 3D reality ;-)
rpaul_bauman
not rated yet May 31, 2015
It's NOT space-time; it's Space - Times. One must Start correctly. If motion in one dimension can cause time to change in the other two, then the 3 dimensions are NOT independent. The assumetion is that there are 3 INDEPENDENT variables. Dimension may have its own time. A point is not (x,y,z,t), but { (x,t)i, (y,t)j, (z,t)k }.
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (4) May 31, 2015
It sound more like philosophy than real science?

You got that right, but less philosophy and more pseudoscientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo. No science whatsoever.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) May 31, 2015
Nutcase, stay away from my kids, stay away from feeble intellects, stay away, go hide in cave !


LOL, Mike Massen's kids are of feeble intellect, why am I not surprised...
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) May 31, 2015
Everything we know of modern physics today came from 'philosophy' around the coffee table.
This is rubbish. And everyone knows it except philosophers.
anywallsocket
not rated yet Jun 12, 2015
So if the universe is a hologram, then is it kind of like the holograms from Star Wars that project an actually 3-dimensional image, or is it more like a projection screen that projects light from the source onto a flat surface?


A projector is not a hologram, because it projects 2D onto 2D. A true hologram projects higher dimensions downward, i.e. from 3D to 2D. The holographic principle suggests the same is possible for our 3D universe, e.g. a 3D spherical volume in our universe can be described if you know its 2D surface data. A better example would be the fact that we can describe many 3D aspects of a black hole's volume by measuring the aspects of its 2D surface.
anywallsocket
not rated yet Jun 12, 2015
I sense this comment will be lost amongst the rest...
but how do we go from on one hand discerning that 3D energy density data can be read from 2D energy density data, to discerning that the 3D itself emerged from the 2D itself on the other hand?

The thought seems to have a bias for simplicity, as I suppose it should, but couldn't it be argued inversely? That instead of the universe beginning with one dimension of freedom and increasing thereafter, it could have began with possibly infinite and began decreasing thereafter? The heat death model of cosmology certainly suggests that in the end we will have much less freedom of movement then we do now.
Mike_Massen
4 / 5 (4) Jun 12, 2015
cantdrive85 ugly showing himself up easily
Nutcase, stay away from my kids, stay away from feeble intellects, stay away, go hide in cave !
LOL, Mike Massen's kids are of feeble intellect, why am I not surprised..
English not your first language, you know how to parse ?

Tell us your reasons a black hole cannot form, you claimed there were too many to list, try the top 3 with ANY maths instead of hand-waving imprecise unscientific pseudo-science attempt, ugh :-(

Have you ever been in a physics lab, run any experiments on anything, know of the science disciplines & just why they throw out your crank thinking ?

Why cannot you make sense of an equation that clearly has no upper bound, if it should how would you arrive at it ?
https://en.wikipe...vitation

You come across so clearly as someone who CANNOT do straightforward arithmetic, why is that ?

Learn core Physics please, properly as per the best approach eg @ Uni
machapungo
5 / 5 (1) Jun 13, 2015
Mike says, "Eh ? We start within the bounds of our perceptual framework, please get a grip on essentials re phenomenology"

Our perceptual framework is bounded by our 5 senses and what our conscious brain does with those inputs. All of those inputs submit to inherent delays and translations into different forms of signals. Consequently, we have no DIRECT conscious contact with reality. The signals that our brains work with are all abstractions of reality. They are also all historical records due to the unavoidable delays. What we call the "present" is really a set of records that represent the recent past. I view the "now" as the constantly moving and therefor changing reality of all of existence in the universe. We have no direct conscious contact with the "now". Since all of our inputs are abstractions, all of our outputs are also abstractions. We do not have the power to impart reality to abstractions of reality. We humans need the concept of time to think of anything complex.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.