The Holographic Principle (APOD 2009 September 13)

[neufer]

"...Beware, other people looking at the above image may not claim
to see 3 x 10^65 bits -- they might claim to see a teapot."

• And we all know who that particular person is.

[gwrede]

the most information you can get from this image is about 3 x 10^65 bits for a normal sized computer monitor.

An upper limit for the data you can get from that image is 273886 * 8 = 2191088 bits. That is the size of the file. In reality the information content is even less because some bits are lost in the file format itself. Of course, a specific area of the screen can contain outrageous bits of information, maybe even the number that you stated.

Actually, and more precisely, the 3 x 10^65 bits of data are on the monitor screen even if the monitor is shut down. (And I'm not talking about the phosphor afterglow of old fashioned monitors.) The data comes mostly from the positions and states of the elementary particles that constitute the specific area.

[neufer]

the most information you can get from this image is about 3 x 10^65 bits for a normal sized computer monitor.

An upper limit for the data you can get from that image is 273886 * 8 = 2191088 bits. That is the size of the file. In reality the information content is even less because some bits are lost in the file format itself. Of course, a specific area of the screen can contain outrageous bits of information, maybe even the number that you stated.

So is what they are trying to say is that the particular pattern on the screen can be data compressed into a single number that is no smaller than about 3 x 10^65 (or ~217 bits of information)?

[geckzilla]

This reminds me of an idea I once had for a program that systematically assigns an RGB color (8 bits in each channel, at least) to each pixel on a small, icon-sized image, say no bigger than 64 by 64 pixels tall and wide... so, eventually, every image that is possible would be made, including famous artworks and art that has yet to be seen. And if you managed to sort them out, every possible frame of every movie ever made and yet to be made as well. But I gave up on that after realizing it would produce billions and billions of trash noise and 64x64 is pretty crummy resolution.

And that teapot defies gravity. Why did they have to create that image with a tangent at the lower edge of the teapot? And those garish colors... This APOD offends my design senses in multiple ways.

[neufer]

And that teapot defies gravity. Why did they have to create that image with a tangent at the lower edge of the teapot? And those garish colors... This APOD offends my design senses in multiple ways.

MR. PITT: Oh, this is very odd.

KRAMER: (looking at picture) Yeah, it's 3-D art. Computers generate 'em. BIG computers.

MR. PITT: Yes, I've heard about these. How do they work?

KRAMER: Well, you blur your eyes like you're starin' straight through the picture. And you keep your eyes unfocused. And then... (Kramer and Pitt stare at picture) Oh, oh, oh, YEAH!

MR. PITT: I don't see it.

KRAMER: Yeah, it's a spaceship, surrounded by planets, asteroids...

MR. PITT: I still don't see it.

ELAINE: Okay, Kramer, that's enough. Mr. Pitt has got work to do.

KRAMER: Ya' ever dream in 3-D? It's like the boogeyman is comin' right at you.

MR. PITT: A spaceship, where?

KRAMER: (pointing) Right in here. Just keep your eyes unfocused.

ELAINE: (pointing at 3-D picture) Look, there's a spaceship! That is so cool!

MR. PITT: Where is it?

ELAINE: (pointing) Right here.

MR. PITT: I'm looking there!

ELAINE: No, no, unfocus.

MR. PITT: I am unfocused!

(phone rings)

ELAINE: (answering phone) Hello? Oh, yeah, okay fine. Uh, he'll be right down. (to Pitt) Car's here to pick you up and take you to the meeting.

MR. PITT: (still staring at picture) Meeting?

ELAINE: Yeah, the Poland Creek merger?

MR. PITT: Why don't you go for me?

ELAINE: How can I go?

MR. PITT: Oh, all they're gonna do is read the report.

ELAINE: Mr. Pitt, I do not think that is such a good idea.

MR. PITT: Oh, DAMN this thing!

ELAINE: (on phone) Oh, yes, yes I'll tell him. Yes, thank you. Um, um hold on. (to Pitt) Mr. Pitt!

MR. PITT: (staring at 3-D poster) I think I'm on to something!

ELAINE: Mr. Pitt! The board of directors is on the phone. They've called an emergency meeting. They want you to be there to discuss the merger!

MR. PITT: You said keep your eyes out of focus, which is misleading. You want DEEP focus!

ELAINE: (on phone) Yes, hi. Okay, fine, yeah, hold on just a second. Lemme just... (reaches into purse) Yeah, I've got it... (pulls out both hands completely covered in black ink) Oh! Oh! Yeah, yeah, he'll be there. (drops phone, rushes to Pitt) Mr. Pitt, you have GOT to stop staring at that poster!

MR. PITT: I see something that could be a spaceship. Is it round? Is it pointy?

ELAINE: (grabs poster, smashes it) No, you don't see it, and you're never going to see it! (grabs Pitt by the lapels, getting ink all over his jacket) Mr. Pitt, you have to meet with the shareholders, you have to leave now. Do you hear me? Do you hear me?!
----------------------------------

[Star*Hopper]

All well & good, I suppose....but somebody help me out here. What does the 'A' in 'APOD' stand for, again?

~*

[bystander]

All well & good, I suppose....but somebody help me out here. What does the 'A' in 'APOD' stand for, again?

Astronomy, the connection? Apodman's teapot, of course.

"...Beware, other people looking at the above image may not claim
to see 3 x 10^65 bits -- they might claim to see a teapot."

• And we all know who that particular person is.

[Tilt]

One lump or two?

Cosmo Kramer Flashbacks, jeeez....

"I sense a great vulnerability, a man-child crying out for love, an innocent orphan in the post-modern world."
"I see a parasite, a sexually depraved miscreant who is seeking only to gratify his basest and most immediate urges."
"His struggle is Man's struggle. He lifts my spirit!"
"He is a loathesome brute, yet I can't look away."
"He transcends Time and Space!"
"He sickens me."
"I love it!"
"Me too!"

Well....... We all know how that turned out.

[dduggan47]

The heck with the physics. Just once in my life ... someday ... I'd like to see the image in one of these pictures. Never ever have I been able to see them.

What's wrong with me?

[dduggan47]

All well & good, I suppose....but somebody help me out here. What does the 'A' in 'APOD' stand for, again?

~*

"It can arise from generalizations from seemingly distant speculation that the information held by a black hole is determined not by its enclosed volume but by the surface area of its event horizon."

OTOH, I'd be more inclined to ask whether we're really running out of APODs:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020430.html

[Tilt]

This might help: I recalled after about a minute that it helps to put your nose almost directly on the image and stare straight ahead.

Yes, there's Some repetition, but what the heck. I like to go back to the early early APODs. I did a programming internship at the Climate & Radiation Branch at GSFC the Summer of '95 when it was all brand new. When I found the APOD... man, it was better than sliced bread, < G >. It amazes me to see the Calendar page now ---- so many glorious images over the years.

Way ta go, Guys.

[grump]

The heck with the physics. Just once in my life ... someday ... I'd like to see the image in one of these pictures. ...

I look for a couple of contrasting areas about eye spacing apart. In the APOD pic there are some darker patches across the middle - line up your eyes on the dark matter with your face about, oh, 30 to 50cm from the image, then defocus ie dont 'look' at anything in particular, then slowly move your face closer close to the image. Maybe, just maybe, the 3D will slowly resolve as your brain sorts it out. It does not suddenly pop into 3D for me - just slowly builds over a few seconds.

Notice how I've cunningly introduced a couple of astronomy terms into the post.

[cubewano]

"According to the Holographic Principle, the most information you can get from this image is about 3 x 10^65 bits for a normal sized computer monitor."

But what if the image is presented so that each pixel is a hyperlink?

Or is that cheating?

[DavidLeodis]

The heck with the physics. Just once in my life ... someday ... I'd like to see the image in one of these pictures. Never ever have I been able to see them.

What's wrong with me?

When such 3D hidden images became very popular at least 15 or more years back I never had any problem seeing what was in them but I knew several people that never could. Shame really as the effect when seen is remarkable, as in the APOD with a teapot that looks to be floating. I hope dduggan47 that you do make out the hidden image in this and other similar holographic images.

[Chris Peterson]

When such 3D hidden images became very popular at least 15 or more years back I never had any problem seeing what was in them but I knew several people that never could. Shame really as the effect when seen is remarkable, as in the APOD with a teapot that looks to be floating. I hope dduggan47 that you do make out the hidden image in this and other similar holographic images.

I suspect you know this, but to be clear, there is no connection between this image (which is based on random dot stereography) and holography. This isn't a "holographic image".

[apodman]

The A stands for autostereogram. I'm cool with connecting the holographic principle to astronomy via black holes, but using a hologram to represent the holographic principle is one stretch and using an autostereogram to represent the hologram is another stretch. Alas, stretch is all you can do since there is no way on a monitor to illustrate the appearance of an actual black hole or the appearance of an actual hologram. I am one of those autostereographically challenged folk, so (contrary to published assumptions) I see no teapot (nor anything else other than a 2D abstract pattern) and remain unconvinced there is one. I remain unconvinced that autostereograms are anything other than a hoax designed to waste my time defocusing while the jokers point and giggle.

[DavidLeodis]

When such 3D hidden images became very popular at least 15 or more years back I never had any problem seeing what was in them but I knew several people that never could. Shame really as the effect when seen is remarkable, as in the APOD with a teapot that looks to be floating. I hope dduggan47 that you do make out the hidden image in this and other similar holographic images.

I suspect you know this, but to be clear, there is no connection between this image (which is based on random dot stereography) and holography. This isn't a "holographic image".

Just to make it clear, yes I knew that Chris. I simply used holographic image as that is what these types of 'images' are often called in general use and as they usually were when they began to appear many years back.

[DavidLeodis]

The A stands for autostereogram. I'm cool with connecting the holographic principle to astronomy via black holes, but using a hologram to represent the holographic principle is one stretch and using an autostereogram to represent the hologram is another stretch. Alas, stretch is all you can do since there is no way on a monitor to illustrate the appearance of an actual black hole or the appearance of an actual hologram. I am one of those autostereographically challenged folk, so (contrary to published assumptions) I see no teapot (nor anything else other than a 2D abstract pattern) and remain unconvinced there is one. I remain unconvinced that autostereograms are anything other than a hoax designed to waste my time defocusing while the jokers point and giggle.

I can assure you apodman that it is no false claim. There really is a teapot in the image. It is a shame you don't see it, as the 3D effect in this and other autosterograms is amazing.

[Doum]

Well, i am the first surprise but the teapot is realy there. Amazing.

[apodman]

Oh, I believe y'all. It's just that, despite my efforts, I remain disappointed and unconvinced in the evidential sense. And how many other untested abilities might my brain be missing?

[DavidLeodis]

Oh, I believe y'all. It's just that, despite my efforts, I remain disappointed and unconvinced in the evidential sense. And how many other untested abilities might my brain be missing?

Hi apodman. Though I have no problem seeing the 3D effect in such images as the APOD I can never succeed in doing the cross-eyed way to see stereoscopic images and so, where possible, I have to rely on red/blue glasses. They always work well for me but I know from older APODs discussions that some prefer the cross-eyed method as they find it easy.

[rstevenson]

When I first read it I thought the reference to a teapot was just another in joke. But today, with the ongoing discussion, I decided to try it. POP! Out popped a teapot.

Oddly it won't work if I'm not wearing my reading glasses. Must be some sort of virtual focal length thing.

Rob

[Star*Hopper]

They come so easily to me, I really wonder about those who say they can't see 'em!

If you can cross your eyes, then you have the 'talent' - just have to learn to 'uncross' them past point of focus. And all that takes is, looking at something farther away!

It's sort of like learning to use averted vision thru your scope's eyepiece. It's one thing to look off-center, but it's another to focus your mind on a point away from where your eyes are pointed directly.

Look at the pattern in your screen. Then, without moving your eyes away, consciously force your point of focus to something behind your screen, as if you're looking right thru the screen. The pattern should go out of focus slightly, & you'll know you're on the 'right track'. Slowly, imagine it - the thing you're imagine you're seeing behind the screen - is farther, and farther, and farther away. Just keep increasing the distance & the 'object' in the pattern should suddenly pop into your consciousness.

It takes a bit of getting used to, learning how to 'hold' on that defocused point while your brain 'looks around' examining the objects....but once you learn to see them, it'll be so easy that....well, see my first sentence.

HTH!
~*

[zbvhs]

Things like this come under the heading of Planetary Phenomena. We are Planetary Phenomena so the sky's the limit.

[Czerno]

Wow! Thank you, Star Hopper ! At last I've seen that teapot emerge from the background and floating in space !

Where could we find a simple explanation of the principles of such single image 3-D illusions ?
Are the seamingly random colored dots essential ?

Would the technique be applicable to 3-D photographs instead of the binocular stereograms - which I find difficult to visualize - and to what extent ? I guess for monchrome pictures only, if the colored dots are indeed essential, which they must be ?

It's fascinating mystery !