I’m being tongue in cheek of course and this is more a matter of philosophy and ontology than math and physics, but one could claim that the hole itself does not exist, it is the absence of matter, so what you are measuring is not the hole but rather the distance between any two points of matter. Otherwise one could point to nothing and claim that it is a hole of any size (like pointing to the sky and simply defining some part of it a hole of a certain size- it would effectively be a meaningless proposition in some sense).
Not if it’s 2D
Holes are arguably 0D.
Idk if you can measure what area a hole takes up it has dimensions doesn’t it?
I’m being tongue in cheek of course and this is more a matter of philosophy and ontology than math and physics, but one could claim that the hole itself does not exist, it is the absence of matter, so what you are measuring is not the hole but rather the distance between any two points of matter. Otherwise one could point to nothing and claim that it is a hole of any size (like pointing to the sky and simply defining some part of it a hole of a certain size- it would effectively be a meaningless proposition in some sense).
But again, it is truly just silly semantics. :)
Sure but THIS hole isn’t 2D because it’s a compressed 3d object.