Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #372375 > unrolled thread

Does Suskind's holographic model allow for time travel because the 3D data is permanently stored in a 2D Copy?

Started by	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
First post	2015-12-19 07:21 -0800
Last post	2015-12-24 11:27 +1100
Articles	20 on this page of 23 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →

#372375 — Does Suskind's holographic model allow for time travel because the 3D data is permanently stored in a 2D Copy?

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-19 07:21 -0800
Subject	Does Suskind's holographic model allow for time travel because the 3D data is permanently stored in a 2D Copy?
Message-ID	<7730bc72-9a67-41ac-8007-9577f846751d@googlegroups.com>

Space time is kinetic energy 
Gravity is spacetime dropping in kinetic energy 
Kinda looks like one day, every particle will slam into itself at 2*c 

If Suskind is right and all information entering  a black hole is stored holographically on the surface we could already be "Falling through a previous COPY of  past that already happened" 

Attempting time travel would destroy the copy by changing the template. 

Or the "holographic template" could be just one instant in time that when reached after the universe  cools to say quark confinement , time will proceed "exactly in the same steps" as last time. 
The holographic copy would only need to store the information on the surface, compressing the necessary required data by c^2 
One byte on the surface becomes c^2 bytes and we always relive the same future echoing forever

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#372376

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-19 07:33 -0800
Message-ID	<7e82575f-c775-4940-a8da-1d0a83c93809@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372375

17 894 789 000 years

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372570

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-23 14:25 +1100
Message-ID	<dduigeFp03gU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372375

On 20/12/2015 2:21 AM, David Fuller wrote:
> Space time is kinetic energy
> Gravity is spacetime dropping in kinetic energy
> Kinda looks like one day, every particle will slam into itself at 2*c
>
> If Suskind is right and all information entering  a black hole is stored holographically on the surface we could already be "Falling through a previous COPY of  past that already happened"
>
> Attempting time travel would destroy the copy by changing the template.
>
> Or the "holographic template" could be just one instant in time that when reached after the universe  cools to say quark confinement , time will proceed "exactly in the same steps" as last time.
> The holographic copy would only need to store the information on the surface, compressing the necessary required data by c^2
> One byte on the surface becomes c^2 bytes and we always relive the same future echoing forever
>

Where is it stated that the holographic form is permanent? In the case 
of a black hole it clearly isn't.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372571

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-22 20:10 -0800
Message-ID	<f3ee3463-d9e1-4e52-aafc-06e00e6ba350@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372570

Where is it stated that the holographic form is permanent? In the case 
of a black hole it clearly isn't. 

Sylvia. 

Holy crap you are a word twisting liar !!

Everywhere you look it is implied the information comprising the in falling object is stored on the 2D surface 
Liar liar pants on fire !!!!

Everything in our world is encoded with quantum mechanical information. And according to the laws of quantum mechanics, this information should never entirely disappear, no matter what happens to it. Not even if it gets sucked into a black hole.

But Prof Hawking's idea is that the information doesn't make it inside the black hole at all. Instead, it's permanently encoded in a two-dimensional hologram at the surface of the black hole's event horizon.

http://www.sci-news.com/physics/science-stephen-hawking-black-holes-information-03172.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372573

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-23 15:38 +1100
Message-ID	<ddumptFps2gU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372571

On 23/12/2015 3:10 PM, David Fuller wrote:
> Where is it stated that the holographic form is permanent? In the case
> of a black hole it clearly isn't.
>
> Sylvia.
>
> Holy crap you are a word twisting liar !!
>
> Everywhere you look it is implied the information comprising the in falling object is stored on the 2D surface
> Liar liar pants on fire !!!!
>
> Everything in our world is encoded with quantum mechanical information. And according to the laws of quantum mechanics, this information should never entirely disappear, no matter what happens to it. Not even if it gets sucked into a black hole.
>
> But Prof Hawking's idea is that the information doesn't make it inside the black hole at all. Instead, it's permanently encoded in a two-dimensional hologram at the surface of the black hole's event horizon.
>
> http://www.sci-news.com/physics/science-stephen-hawking-black-holes-information-03172.html
>

Where's the permanent encoding when the black hole evaporates?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372575

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-22 21:04 -0800
Message-ID	<01fc62af-0fbb-4ce5-bd18-0b9dc44039e8@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372573

Where's the permanent encoding when the black hole evaporates? 

Sylvia. 

It is "THEIR" theory. 
Are they just purposefully telling contradictory stories to see if people notice?

Either black holes don't evaporate 
Or 
The information is destroyed 

Considering no micro black holes have ever been discovered. And most galactic centers seem to have a black hole. 

I think David A Smith once suggested to me all black holes many be the same black hole. 
Maybe a black hole is just a portion of spacetime (brane) stuck to a permanent singular black hole. 

http://i60.tinypic.com/okmna0.jpg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372582

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-23 17:30 +1100
Message-ID	<ddutc6Frb1oU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372575

On 23/12/2015 4:04 PM, David Fuller wrote:
> Where's the permanent encoding when the black hole evaporates?
>
> Sylvia.
>
> It is "THEIR" theory.
> Are they just purposefully telling contradictory stories to see if people notice?

I think you've simply misunderstood.

The problem was originally that the information inside the black hole 
couldn't get out, but at the same time the black hole could evaporate, 
meaning that the information was lost. This seems to conflict with the 
law that information could not be destroyed.

The resolution is that the information is on the surface. Since it's not 
inside the black hole, there's no problem with its being evaporated away.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372618

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-23 06:08 -0800
Message-ID	<b205722f-0b4b-4a1f-8258-0c4c2dbcdcc9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372582

I think you've simply misunderstood. 

The problem was originally that the information inside the black hole 
couldn't get out, but at the same time the black hole could evaporate, 
meaning that the information was lost. This seems to conflict with the 
law that information could not be destroyed. 

The resolution is that the information is on the surface. Since it's not 
inside the black hole, there's no problem with its being evaporated away. 

Sylvia. 

I think their theory is upside down

The universe is constantly expanding. 
We are watching a black hole gain mass and add information to the temporal Record from the inside 

Their theory is correct , just upside down

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372666

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-24 11:35 +1100
Message-ID	<de0sugFcgisU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372618

On 24/12/2015 1:08 AM, David Fuller wrote:
>
> I think you've simply misunderstood.
>
> The problem was originally that the information inside the black hole
> couldn't get out, but at the same time the black hole could evaporate,
> meaning that the information was lost. This seems to conflict with the
> law that information could not be destroyed.
>
> The resolution is that the information is on the surface. Since it's not
> inside the black hole, there's no problem with its being evaporated away.
>
> Sylvia.
>
> I think their theory is upside down

Based on what? It's a complicated theory, and you have little 
understanding of it. How can you possibly think yourself competent to 
propose that they've got it wrong, and that you've got it right?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372675

From	Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
Date	2015-12-24 12:35 +0100
Message-ID	<n5glan$poe$1@node2.news.atman.pl>
In reply to	#372666


Użytkownik "Sylvia Else"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:de0sugFcgisU1@mid.individual.net...

> I think their theory is upside down

|Based on what? It's a complicated theory, and you have little
|understanding of it. How can you possibly think yourself competent to
|propose that they've got it wrong, and that you've got it right?

Sure, Sylvia, sure. We, common mortals, are simply too
stupid to notice, that your mumble is simply inconsistent.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372856

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-28 13:52 -0800
Message-ID	<386ef3c6-ea18-4899-9706-27e5db67ead2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372666

> I think their theory is upside down 

Based on what? It's a complicated theory, and you have little 
understanding of it. How can you possibly think yourself competent to 
propose that they've got it wrong, and that you've got it right? 

Sylvia. 

Because it has been 110 years, 
And contradictions like (evaporating black holes & information about everything that ever falls into a black hole is stored permanently holographically on the surface of the horizon) are still being stated by the "smartest people on the cutting edge".

No one is any closer the anybody else to providing a suitable explanation of the geometry 

http://i57.tinypic.com/zv3mzn.jpg

http://tinypic.com/2mplyamh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372861

From	Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date	2015-12-28 14:46 -0800
Message-ID	<531bb56c-11ed-4f49-81e3-a686c55e1877@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372856

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 2:52:23 PM UTC-7, David Fuller wrote:
>
> > I think their theory is upside down 
> 
> Based on what? It's a complicated theory, and you have little 
> understanding of it. How can you possibly think yourself competent to 
> propose that they've got it wrong, and that you've got it right? 
> 
> Sylvia. 
> 
> Because it has been 110 years, and contradictions like (evaporating
> black holes & information about everything that ever falls into a
> black hole is stored permanently holographically on the surface of
> the horizon) are still being stated by the "smartest people on the
> cutting edge".

Why do you believe those are contradictions?  Some things about GR are
clear and some things aren't.

> No one is any closer the anybody else to providing a suitable explanation
> of the geometry 

Not really.  It appears that the geometry of spacetime is an emergent
property of QM:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9zcBKoFrME
 
> http://i57.tinypic.com/zv3mzn.jpg
> 
> http://tinypic.com/2mplyamh

I think my like makes a lot more sense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372863

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-29 09:49 +1100
Message-ID	<dedskgFifj8U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372856

On 29/12/2015 8:52 AM, David Fuller wrote:
>> I think their theory is upside down
>
> Based on what? It's a complicated theory, and you have little
> understanding of it. How can you possibly think yourself competent
> to propose that they've got it wrong, and that you've got it right?
>
> Sylvia.
>
> Because it has been 110 years, And contradictions like (evaporating
> black holes & information about everything that ever falls into a
> black hole is stored permanently holographically on the surface of
> the horizon) are still being stated by the "smartest people on the
> cutting edge".

Please cite a specific case (with documentary evidence), in which one of 
the smartest people on the cutting edge has stated that the information 
that falls into a black hole is stored *permanently* on the surface of 
the horizon.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372868

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-28 19:30 -0800
Message-ID	<0c6a1b4a-874b-42ac-96ca-ed58b0af9c0d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372863

Please cite a specific case (with documentary evidence), in which one of 
the smartest people on the cutting edge has stated that the information 
that falls into a black hole is stored *permanently* on the surface of 
the horizon. 

Sylvia. 

Susskind and Hawking seem to have been battling over just that issue for years. 

There is plenty of documentation everywhere. 

http://www.egregoralfa.republika.pl/english/exttable.html

Element 86 radon 2 8 18 32 18 8

Element 168  2 8 18 32 50 32 18 8

1 3 5 7 9 7 5 3  odd numbers. 

Truncated octahedral tessellation / Schwarz's Minimal Surface

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372869

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-28 19:50 -0800
Message-ID	<9808d518-fe39-4809-b358-3d94dd1d392b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372868

Susskind and Hawking seem to have been battling over just that issue for years. 

There is plenty of documentation everywhere. 

http://www.egregoralfa.republika.pl/english/exttable.html 

Element 86 radon 2 8 18 32 18 8 

Element 168  2 8 18 32 50 32 18 8 

1+2+2+2+2 = 9
1 3 5 7 9 7 5 3  odd numbers. 
2+6+10+14+18
2, 8, 18,  32, 50

Truncated octahedral tessellation / Schwarz's Minimal Surface 

Inert Noble gas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372872

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-29 15:09 +1100
Message-ID	<deefcdFmj77U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372869

On 29/12/2015 2:50 PM, David Fuller wrote:
> Susskind and Hawking seem to have been battling over just that issue for years.
>
> There is plenty of documentation everywhere.
>
> http://www.egregoralfa.republika.pl/english/exttable.html

Perhaps, but that's not any of it.

Find some. Cite it. Don't just allege, without evidence, that it exists, 
'cos I won't believe you.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372888

From	David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-12-29 09:22 -0800
Message-ID	<3d7163a9-7acf-415b-9736-784336142446@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#372872

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 10:09:51 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 29/12/2015 2:50 PM, David Fuller wrote:
> > Susskind and Hawking seem to have been battling over just that issue for years.
> >
> > There is plenty of documentation everywhere.
> >
> > http://www.egregoralfa.republika.pl/english/exttable.html
> 
> Perhaps, but that's not any of it.
> 
> Find some. Cite it. Don't just allege, without evidence, that it exists, 
> 'cos I won't believe you.
> 
> Sylvia.

If you don't believe Susskind and Hawking then there is NO Point in Providing further Citation. http://www.sci-news.com/physics/science-stephen-hawking-black-holes-information-03172.html 

http://egregoralfa.republika.pl/english/exttable.html

I fixed Pawel Najderek's Periodic table For him. 

I put all the Noble Gasses on the Center Line.

http://i64.tinypic.com/20sgdo9.jpg

http://i64.tinypic.com/6sb1iu.jpg
contact:   arided@poczta.onet.pl  Copyright (C) Bydgoszcz 2008r.  
Pawel Najderek All Rights Reserved

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372913

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-30 11:37 +1100
Message-ID	<degn9iF9ra9U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372888

On 30/12/2015 4:22 AM, David Fuller wrote:
> On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 10:09:51 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else
> wrote:
>> On 29/12/2015 2:50 PM, David Fuller wrote:
>>> Susskind and Hawking seem to have been battling over just that
>>> issue for years.
>>>
>>> There is plenty of documentation everywhere.
>>>
>>> http://www.egregoralfa.republika.pl/english/exttable.html
>>
>> Perhaps, but that's not any of it.
>>
>> Find some. Cite it. Don't just allege, without evidence, that it
>> exists, 'cos I won't believe you.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> If you don't believe Susskind and Hawking then there is NO Point in
> Providing further Citation.
> http://www.sci-news.com/physics/science-stephen-hawking-black-holes-information-03172.html
>
>
That's not a citation of Hawking saying it - it's just some science 
columnist's interpretation. It's of no more value than your own opinion.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372598

From	Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
Date	2015-12-23 12:07 +0100
Message-ID	<n5dv92$7da$1@node2.news.atman.pl>
In reply to	#372573


Użytkownik "Sylvia Else"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:ddumptFps2gU1@mid.individual.net...


|Where's the permanent encoding when the black hole evaporates?

In the imagination of a relativistist.
Samely, as everything related to black holes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372609

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date	2015-12-23 23:58 +1100
Message-ID	<ddvk2pF2alvU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#372598

On 23/12/2015 10:07 PM, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
>
> Użytkownik "Sylvia Else"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:ddumptFps2gU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
> |Where's the permanent encoding when the black hole evaporates?
>
> In the imagination of a relativistist.
> Samely, as everything related to black holes.
>

If you don't believe in the subject matter of a thread, then what's the 
point in commenting?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →

csiph-web

Does Suskind's holographic model allow for time travel because the 3D data is permanently stored in a 2D Copy?

Contents

#372375 — Does Suskind's holographic model allow for time travel because the 3D data is permanently stored in a 2D Copy?

#372376

#372570

#372571

#372573

#372575

#372582

#372618

#372666

#372675

#372856

#372861

#372863

#372868

#372869

#372872

#372888

#372913

#372598

#372609