Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #424876

Re: the information paradox

Show all headers | View raw

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > RichD wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There's been a kerfuffle about information disappearing
> > > > into black holes.  The Information Conservationists claim
> > > > victory, but it seems still moot.
> > >
> > > It doesn't disapear into black holes, it just goes in..
> > > you can be on the inside or other side of the black hole to watch it coming in.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > In a recent seminar on the topic, the speaker claimed
> > > > that if information leaks out via Hawking radiation,
> > > > we encounter a conundrum: escaping a black hole, requires
> > > > faster than light transport, violating etc.  The premise
> > > > here is that information is a 'thing', which must obey relativity.
> > >
> > > That is why Einstein hated Neil...it was Neil who began the agrgument that information travels faster than light.
> > >
> > > And Einstein believes the opposite. It's not that information must obey relativity...it's that
> > > information must obey Albert Einstein. It's not Science, it's personal.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Does this argument stand up?  SR is a classical theory,
> > > > of stuff moving through space.  Black hole evaporation
> > > > is a purely quantum phenomenon, which doesn't utilize
> > > > classical spacetime paths.
> > >
> > > It depends on who you obey.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > The reasoning strikes me as specious.  Anyhow, it's certainly
> > > > grist for a relativity board -
> > > >
> > > > Similarly, if it entails an entangled pair, inside &
> > > > outside the horizon, then pair correlations ought to
> > > > persist, according to QM, again violating relativity.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rich
> > >
> > > It's not violation relativity...it's violating Albert Einstein.
> > >
> > > It's anti-semetic Science.
> > >
> > > They are both..just theories anyway.
> > >
> > > There is no information paradox. It's just a difference of opinion caused by...friction.
> > >
> > > The Starmaker
> >
> > In other words,
> >
> > einstein - nothing faster than the speed of light
> >
> > Bohr - information travels faster than the speed of light
> >
> > Pick a side, and kill the other side.
> 
> I mean, this has been going on since the 1930's....and you're still at it????
> 
> Maybe you guys got fooled with the word..."entangled". It's just another word for that 1930's term, ...quantum mechanics.
> 
> It's sooooooo 1930's...
> 
> Have you guys ever considered thinking for yourselves????


I guess everybody doesn't understand 'quantum entangled' (quantum
mechanics) except me. 



Maybe this quote also needs to be updated:

[I can't accept entanglement because] "I like to think the moon is there
even if I am not looking at it. It sounds spooky"

--Albert Einstein

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

the information paradox RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-07-12 12:52 -0700
  Re: the information paradox Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 12:57 -0700
  Re: the information paradox The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-12 14:44 -0700
    Re: the information paradox The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-12 19:46 -0700
      Re: the information paradox The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-12 21:27 -0700
        Re: the information paradox The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-14 09:33 -0700
  Re: the information paradox "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 21:31 -0700

csiph-web