Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:43 PM John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:42 PM Lawrence Crowell < > goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > all the radiation emitted is entangled with the black hole, which would >> then mean the entanglement entropy increases beyond the Bekenstein

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Sunday, March 10, 2019 at 9:16:12 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > They say if information is lost, determination is toast. But doesn't QM > inherently affirm information loss? I mean, although, say, the SWE can be > run backward in time to reconstruct any wf it describes, we can

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:42 PM Lawrence Crowell < goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote: > all the radiation emitted is entangled with the black hole, which would > then mean the entanglement entropy increases beyond the Bekenstein bound. Could nature be trying to tell us that the

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

I thought QM was deterministic, at least mathematically - and I guess in the MWI? I mean everyone can't have forgotten quantum indeterminacy when discussing the BHIP, surely? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe

Re: What is the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds?

Graham's number tetrated Graham's number times? That took about 5 seconds, does it come close? On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 07:06:24 UTC+13, John Clark wrote: > > It's easy to prove that the Busy Beaver Function grows faster than *ANY* > computable function because if there were such a faster

My son the mathematician

Here is his first co-authored paper (at the age of 20). Topology and its Applications Volume 254 , 1 March 2019, Pages 85-100 Extending bonding functions in generalized

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 1:43:05 AM UTC-6, Liz R wrote: > > I thought QM was deterministic, at least mathematically - and I guess in > the MWI? > *QM is deterministic, but only as far as reconstructing wf's as time is reversed, but it can't reconstruct individual events which are without

Re: What is the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds?

I have a simpler answer! "the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds" ...can be written in 5 seconds. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: Is Google groups shutting down?

On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 2:33:58 AM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > If so is the EL going somewhere else? > Google Groups as a whole https://groups.google.com/ e.g. this one https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/everything-list apparently will remain as is with nothing changing.

Re: My son the mathematician

On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 2:46:50 AM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > Here is his first co-authored paper (at the age of 20). > > Topology and its Applications > > Volume 254 >

Is Google groups shutting down?

If so is the EL going somewhere else? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group,

Re: What is the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds?

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 3:39 AM Liz R wrote: *> Graham's number tetrated Graham's number times? That took about 5 > seconds, does it come close?* Tetration is computable and the Busy Beaver Function grows faster than ANY computable function. We don't know what BB(7) is but we do know its

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 4:54 AM wrote: *> QM is deterministic, but only as far as reconstructing wf's* > We can calculate the wave function exactly but the wave function does not determine exactly how matter will behave. As far as the Black Hole information paradox goes solving that is one of

Re: What is the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds?

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 3:41 AM Liz R wrote: *> I have a simpler answer!* > *"the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds"* > *...can be written in 5 seconds.* > I can beat that and it would take even less time to write: "the largest integer you can write in 5 YEARS" John K Clark > --

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 7:40:59 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 4:54 AM > wrote: > > *> QM is deterministic, but only as far as reconstructing wf's* >> > > We can calculate the wave function exactly but the wave function does not > determine exactly how matter will

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 2:41:13 PM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:18 PM > > wrote: > > >>We can calculate the wave function exactly but the wave function does >>> not determine exactly how matter will behave. >>> >> >> *That's precisely my point. If we can't

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On 12-03-2019 01:14, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 2:41:13 PM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:18 PM wrote: We can calculate the wave function exactly but the wave function does not determine exactly how matter will behave. _THATS PRECISELY

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Sunday, March 10, 2019 at 8:16:12 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > They say if information is lost, determination is toast. But doesn't QM > inherently affirm information loss? I mean, although, say, the SWE can be > run backward in time to reconstruct any wf it describes, we can

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:14 PM wrote: *> How is information preserved in usual QM? If a particle bends in one > direction, and you play the wf back in time, how do you recover a particle > which will bend in the same direction, exactly? AG * > You can't replay the motion of a particle because

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:18 PM wrote: >>We can calculate the wave function exactly but the wave function does not >> determine exactly how matter will behave. >> > > *That's precisely my point. If we can't determine exactly how matter will > behave, how can we go back in time to reconstruct

Re: My son the mathematician

Very good. Brent On 3/11/2019 12:46 AM, Liz R wrote: Here is his first co-authored paper (at the age of 20). Topology and its Applications Volume 254 , 1

Re: My son the mathematician

On 11-03-2019 09:51, Philip Thrift wrote: On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 2:46:50 AM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: Here is his first co-authored paper (at the age of 20). TOPOLOGY AND ITS APPLICATIONS [1] Volume 254 [2], 1 March 2019, Pages 85-100 EXTENDING BONDING FUNCTIONS IN GENERALIZED INVERSE

Re: My son the mathematician

I have published a fair number of papers, and it is always nice to get them accepted. So this is his first and at a pretty young age too. Congratulations LC On Monday, March 11, 2019 at 1:46:50 AM UTC-6, Liz R wrote: > > Here is his first co-authored paper (at the age of 20). > > Topology and