Personally I doubt the integrity of the bridge so I won't be exploring it. ;-)
Harry On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Black hole science is supposed to be the bridge between general relativity > and quantum mechanics. Exploring this connection is the beat sort of > science. > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:34 PM, H Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> For those who noticed >>> - the message of Brian Josephson whistleblowing some exchange between >>> moderator to block Ferara tests >>> - the effective blocking of lugano test >>> >>> there is an article by Nicolas Gisin (an insider of science, not a rebel) >>> http://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/nicolas-gisin/ >>> >>> Nature try to reframe the debate >>> >>> http://www.nature.com/news/arxiv-rejections-lead-to-spat-over-screening-process-1.19267 >>> >>> >>> >> From the Nature link: >> "Sabine Hossenfelder, an expert on quantum gravity at the Frankfurt >> Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany, says that the black-hole paper >> is scientific and clearly argued, but is wrong because it uses an equation >> in a slightly different regime to that in which it should be applied. She >> calls this a “common and understandable mistake”. >> >> Instead of being wrong the conclusion should be seen as a reductio ad >> absurdum demonstration of the incompatibility of quantum mechanics and >> general relativity. Without a quantum theory of gravity the entire field >> of black hole physics is based on discretion rather than logic. >> >> Harry >> >> >> >> > >
