Re: Catriona McLeod Nichols


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Previous # Next ] [ Start New Thread ] [ TarBoard ]

Posted by Jon on March 02, 2006 at 16:32:56 from 199.159.117.62 user Jon.

In Reply to: Re: Catriona McLeod Nichols posted by John Nichols on March 02, 2006 at 05:15:24:

John wrote:

7. The list of all lists stuffs the GUT theory. As does the "absence of information from a black hole" - a black hole is black and so there is some negative information, we may not see the light anymore but in not seeing the light we infer a lot of things. So Hawking must be wrong if he says there is no info from a black hole.

Hadn't you seen? Hawking has since acknowledged ("Information Loss in Black Holes", preprint hep-th/0507171, 2005, cited, among other places in John Cramer's Alternate View, Analog, May, 2006) that information isn't lost in a Black Hole. Cost him an Encyclopedia of Baseball to John Preskill (Hawking & Kip Thorne had bet Preskill on the question).


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
Eel-Mail:

Existing subject (please edit appropriately) :

or is it time to start a New Thread?

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

post direct to TarBoard test post first

Before posting it is necessary to be a registered user.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TarBoard ]

Courtesy of Environmental Science, Lancaster

space