danydandan Posted January 30, 2019 #576 Share Posted January 30, 2019 @sci-nerd your dismissing radiation from a Black hole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted January 30, 2019 Author #577 Share Posted January 30, 2019 9 hours ago, danydandan said: @sci-nerd your dismissing radiation from a Black hole? No, not at all! To stay within the analogy, I'd describe Hawking radiation as a confirmation message. Like when you empty you computers recycle bin, it plays a sound to tell you the job is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted January 31, 2019 #578 Share Posted January 31, 2019 Seems that what is required here abouts is a Metamorphosis of Ajax for the Mind .... ~ Quote ~ The Metamorphosis of Ajax Introduction - Ex-Classics https://www.exclassics.com/ajax/ajaxintr.htm The Metamophosis of Ajax A new look at a stale subject by. Sir John Harington. INTRODUCTION. Long before Thomas Crapper, there was John Harington. ~ John Harington (writer) - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harington_(writer) Sir John Harington of Kelston, but baptised in London, was an English courtier, author and ... His best-known work today, A New Discourse of a Stale Subject, called the Metamorphosis of Ajax (1596) is a political allegory and a coded attack ... ~ Sir John Harington's Flush Toilet - The Tudor Society https://www.tudorsociety.com/sir-john-haringtons-flush-toilet/ Nov 20, 2014 - Harington gave full details of his flush toilet in his book A New Discourse of a Stale Subject, called the Metamorphosis of Ajax, which I have ... ~ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted January 31, 2019 #579 Share Posted January 31, 2019 saving that one for later. Harte 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted January 31, 2019 #580 Share Posted January 31, 2019 15 hours ago, sci-nerd said: No, not at all! To stay within the analogy, I'd describe Hawking radiation as a confirmation message. Like when you empty you computers recycle bin, it plays a sound to tell you the job is done. A study will be, or may have already been, published regarding how particles not past the event horizon become excited. It's quite interesting however it demonstrates how and why your new thought on the topic is incorrect. Basically there is a premise that around black-holes virtual particles can or do become 'real' particles due to the extreme curvature of space-time and gravity, possibly strong electric forces too. But anyways, dismissal of information past the event horizon isn't something we should do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted February 1, 2019 Author #581 Share Posted February 1, 2019 On 31/1/2019 at 10:06 AM, danydandan said: But anyways, dismissal of information past the event horizon isn't something we should do. Agree. It is just a suggestion. Needs more work to become a thesis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted February 1, 2019 #582 Share Posted February 1, 2019 I can't think of any way a black hole could be a shortcut for a coded universe. Harte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danydandan Posted February 1, 2019 #583 Share Posted February 1, 2019 15 minutes ago, Harte said: I can't think of any way a black hole could be a shortcut for a coded universe. Harte The idea is kind of crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted February 2, 2019 Author #584 Share Posted February 2, 2019 21 hours ago, Harte said: I can't think of any way a black hole could be a shortcut for a coded universe. 21 hours ago, danydandan said: The idea is kind of crazy. Do you agree that it would take a lot of processing power to simulate a star (down to particle level of course)? And would you agree that for each star that is removed from said processing, there is less work to compute? Less work is equal to a shortcut. Isn't it? Black holes are information "dead ends" (to the observer), so in a simulation they would not need to be processed, besides the gravity field (which should be quite simple). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted February 2, 2019 #585 Share Posted February 2, 2019 Oh, the gravity is "quite simple," eh? That explains it. I would think that coding for a star would be just as simple. If not, why not? Harte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep73 Posted February 2, 2019 Author #586 Share Posted February 2, 2019 3 minutes ago, Harte said: I would think that coding for a star would be just as simple. If not, why not? Maybe because of the chaos of lose particles and because of fusion? You don't like the idea, I get it, so let's just leave it. The guys on scienceforums.net were much more positive, so at least someone appreciates it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted February 2, 2019 #587 Share Posted February 2, 2019 The chaos coding is necessary anyway for other applications, so not really a shortcut. Harte 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now