Dear Amazigh,

Thanks for your comments. I I am going to surely read, comment and rate your Essay before the vanishing of the deadline of Community Rating.

Cheers,

Ch.

Dear Christian,

Why to waste our brain power on just mathematical singularities, they are not real?

I am asking you this as you did not get time to reply my question....

Best

=snp

Hi Edwin Eugene,

Thanks for your comments with kind congrats. I worked and still work on gravito-magnetism, see here for example. Thus, I am interested on your Essay and I will surely read, comment and rate it before the vanishing of the Community Rate's deadline.

Cheers,

Ch.

Dear Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta,

Actually, I did not forget your interesting questions. As I told you, they need time to be replied in detail. I will surely restart this interesting discussion with you after the vanishing of the deadline of Community Rating. In the meanwhile, I will surely read, comment and rate your Essay before such a deadline.

Cheers,

Ch.

Professor Corda,

Thanks so much for your kind words on my essay (http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1914 ), I am very encouraged that the author of your wonderful paper finds my paper likeable! I am working through the mathematical presentation in yours and am learning much -- thank you for presenting it here and sharing and thank you for sharing your comments on my thread!

Cheers and Best of Luck in the Contest -- you should not need it !

Jennifer Nielsen

    Christian: I am so impressed to see another author tackle a long-held concept and challenge it, instead of just writing more feel-good metaphysics. (Not only that, but to take on an icon like Hawking! Good for you, we should not be idolators.) I too have challenged a long-held assumption in my paper: that quantum mixtures of the same density matrix are indistinguishable. In my essay (/1610) I propose an empirical way we could distinguish such mixtures (e.g., mix of H and V linear polarized photons from mix of R and L circular states.) It should be of particular interest to you because of the significance of the DM in both our papers. I hope you have time to read it over and perhaps comment. PS to everyone: voting ends at 11:59 tomorrow night EDT (presumed from "ET" in FQXi update.)

      Dear Christian,

      Thank you very much for your encouragement.

      You saw very fair.

      Actually I insist, as I know now, the first principle of all is duality.

      You'll find out, hopefully in a few months.

      Regarding the third point:

      « 3) What do you think on my Statement Regarding the duality betweens and bit it, ie" Information physics tells how to work. Physics tells how to information flow "? »

      If you permit, there is what I think:

      « Information tells Energy how to flow. Energy carries Information. »

      Here's how I see it, but not exactly. : Energy is the horse, the rider is Information.

      Because Information is organised Energy.

      In other words. All things in the Universe are information, even the space. Then, what information is ? It is the organized Energy.

      Ok, what is the Energy then?

      We know how it manifests itself, but we do not know what it is. This is the first reality, impossible to fundamentally explain or define.

      Good luck and best wishes,

      Amazigh H.

      This contest is about whether reality can be represented in a binary fashion, not about information in general disappearing down a black hole. I don't see the relevancy to the topic. This is a typical equation heavy science paper that would lose most readers past the first two pages. I can't see this being an article in Scientific American, so I don't see it as being of general interest.

        Hi Cristi,

        This happened also to me. In fact, yesterday my Community Rate had an average score of 6.1 with 60 rates. Today it has an average score of 5.9 with 59 rates. It seems that a score 10 has been deleted. I have just sent an email to Brendan asking clarifications.

        Cheers,

        Ch.

        Dear Mr. Hu,

        Your criticism has been previously raised by other people. I rewrite here my reply to them almost verbatim. Although "It From Bit or Bit From It" is the title of the Contest, one easily checks that topics like "How does nature (the universe and the things therein) "store" and "process" information?" and "How does understanding information help us understand physics, and vice-versa?" are fully taken into account in my Essay. On the other hand, it is historically well known and also stressed in the interesting Essay by Singleton, Vagenas, & Zhu, which looks to be complementary to my one, that (verbatim from the Essay by Singleton, Vagenas and Zhu) "much of the interest in the connection between information, i.e. "bits", and physical objects, i.e. "its", stems from the discovery that black holes have characteristics of thermodynamic systems having entropies and temperatures." In fact, if Hawking's original claim was correct, black holes should destroy bits of information. By showing the unitary evolution of black hole evaporation instead implies that bits of information are preserved. On the other hand, the worst consequence of destruction of bits of information by a physical process is that quantum mechanics breaks down. I have instead shown that quantum mechanics works in black hole evaporation and bits of information are in turn preserved in that process. I also think it is not a coincidence that the great scientist who coined the phrase "It from bit or Bit from It?" in the 1950s, i.e. John A. Wheeler, was the same scientist who popularized the term "black hole" in the 1960s. Also, attempts to solve the black hole information loss puzzle opened the road to various interesting physical ideas concerning information, like for example the Holographic Principle. Hence, by using your words, this precise, technical essay about a phenomenon limited to black holes is strongly connected with the broad universal theme of this contest. In order to have further details on this issue, I suggest you to read the pretty book by Leonard Susskind "The Black Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics", Little, Brown and Company (2008). It is not simple to link the nature of information in a black hole to information in the rest of the universe. In any case, an important point is that, as it is supposed that there is a big number of black holes in the universe, the idea that black holes destroy information should lower the global information in the universe. A recent model of cosmology, proposed by Roger Penrose, i.e. The Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, looks to strongly depend on the condition that information should be indeed lost in black holes.

        Sincerely,

        Ch.

        Hi Branko,

        Do not worry, you are not naive. This question is indeed interesting but it requests some time to be answered in detail. I will bring back to you after the vanishing of the Community Rate's deadline which is exactly today. In fact, today I am very busy in order to review all the Essays I promised to read, comment and rate.

        Cheers,

        Ch.

        Best of Luck for the Magnificent Eight !

        I am throught the 180 essays, all rated. For me 2/3 of them were poor and other 1/6 curious. The rest (1/6) have I rated over 4/10.

        You are among the authors of the top essays from my sight - alphabetically :

        Corda, D'Ariano, Maguire, Rogozhin, Singleton, Sreenath, Vaid, Vishwakarma,

        and I hope one of you will be the winner. (Please, don't rate my essay.)

        David

          Thank you very much David! OK, I will not rate your Essay.

          Cheers,

          Ch.

          Resp Prof Christian Corda,

          I am giving my answer to your post in my essay here also, as FQXi does not inform you about my posting there...

          Thank you for all the time and trouble you have taken for this.

          Thank you for giving me an opportunity to clear up such confusions and puzzling situations.

          Thank you for quoting my words from the blog and reading the blog.

          I am answering all your questions / comments one by one indicating your words with - - - - -, Followed by my answer. We can discuss later also after the FQXi contest is over on any point, if you feel it is needed. Your words:

          - - - - -In all honesty, I am very puzzled by your ideas. Here are my comments: - - - - -

          Thank you sir, I am also answering all these comments with all the honesty. I hope , I did not make any conceptual mistakes. We can discuss all these to any further detail without any problem. There are many situations, as the time is less I am pointing out a few observations below.

          - - - - -1) I do not see chaos in the physically existing Astrophysical and Macro-physical Universe's Standard Model. There are some problems (for example I do not like the concept of singularity) but the Model is also intriguing and highly predictive. - - - - -

          Standard model cannot explain the existence of 30 to 35% blue shifted Galaxies and about 20% non shifted Galaxies. It considers only red-shifted Galaxies ignoring all the other types of Galaxies. How will anyone explain existence of blue shifted Galaxies in a totally expanding universe? I feel it is a chaotic situation in astrophysics.

          You are very correct about SINGULARITIES. These are mathematical only. They don't have any physical significance. Still all the educated scientific community is breaking their heads on this. They could have used their valuable brain power for more constructive usage.

          You may please have a look at for further questions on Bigbang :

          http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/2012/07/anymore-evidence-for-big-bang.html

          - - - - -2) Please, can your explain the correct value of the light's deviation by the Sun, - - - - -

          Yes sir, I will try. . .

          50 years of VLBI research is one example

          Please look:

          http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/2011/11/simple-question-to-all-vlbi-solar.html

          - - - - -the gravitational time dilation and frequency shift, - - - - -

          You can assume light waves as Photons with mass and explain them in Dynamic Universe Model.

          - - - - - the gravitational time delay, - - - - -

          Again I will tell about the VLBI, many scientists in the VLBI field say we have to consider the Gravitation of other Planets also in addition to Sun. Which we cannot do with present science.

          I presented paper on this in COSPAR Mysore as an Half an Hour TALK

          - - - - - the Hulse-Taylor pulsar, - - - - -

          Dynamic Universe Model can explain this situation. But Pioneer anomaly cannot be explained ny Standard model!

          - - - - - the Equivalence Principle - - - - -

          Equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass is valid in Dynamic universe model.

          - - - - -and the geodesic motion with NO change Newton's gravitation laws? - - - - -

          In Dynamic universe model Space is space and time is time. All the motions, even those, which are not possible to be explained by GR can be explained by Dynamic universe model. One Example is Gravitational Catapult, which cannot be explained by GR.

          - - - - -3) I also agree with the opinion by Prof. Tejinder Pal Singh, i.e. that it has been convincingly established in cosmology that the perfect blackbody thermal spectrum of the CMB cannot be produced by thermalization of starlight. - - - - -

          If you are thorough with COBE, WMAP etc satellites and their design /working, We can discuss in detail sir, there no problem.

          What actually measured was Star and Galaxy light and it is approximating to Blackbody radiation. How can you deny that fact. Bigbang generated CMB is yet to be detected.

          We can sit in any open forum.

          Thank you

          Best

          =snp

          Dear Neil,

          Thanks for your comments. Yes, it looks that your Essay is connected to my one. If you really find a way to distinguish quantum mixtures of the same density matrix this is also of fundamental importance for the black hole information paradox. I am going to read, comment and rate your Essay before the vanishing of the Community Rate's deadline.

          Cheers,

          Ch.

          Christian,

          First of all thank you for your enthusiastic comments here and at my own essay (/1610). I am flattered to get kudos from the current top-rated essayist. (That BTW is not surprising to me, considering that your essay most resembles a journal paper proposing an advance.) Sadly I have a bit of visual trouble reading your essay, perhaps my older pdf SW did not render it right (it has the scratchy look for me of "Ghostview" altho I downloaded the file itself.) I do note first that you recognize the importance to information issues of trying to resolve controversies over BH information representation and barriers. (This is something I remember as issue from back in early days of hearing "black holes have no hair" - ie, only mass, spin, and charge were considered to be residual, and then on to the "black hole wars" as you relate.) It is of course necessary to try and integrate QM issues into this imbroglio, despite our not having a proper theory of quantum gravity! Then Hawking's discovery about EH radiation knocked a wrench into everything. Yet you realize he should not be hero-worshiped, brilliant as he is (even Einstein and von Neumann made mistakes.)

          You make good progress in relating all the above to evolution of the Schrödinger equation, use of DDF etc. It seems you are zeroing in on your main point when you aptly note how to evade the cruder density matrix view and recover genuine SE of a pure state. (My own essay refers to how we might distinguish mixtures with the same DM, against the common view that is not possible.) This you cap up in a money quote "The result agrees with the assumption by 't Hooft that Schrödinger equations can be used universally for all dynamics in the universe", also being the second person I've read to directly try to refute Hawking's claim about loss of information from a BH. IOW, another pathway to quantum spring!

          Readers may find my own essay interesting since I explain how we could find out more about quantum states or mixtures than heretofore considered possible. This involves for example repeated interactions (akin to weak measurements) of a single photon, as well as how to distinguish e.g. random H, V polarization mixtures from random R, L mixtures. My essay is indeed related to yours, in that distinguishing such mixtures should profoundly impact the BH information paradox.

            Congratulations on your placement in the contest! It is refreshing to see a rigorously argued contribution within accepted physical theory that bears on such broad issues.

            My own essay was much more philosophically and generally focused, inquiring into the intersection of the foundations of mathematics, computer science, and physics, noting that often the laws of physics themselves seem to be implied by redundancies in information (gauge theories), which are unavoidable.

              Christian,

              My most sincere congratulations on your win. Now it's perhaps the judges turn to be under scrutiny. For such different essays it's astonishing the insight of the Coleman statement; "The career of a young theoretical physicist consists of treating the harmonic oscillator in ever-increasing levels of abstraction." was central for us both.

              You also know from my AGN (BH) galaxy cyclic sequence work that I'm overjoyed by your cutting through the dense nonsense talked about black holes in recent decades. In fact I hope I can now convince you to cut deeper still to reach a simpler reality where all the matter/information accreted is simply accelerated, re-ionised and blasted back out as quasar jets, condensing fresh fermions from the QV to start the next cycle. The problems of re-ionisation, galaxy mass growth, kinetic decoupling etc. thereby also explained. I propose Coleman's statement then also applies to BH's.

              FQXi has never had a better opportunity to fulfil it's remit and enable a (Q?) leap in the understanding of nature. So many theses agreed where the solutions lay, many not even in the top 40, that a major correlation job is required. Do you agree Tom Ray's (excellent I think) idea to compile a 'set of self similar sets'? The term 'herding cats' comes to mind, but is it beyond the wit of man? If the FQXi trustees retreat to doctrine then perhaps one of the title you edit?

              Very best wishes for the final assessment.

              Peter

                Hi Jennifer,

                Thank you very much for your kind words. I am honoured that you are working through the mathematical presentation of my paper. I see that you are among the Finalists. Congrats and let us cross the fingers for the final judgement by the FQXi expert panel of judges.

                Cheers and Best of Luck in the Contest to you too,

                Ch.