Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Lasers May Solve the Black Hole Information Paradox

Soulskill posted about 5 months ago | from the is-there-any-problem-lasers-can't-solve dept.

Shark 75

astroengine writes: "In an effort to help solve the black hole information paradox that has immersed theoretical physics in an ocean of soul searching for the past two years, two researchers have thrown their hats into the ring with a novel solution: Lasers. Technically, we're not talking about the little flashy devices you use to keep your cat entertained, we're talking about the underlying physics that produces laser light and applying it to information that falls into a black hole. According to the researchers, who published a paper earlier this month to the journal Classical and Quantum Gravity (abstract), the secret to sidestepping the black hole information paradox (and, by extension, the 'firewall' hypothesis that was recently argued against by Stephen Hawking) lies in stimulated emission of radiation (the underlying physics that generates laser light) at the event horizon that is distinct from Hawking radiation, but preserves information as matter falls into a black hole."

cancel ×

75 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Backup your data now (4, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | about 5 months ago | (#46579307)

Throw your storage devices into a black hole, and make sure that your data gets preserved for eternity.

Coming soon, the ability to retrieve the data from the event horizon should it be required again.

Re:Backup your data now (3, Funny)

Moblaster (521614) | about 5 months ago | (#46579503)

Why go through all that trouble? If your hard drive had anything important on it to begin with, it would equal 42.

Re:Backup your data now (4, Interesting)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#46579583)

There are many Hard Scifi novels in which data storage is kept on the event horizon of a black-hole, or more commonly on a neutron star. This isn't a new idea. And before you say "A Neutron star isn't a black hole!" Do the math... it might as well be. Just because the energy required to leave it's gravitational field isn't infinite doesn't mean it's anywhere within the realm of possible to achieve.

Re:Backup your data now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46583039)

But... but... I thought black holes are magic vacuum machines that suck in everything around them into alternate universes! You're telling me they're just big boring lumps of heavy stuff??!??!? Next thing you'll be telling me they didn't eat the Malaysian airplane!

I feel so lost.

Re:Backup your data now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46583577)

if it helps, in a black hole the lump is actually a geometric point with infinite density, so thats pretty damn cool

Re:Backup your data now (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#46586843)

Blackholes do not have infinite density. If they did, the idiots on CNN would have been right... they'd be sucking in the entire universe. Be careful when using the word "infinite". A blackhole has a finite mass and a finite radius. The singularity has no radius, but also has no mass. It's just the center of the gravity field of the entire object.

Re:Backup your data now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46588943)

Pending any updates to GR from some form of quantum gravity, the singularity does have infinite density locally, as any infalling material will reach the singularity in finite time from its own frame, and pile up at that point (or ring in case of spinning black hole). It wouldn't be sucking in the whole universe, as in the far field nothing cares about the matter distribution, but only the total mass which is still finite.

rm -r * (1)

mdsolar (1045926) | about 5 months ago | (#46579623)

used to be the preferred method of data reduction.

Re:rm -r * (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579929)

You're missing an argument and losing one simultaneously.

Re: rm -r * (1)

tysonedwards (969693) | about 5 months ago | (#46580395)

The theory itself states that information of what enters a black hole is itself retained, and due to the time dilation characteristics caused by the extreme gravity, said information would be present for eternity, even after the last hydrogen atom decays and the universe becomes a vast wasteland. While the matter is long gone, the energy remains and thermodynamics teaches us that the two are interchangeable. As such, the parent is making a facetious argument about how should a hard drive be thrown into a black hole, the universe has made a truly perfect backup of the data that is incapable of being destroyed and will itself outlive all matter in the universe.

And as the saying goes, jokes are funnier when they need to be explained.

Re: rm -r * (1)

mdsolar (1045926) | about 5 months ago | (#46583871)

My point was that data reduction to the limit zero data used to be easy to do.

Re:rm -r * (1)

Hillgiant (916436) | about 5 months ago | (#46585779)

mv -f * /dev/null

Re:Backup your data now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579915)

If the black hole is big enough then we should have plenty of time to retrieve it (billions of years plus), the gravitational gradient doesn't have to be particularly steep at the event horizon.

Re:Backup your data now (1)

FatdogHaiku (978357) | about 5 months ago | (#46580175)

Coming soon, the ability to retrieve the data from the event horizon should it be required again.

Oh sure, YOU can get your data from the event horizon... but YOU can not get back FROM the event horizon! So you need to pack a really strong USB cable...

Re:Backup your data now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46580385)

Coming soon, the ability to retrieve the data from the event horizon should it be required again.

For that, you need to harness the collective power of a chariot of sharks, the lead one with radiation source attached to its head, emitting coherent signals at 680nm wavelength. That is how Santa gets his relativistic speed up at Christmas time as well, and the bottomless sack of presents.

Re: Backup your data now (1)

hAckz0r (989977) | about 5 months ago | (#46582721)

Your storage infinite device: 1) create a radio receiver that transcribes the incoming signal into a laser beam. 2) Drop it into a black hole. The data in the beam now becomes infinitely compressed as it tries to get to the event horizion. 3) Send it all your data. 4) pr0fet! Just make sure the EULA states that it is to be used only for perminant storage (as nothing ever comes back out of a black hole.)

Re:Backup your data now (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 5 months ago | (#46584323)

Throw your storage devices into a black hole, and make sure that your data gets preserved for eternity.

  Coming soon, the ability to retrieve the data from the event horizon should it be required again.

Or, down on earth...

It's utterly trivial to write a backup program. Anyone can do it.

The hard part's writing the program to restore from that backup.

time lapse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579335)

how far is the nearest black hole? i mean, they would have to shoot the "laser"(read as dr Evil) and wait how long for the laser to reach the black hole? It should be some years. then, another years to receive the data from that black hole. is that correct?

Re:time lapse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579415)

how far is the nearest black hole?

Got a bunch just across the tracks. Not too expensive either. 10 bucks a throw, 50 for all night..

Re:time lapse (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46579419)

how far is the nearest black hole? i mean, they would have to shoot the "laser"(read as dr Evil) and wait how long for the laser to reach the black hole? It should be some years. then, another years to receive the data from that black hole. is that correct?

Sssssh! You'll spoil their proposal for a research grant!

Re:time lapse (0)

sconeu (64226) | about 5 months ago | (#46579443)

Depends on how fast the sharks travel.

Re:time lapse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579469)

In water or salsa?

Re:time lapse (3, Insightful)

PPH (736903) | about 5 months ago | (#46579559)

I don't think they are proposing shooting a laser at a black hole (that might make it mad). The researchers are proposing a mechanism similar to what happens in a laser as a possible method for preserving information as it is simultaneously swallowed by the black hole. The problem remaining to be solved is one of figuring out if some of the radiation leaving the event horizon is produced by this process as opposed to a random process. In one case, information is preserved. In the other, not (no information was present to begin with).

Re:time lapse (2)

mikael (484) | about 5 months ago | (#46580333)

There was a theory that protons behave as subatomic black holes. Electrons can spin round them but can't enter. Just ionize some hydrogen gas, chill it down to near absolute zero to get an Einstein-Bose condensate and zap it with the lasers, then measure the returned signal.

http://www.energydigital.com/g... [energydigital.com]

Re:time lapse (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46580969)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_electron

Re:time lapse (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46581369)

You can't get a straightforward Bose-Einstein condensate with protons, because they are fermions, while BECs form from bosons (which follow Bose statistics, the named after the same person BECs are named after too). You can form a ferimonic condensate, where the fermions pair off to form pairs that act like bosons, but those pairs are much larger physically than the constituent particles.

That said, the structure of protons are probed on vary small scales quite regularly, as that is essentially what is done by any proton based particle accelerator. The problem with claiming the proton is a black hole is that you would need a rather complicated if not convoluted theory that wouldn't resemble general relativity and black holes at all. The forces involved don't look anything like gravity, and you have to account for the very detailed, quantitative measurements made about the structure of a proton as it doesn't look like a symmetric point particle.

Re:time lapse (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 5 months ago | (#46581277)

why even bother shooting it in a black hole. just shoot it NOT towards anything. then, when you need the data, just travel ahead of the beam and then read the data as it hits your sensor. of course, this is a read-once method for data retrieval.

Re:time lapse (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 5 months ago | (#46581547)

Re:time lapse (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 5 months ago | (#46582083)

No, in that same video, an expert explained, "a small black hole would have swallowed up our entire universe, so we know it's not that". Thank god we have experts to clarify issues like that.

Re:time lapse (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 5 months ago | (#46584629)

Forget small black holes. There's a supermassive black hole right in our galaxy.

First post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579343)

yay!

Re:First post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579359)

Dammit... ok, it was third

Re:First post (4, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 5 months ago | (#46579481)

Time dilation is strong with this one...

Re:First post (1)

rmdingler (1955220) | about 5 months ago | (#46579989)

Well done.

Lasers? Black holes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579491)

What's the friken' shark feel like when he falls into the black hole?

Somebody notify PETA so they can put an end to these horrible experiments.

Re:Lasers? Black holes? (2)

rmdingler (1955220) | about 5 months ago | (#46580001)

What's the friken' shark feel like when he falls into the black hole?

I mean, he's scared at first...who wouldn't be? But as long as you sling some tuna in behind him, it's turtles all the way down.

Re:Lasers? Black holes? (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 5 months ago | (#46582095)

What's the friken' shark feel like when he falls into the black hole?

Probably a lot like a whale or a pot of petunias would in the same situation.

Re:Lasers? Black holes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46582193)

it depends on the size of the black hole. if its small, it'd be ripped to shreds by gravitational forces pretty early on, or possibly even incinerated by the hypothetical firewall. for a black hole large enough that the gravitational effects dont instantly spaghetti-fi it (and assuming no hypothetical firewall), it wouldnt notice anything different upon crossing over the event horizon until they were already quite a ways closer to the singularity (some black hole visualizations [youtube.com] ).

so really, it wouldnt really notice anything until it gravity shredded it.

The truth about the event horizon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579499)

Sharks at the event horizon eat everything falling in and may emit laser light.

Lasers, is there anything they can't do? (4, Interesting)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about 5 months ago | (#46579637)

It's probably nothing to do with black holes, but one of the pioneers of solid-state lasers was on The Life Scientific [bbc.co.uk] this morning. If it's available in your area it's well worth a listen.

Add some sharks and I am SOLD! (0)

Lexible (1038928) | about 5 months ago | (#46579687)

What we all want is spaghettified laser sharks. Amiright!?

Re:Add some sharks and I am SOLD! (1)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about 5 months ago | (#46582563)

Aaaand this is the most internet thing that has ever been said.

Re:Add some sharks and I am SOLD! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 5 months ago | (#46583743)

What we all want is spaghettified laser sharks. Amiright!?

No no no, for a dish like that, you would use linguine with a cream+wine sauce, not spaghetti.

Now, if you want a red sauce, you'd make something more like a cioppino [wikipedia.org] .

Do you people now know anything? ;-)

Re:Add some sharks and I am SOLD! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 5 months ago | (#46583781)

Do you people now know anything? ;-)

Doh. "s/ now/ not/g"

Punchline fail. :-P

All the bits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579745)

The information has to contain *all* the information about the matter falling in. It's essentially the scanner side of a Star Trek transporter.

How/why would a black hole preserve information (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46579829)

A fire, a steam roller or a grinder would obliterate most everything, never mind information, yet if thrown into a black hole it's saves it? No NSA needed?

Since I and surely others have seen this many times, an explanation, say at the undergraduate physics level or better yet with a car analogy would be highly appreciated. "Duh, the compactor crushes the car, but the black hole..."

Re:How/why would a black hole preserve information (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46581435)

Physical information is closely related to entropy, and you can think of the inability to destroy it as related to the inability to lower entropy for free. This would make an information physicist face palm though, so if you look up any introduction to what physical information is, you'll see a more detailed and proper description of the connection to entropy. Another way of thinking of it is not being able to reduce the number of distinguishable states in a system, by having stuff in a black hole that becomes an indistinguishable state.

Re:How/why would a black hole preserve information (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 5 months ago | (#46582131)

And why exactly is it so impossible for matter to become an indistinguishable state? Why can't entropy go down in such extreme conditions? Sure, all our experiments in relatively low gravity seemed to conserve "information", but what gives us the right to extrapolate that to black holes?

It's not like the second law of thermodynamics is really a law anyway. It just says that normally, entropy is so unlikely to decrease spontaneously that, for all intents and purposes, we may safely assume it never does. As long as the system is big enough, because violations of this "law" are already causing trouble in nanotechnology. If only a few atoms are involved, nothing keeps the entropy of the system from decreasing every now and then. But for large enough collections of atoms, sure, they are very unlikely to suddenly organise themselves, temperature difference are very unlikely to evolve the "wrong" way, etcetera. In the kind of conditions we have been able to observe so far.

But black holes... I can readily imagine them destroying information, in fact it seems extremely likely to me that they do, from an intuitive point of view. So why are scientists having such a big problem with that? Sure, entropy always increases in sufficiently large "normal" systems but black holes are anything but normal. I really don't see any compelling reason for them to conserve entropy.

Re:How/why would a black hole preserve information (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46585819)

The discussion of the second law of thermodynamics is kind of irrelevant, because information and entropy are not the same thing, even if closely related in some ways and a crude way to think of things. But getting into quantum information in particular, the in ability to delete states is tightly connected with other aspects of quantum mechanics. This is no longer the statistical nature of thermodynamics that can break on the small scale with enough luck, but breaking the deleting of states causes fundamental problems in quantum mechanics, and would allow for things like violating the uncertainty principle and faster than light communication. While there is always the possibility that current theories are wrong, nothing suggests that this aspect is something that is wrong currently. And while gravity around a black hole is quite a bit stronger situation than as measured around Earth, the situation at the event horizon is not that extreme, and on a local scale would still be kind of boring in some regards (as opposed to at the singularity).

Lasers, storage, black holes (1)

woboyle (1044168) | about 5 months ago | (#46580057)

"Throw your storage devices into a black hole and preserve your information forever." No backups necessary? So, how do you retrieve that file you lost that says you are the inheritor of a serious fortune? :-)

Re:Lasers, storage, black holes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46580183)

"Look it up on Google."

That's what my work colleagues keep saying when I ask them for their documentation. Every once in a while, I get them back: when what they find me on Google is me explaining 10 years ago that they were wrong then, too.

Re:Lasers, storage, black holes (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 5 months ago | (#46582135)

You just get it from the Hawking radiation. There's a bit of math involved and we aren't quite capable of actually doing it yet right now, but if you just wait in the vicinity of the black hole, mankind will figure it out for you in no time at all.

Re:Lasers, storage, black holes (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 5 months ago | (#46583815)

but if you just wait in the vicinity of the black hole, mankind will figure it out for you in no time at all.

Sounds like a good place to send the 'B Ark'. ;-)

A common mistake (1)

Vincie (918910) | about 5 months ago | (#46580277)

The information absorbed from the matter that falls into the black hole must correspond to something existent, and given that nothing can be created or destroyed, even if something passes the event horizon, the corresponding information must remain. There must be an infinity of information dwelling in the nothingness of the cosmos! How else would we be able to be philodoxers? Since philodoxy cannot conceive of nothing, it necessarily follows that, in virtue of the mass doxaston, that there is an infinity of information. And it will be all at our fingertips.

THIS ... THIS. Now THIS is Science! (0)

grep -v '.*' * (780312) | about 5 months ago | (#46580349)

Lasers May Solve the Black Hole Information Paradox

!! But, but -- how do we get the sharks into the black hole? I didn't think they fly! ... Hmm, I guess we'll first have to evolve them into intelligent sapient spaceship-flying beings before we fling them headfirst into a black hole. (Or tailfirst? Which way should the laser point?)

Ob [xkcd.com]

Frist 5Top (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46580809)

irc.easynews.com Need your help! of OpenBSd versus the hard drive to bunch of retarded corpse turned 0ver The failure of mistake of electing

i read my first science fiction black hole paradox (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46581021)

when i was a child in a library dating back to 1920s where a stranded astronaut is in the asteroid belt, with no radio coms, so he gets clever and uses small rocks, thrown into a conveniently close blackhole to morse code an sos. on the theory that x-ray pulses of the matter implosions would reach earth and rescue. they knew in 1920 that xrays can escape a blackhole or someone theorized it.

Re:i read my first science fiction black hole para (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46581459)

The term "black hole" didn't get used until the late 60s, at which point x-rays from Cygnus X-1 was already observed and theoretical work on accretion disks was already started (although the connection between the two took until the early 70s to solidify using better observations from a satellite instead of sounding rockets). The older concept of a dark star wasn't considered completely black though, and was known long before the 1900s to possibly emit light, but it is a rather difference concept that disappeared with GR.

Re:i read my first science fiction black hole para (1)

Pikoro (844299) | about 5 months ago | (#46581723)

Not the 1920s but that was a short story by Azimov called "Old Fashioned" published in 1976 I believe.

paradox? (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 5 months ago | (#46581095)

Is there any empirical evidence that information can't be destroyed?

If not, what would be the consequences of just ditching the law(?) that creates the paradox?

Re:paradox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46581857)

Both classical and quantum physics preserve information at EVERY step---except a black hole. Black holes are defined in a way that prevents information from escaping from them, that creates kind of a paradox... and yet information is preserved in ALL other situations---perhaps there's something we're missing about black holes.

My guess, every time something falls into the black hole, it gets imprinted on the event horizon---and as it is falling in (within the event horizon), the *mass* of the black hole *decreases* just enough to strip away (radiate away) the information imprinted on the event horizon by the falling object that's already inside the event horizon.

Re: paradox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46584657)

If information is indeed lost inside a black hole? It would mean we don't know squat about physics. Do to the current theory of 'Conservation of information', it is a fundamental law of physics! Leonardo Susskind solved this issiue with the holographic principal, I thought?

Re:paradox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46583813)

Is there any empirical evidence that information can't be destroyed?

Yes, that evidence can be found in quite literally everything we have measured to date.
Matter, energy, quantum or only subatomic - all have shown this to be the case in every test and measurement to date.

Sadly we can not easily take measurements of a black hole beyond the horizon, so we don't know if that is the case there or not, but we seem to have no idea how it would Not be the case, other than the simple fact it always has been.

The consequence of information being destroyed is that matter can not form and you and I would not exist. Time would likely exist but moment B would not come after moment A and before C, all moments would be in a random order and possibly different moments in time occurring more than once or never at all, yet the results of those non-existant moments would still show as happened.

Since we do seem to be here and exist, and time flows in one orderly way, that effectively indicates information is normally never destroyed, and thus why we say it never is destroyed.

The math we currently have regarding black holes seems to say it is destroyed, which directly contradicts every other aspect of observed reality to date - thus the contradiction.

Personally, I just really hope our math is wrong. That alone would fix up nearly all (if not literally all) of the problems our current ideas of black holes cause.

For example, the math says the point within a black hole is infinite in mass, despite the fact this is not actually needed for the idea of a black hole to exist!
Yes, infinate is greater than the speed of light, thus prevents lights escape just fine... but any value over the speed of light is above the speed of light too, and have the same effect.

c is roughly 299,792,458 m/s
A black hole technically only requires that light need to travel 299,792,459 m/s for that light to never escape. This removes the infinities completely, the information paradox, and a couple other problems.
But the math says this simple answer is not correct (for reasons I admit to not understand), that it must be infinite.

Re:paradox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46584221)

For example, the math says the point within a black hole is infinite in mass, despite the fact this is not actually needed for the idea of a black hole to exist!

The "math" gives infinite density, not infinite mass. It still has a finite total mass.

A black hole technically only requires that light need to travel 299,792,459 m/s for that light to never escape.

Not sure if you intended to say going slightly faster means it could escape, but any finite change to the speed of light just changes where the event horizon is located, not the specifics of what it does.

how do I know this and they dont? (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 5 months ago | (#46581513)

Any particle that contains mass and energy (so basically all of them) that passes into a black hole does so at a slight angle. That changes the rotation just slightly on one direction. That alone may preserve information about what fell in. That theory is 10+ years old and still the most correct and provable. People just don't like how there's a 2 dimensional arc of possible entry vectors for any given particle so its "information" can't be reversed flawlessly to one single answer.

The holy grail of data storage (1)

JeremyWH (1354361) | about 5 months ago | (#46582075)

Sharks with hard drives riding laser beams into black holes

Re:The holy grail of data storage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46583567)

Hard driven sharks riding black beams make laser holes.

Boot thrown into the blackhole information paradox (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46582213)

If the theory is {
a black hole represents a collapse of spacetime at least up to the atomic level
} then {
1. you lose the notions of localization and temporalization as a result of the spacetime continuum being collapsed. This collapse is similar to the way mathematical equations can lose some significance when two infinities cancel.
2. dwelling on this absence of temporalization {
2.1 Anything thrown into the black hole was/is _always_ encoded in the information that exists defining the black hole, even before it was actually thrown in because, unlike our version of schrodinger's cat experiment, the lack of temporalization means the box is always open _if_ the observer ever ended the experiment by opening it...
2.2 ... and the cat is both dead and alive in the informational sense...
2.3 ... during the whole moment of the black holes existence.
2.4
}

Re:Boot thrown into the blackhole information para (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46582785)

3. dwelling on the absence of localization {
3.1 The information that represents the boot is absolutely conserved within the singularity as long as the boot actually existed for at least a single moment...
3.2 ...regardless of whether the boot was thrown into the black hole or not.
}}

Moot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46583689)

I really don't see the point to the whole theory. First, if we used every electron in the universe, we could store more data than the universe can account for via data compression.

A black hole simply compresses the data infinately. (yeah that is a joke).

But I can truely destroy data by further compressing it in a way that can't be reversed. It's easy to do. Take any number, say 42. Now lets compress it down to a 3. Unless you maintain the exact formula you used to reduce it downb to those two bits, then you have no way of reversing it back to 42. As a result, the data is destroyed.

Re:Moot (1)

LeadSongDog (1120683) | about 5 months ago | (#46584625)

Yeah, but the formula used to compress pi down to one bit sucks at compressing e.

Re:Moot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46585847)

But I can truely destroy data by further compressing it in a way that can't be reversed. It's easy to do. Take any number, say 42. Now lets compress it down to a 3. Unless you maintain the exact formula you used to reduce it downb to those two bits, then you have no way of reversing it back to 42. As a result, the data is destroyed.

Any computation process that does so uses energy and produces heat or emits the information in some other form. If you use a form of computation and an algorithm that is reversible, it can be done without such waste because no information needs to be "lost" in the process.

Stimulated emission of particle/anti-particle pair (1)

mdsolar (1045926) | about 5 months ago | (#46583835)

From the paper: "Note that as 2m anti-particles are stimulated behind the horizon in region II, particle number is conserved. We should also point out that because the incident particle carries energy and momentum, the black hole does not have to donate mass in order to allow the emission of stimulated pairs, as it does for virtual pairs." While stimulated emission of photons plays a big role in this, it is not really the physics of lasers.

Wasn't the information paradox already resolved? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46584691)

That as matter falls towards the black hole time slows, and since it can never be observed entering the black hole the information just ends up getting "smeared" along the event horizon?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>