3 ms·

The reduction of information aspect you suggest contradicts one of the key elements outlined in the article (the QM view that information might be transformed (

The reduction of information aspect you suggest contradicts one of the key elements outlined in the article (the QM view that information might be transformed (combined/processed) but never removed). I offer my own, within this realm of discussion, layman's perspective that a black hole might be metaphorically similar to an above ground swimming pool with a (small) hole in the side, within a still larger pool. If there is an orderly structure within the small pool the flow will remove structured information from within and spray it back out. Following the above metaphore and the impression the article gave me: a black hole does something similar but in a more fourth-dimensional hysteresis format. Over time the energy and "information" contained within (or released out as other forms of energy) is observation-ally constant. This would be a lot more like the way a moon can create tides that pull water in and out of a bay. While I would also love for science fiction toys like the Portal Gun (or other wormholes/gateways) to be a reality, I really doubt they're actually possible and even if they are this would probably be as close to realizing them as discovering the principles of electricity were to creating the microprocessor.

parksy 7y ago
Can you point out specifically what I said that contradicts, not trying to be obtuse but I want to reassess my thinking. The reduction of information example I thought agreed with the article, because traditionally (or in other words in layman's understanding) a black hole seems to have been represented as thing that removes information from the universe, which would be like taking a sequence of binary and reducing it to a 1 or 0 through some hidden methods. You'd never be able to get back the original data - unless you had some encoding of the steps taken to reduce, i.e. through a transformation. Genuinely I'm just not quite sure which bit of my analogy contradicts the article, and perhaps I've just not been clear enough in what I am writing, but I appreciate your comment in any regards.
- qubex 7y ago
  Basically quantum theory forbids hashing (because it’s an irreversible form of information loss) — but what you are proposing is not a hash since it produces a stream of bits which re-encode the original string (simply in a different form).

parksy 7y ago

Can you point out specifically what I said that contradicts, not trying to be obtuse but I want to reassess my thinking. The reduction of information example I thought agreed with the article, because traditionally (or in other words in layman's understanding) a black hole seems to have been represented as thing that removes information from the universe, which would be like taking a sequence of binary and reducing it to a 1 or 0 through some hidden methods. You'd never be able to get back the original data - unless you had some encoding of the steps taken to reduce, i.e. through a transformation. Genuinely I'm just not quite sure which bit of my analogy contradicts the article, and perhaps I've just not been clear enough in what I am writing, but I appreciate your comment in any regards.

qubex 7y ago
Basically quantum theory forbids hashing (because it’s an irreversible form of information loss) — but what you are proposing is not a hash since it produces a stream of bits which re-encode the original string (simply in a different form).