> Hossenfelder doesn't claim that all the experts are wrong. "In his book, Hawking painted a neat picture for black hole evaporation that is now widely used. [

> Hossenfelder doesn't claim that all the experts are wrong. "In his book, Hawking painted a neat picture for black hole evaporation that is now widely used. [...]. It’s simple, it’s intuitive, and it’s wrong."[1] When I read that quote, I originally took it at face value, because she seems like an expert in her field, and it certainly sounds plausible. But now, in the next writeup of hers that I've come across, I find a claim that the description of FTL and causality portrayed by every legit source I've ever encountered is wrong, and that FTL without violating causality is somehow possible within Einstein's framework. That's two incredible claims in as many writeups. Why haven't I seen similar claims from e.g. Brian Greene or David Deutsch? Is it something specific to her own theories? Is it from some branch of theoretical physics that's not accepted by mainstream physicists? Am I misunderstanding the claims? Etc. [1] http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2015/12/hawking-radiation-is-not-produced-at.html?m=1 http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2015/12/hawking-radiation-i...