3 ms·
I was told that this is exactly what the Bekenstein bound ultimately means. It seems reasonable to me, but then why is that not conclusive? Also if anyone who
by guerrilla 3y ago
I was told that this is exactly what the Bekenstein bound ultimately means. It seems reasonable to me, but then why is that not conclusive?
Also if anyone who knows wants to explain why the Bekenstein bound is even a thing, I'd love to hear that too.
- consilient 3y agoExceeding the Bekenstein bound would mean having less-than-equilibrium free energy. See https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07184 https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07184
- guerrilla 3y agoHmm so that would be a system being out of equilibrium but in a "negative" direction, which is nonsense since any amount of non-equilibrium is a positive amount of free energy. So, I don't understand any of the math in that paper but is there any easy/intuitive way to explain why a higher information density would require negative free energy? I guess I need to understand the relationship between information density and free energy first. Hmm.
- consilient 3y ago> So, I don't understand any of the math in that paper but is there any easy/intuitive way to explain why a higher information density would require negative free energy? Not really, no. If you don't have the equivalent of a good undergraduate education in physics very little about QFT is going to be accessible to you.
- guerrilla 3y agoI guess I'll have to wait for the PBS SpaceTime video then...