1994-04-05 - Re: Bekenstein Bound (was: Crypto and new computing strategies)

Header Data

From: Jim choate <ravage@bga.com>
To: ag588@cleveland.freenet.edu
Message Hash: 948f0600c442c88df4261e7e05e86b1f60271855f43127e4c1beb558476075a8
Message ID: <199404042135.AA29973@zoom.bga.com>
Reply To: <199404041625.MAA08781@eeyore.INS.CWRU.Edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-04-05 21:22:36 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:22:36 PDT

Raw message

From: Jim choate <ravage@bga.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:22:36 PDT
To: ag588@cleveland.freenet.edu
Subject: Re: Bekenstein Bound (was: Crypto and new computing strategies)
In-Reply-To: <199404041625.MAA08781@eeyore.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Message-ID: <199404042135.AA29973@zoom.bga.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


> 
> >
> >You made the assertion in your rebuttal about area -v- volume in relation
> >to black holes and event horizons about the entire universe not being   
> >containable in a volumn, if you accept this premice then you have to accept
> >the premice that the universe is unbouded and hence not containable. This 
> >leads the bounds on the B-equation to be infinitly large number of possible
> >states.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> So what's wrong with that?
> 
> Jay
> 
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I am an attorney, seeking a position in the area of Computer Law.  If you
> know of such a position available, or of someone who may know of such a
> position, please send e-mail!  Thanks.
> 

If you accept the universe as unbounded then you have to throw out the Big Bang
and much of conventional physics, including large parts of what you are trying
to prove.





Thread