Text Size


Tag » black hole firewall
On Jun 30, 2014, at 11:45 AM, Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com> wrote:

"In any case, the SEP is really just a conjecture. Also there is something fundamentally wrong with a theory in which the existence of radiation is frame dependent. Surely it should at least be possible to settle this question empirically?"

No, look at the Unruh effect.
Virtual photons in inertial frames are real photons in coincident non-inertial frames. This is the origin of the firewall debate on black holes.There is a creative tension between equivalence principle and charges emitting photons
If a charge sits at surface of Earth it has a constant proper acceleration in a static LNIF. Feynman would say no problem - constant acceleration does not cause real photon emission - to who? others ask.
If you accumulate a lot of unbalanced electric charge and just let it sit on a lab table do you expect it to radiate real photons? Where is the energy coming from?
In Wheeler-Feynman-Cramer - the emission of real photons is a transaction between emitter and absorber with advanced confirmation. So now there are four cases emitter rest frame in LIF or LNIF, absorber rest frame in LIF' or LNIF'
We do not expect any real photon emission in the geodesic LIF <—> geodesic LIF' case. What about the other three?


On 6/29/2014 9:39 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Still up in the air

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 29, 2014, at 7:00 PM, Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com> wrote:

Here is a more in depth discussion of the problem by R. Scalise, which raises doubts about
Feynman's answer based on more recent work:


On 6/29/2014 6:47 PM, Paul Zielinski wrote:
Informative discussion on this topic by Kevin Brown available here:


On 6/29/2014 6:37 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
1) an electric charge on a time like geodesic should not radiate transverse photons.

2) Feynman showed that a charge in uniform acceleration does not radiate.

This is obvious since radiation reaction depends on the jerk covariant derivative of


Note that this is complicated in LNIFs.

Sent from my iPad

    • Jack Sarfatti shared a link.
      3 minutes ago · Edited
      Begin forwarded message:

      From: "Academia.edu" <notifications@academia.edu>
      Subject: You just got 35 views on "ER=EPR discovered by Jack Sarfatti in 1974"
      Date: November 20, 2013 at 4:26:15 PM PST
      To: jacksarfatti
      Reply-To: "Academia.edu Support" <support@academia.edu>

      Hi Jack,

      Congratulations! You uploaded your paper 2 days ago and it is already gaining traction.

      Total views since upload:


      You got 35 views from Argentina, the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Canada, Brazil, Italy, and Spain on "ER=EPR discovered by Jack Sarfatti in 1974".

      Upload Another Paper

      The Academia.edu Team

      You can disable these alerts in your Notification Settings

      Academia.edu, 251 Kearny St., Suite 520, San Francisco, CA, 94108


      From my Starship book under construction
      Only recently, Lenny Susskind and his students working on hologram universe ideas rediscovered this “ER = EPR”[i] connection in a more mathematically rigorous manner than my precognitive remote viewing intuitions over forty years ago. Back then no one else was linking EPR with ER to my knowledge. I conjecture, semiseriously given the claims of Puthoff and Targ at SRI[ii], that since Lenny and I worked together at Cornell in 1963-4 that I was glimpsing his work of 2012 back then in 1974.

      1973: H. G. Ellis’s “drainhole,” the first plausible stargate candidate where the gravity wormhole is coupled to a massless negative energy spin zero field. That year is also a year of high strangeness, but that story is not for this book.

      1974: Hawking shows that all black holes radiate black body radiation[i] whose peak wavelength lmax is roughly the square root of the area-entropy of the black hole’s horizon, i.e., lmax ~ A1/2 where the entropy S ~ kBA/4.

      During this time I conjectured in the pop physics book “Space-Time and Beyond” that Einstein-Rosen bridges and Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky[ii] quantum entanglement[iii] were two sides of the same coin in some yet not well understood sense. This was a precognitive intuition on my part.

      Remember I wrote the quote below in 1974 almost 40 years ago. See David Kaiser's "How the Hippies Saved Physics" about me and my associates back then. We were way ahead of the pack.

      From the 1975 book Space-Time and Beyond E.P. Dutton co-authored with Fred Alan Wolf and artist Bob Toben - First edition. p. 134 "Each part of space is connected to every other part through basic units of interconnection, called wormholes. Signals move through the constantly appearing and disappearing (virtual) wormhole connections, providing instant communication between all parts of space. These signals can be likened to pulses of nerve cells of a great cosmic brain that permeates all parts of space. This is a point of view motivated by Einstein's general theory of relativity in the form of geometrodynamics. A parallel point of view is given in the quantum theory as interpreted by Bohm. In my opinion this is no accident because I suspect that general relativity and quantum theory are simply two complementary aspects of a deeper theory that will involve a kind of cosmic consciousness as the key concept. Bohm writes of “quantum interconnectedness": 

      However there has been too little emphasis on what is, in our view, the most fundamentally different new feature of all, i.e., the intimate interconnection of different systems that are not in spatial contact ... the well known experiment of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen ... Recently interest in this question has been stimulated by the work of Bell..." D. Bohm & B. Hiley...

      End of excerpt from 1975 Space-Time and Beyond.

      The Wheeler-Fuller pinch-off would then correspond to signal locality (later called “passion at a distance”) corresponding to unitary linear orthodox quantum theory. Stargate traversable wormholes would correspond to what Antony Valentini would years later call “signal nonlocality” in a more general post-quantum theory that was both non-unitary and nonlinear in the sense later clarified independently by Steven Weinberg[iv] and Henry Stapp. [v]

      [i] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-body_radiation

      [ii] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox

      [iii] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

      [iv] http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw48.html

      Steven Weinberg, Physical Review Letters 62, 485 (1989);

      Joseph Polchinski, Physical Review Letters 66, 397 (1991).

      [v] http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/stapp.html

      Henry Stapp Physical Review A, Vol.50, No.1, July 1994

      [i] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0289v1.pdf

      http://motls.blogspot.com/2013/07/papers-on-er-epr-correspondence.html Lubos Motl 


      [ii] http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/CIA-InitiatedRV.html
      Black-body radiation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
      Black-body radiation is the type of electromagnetic radiation within or surrounding a body in thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment, or emitted by a black body (an opaque and non-reflective body) held at constant, uniform temperature. The radiation has a specific spectrum and intensity that...
      Jack Sarfatti
      35 minutes ago via Twitter
        http://t.co/BsDySKcu8y Dick Bierman
        Quantum Consciousness
        Studies by Professor Benjamin Libet at University of California San Francisco in the late 1970's on awake neurosurgery patients suggested that the brain refers information "backwards in time". Simple activities like the sensation of walking (seeing and feeling your feet hit the pavement) may also in…
      Jack Sarfatti
      42 minutes ago via Twitter
        Feeling The Future: Is Precognition Possible? - Wired Sciencehttp://t.co/Bp4Tcm3AKc
        Feeling The Future: Is Precognition Possible? - Wired Science
        Most science papers don’t begin with a description of psi, those “anomalous processes of information or energy transfer” that have no material explanation. (Popular examples of psi include telepathy, clairvoyance and psychokinesis.) It’s even less common for a serious science …
      Jack Sarfatti
      43 minutes ago via Twitter
        Can we feel the future through psi? Don't rule it out http://t.co/iMOsHHL8cY
        Can we feel the future through psi? Don't rule it out | Ed Halliwell
        Ed Halliwell: A study suggesting the existence of precognition should be carefully scrutinised – not dismissed out of hand
      Jack Sarfatti
      53 minutes ago via The BBC website
        BBC Two - The Secret Life of Uri Geller
        Documentary exploring Uri Geller's covert life as a 'psychic spy'.


Lenny Susskind hopes to save both unitarity and the equivalence principle. He writes: "
In this paper I’ve made no attempt to prove that firewalls are absent in all circumstances. Indeed ER=EPR raises the possibility that an angry Alice can hit Bob with a nasty shockwave as he crosses the horizon [10]. What I have assumed is that firewalls are not inevitable— particularly so if the black hole begins with a smooth horizon—and then asked what new concepts are required to resolve the various paradoxes. In a sense I am trying to turn the firewall inevitability arguments into arguments for new physical concepts needed to reconcile unitarity and complementarity."
Lenny makes a mistake here in my opinion: "This is a twist on two commonly held incorrect sci-fi ideas; the first being that super-luminal signals can be sent through wormholes; and the second that superluminal signals can be sent using entanglement. ER=EPR does not allow superluminal signals, but it gets very close, in the sense that there is no limit on how soon after horizon crossing Bob can receive Alice’s message."
Yes, what he says is true for orthodox quantum theory, but not for its extension that corresponds to traversable wormholes held open with either exotic matter, or couplings to a scalar field as described in current literature cited by Enrico Rodrigo in his Stargate book.
I prefer to keep the equivalence principle and junk unitarity because then we have entanglement signal nonlocality - that's a game changer - Brave New World, Men like Gods and we then understand the physical mechanism for consciousness leading to naturally conscious artificial intelligent androids.
“For years it was thought that the Schwarzschild spacetime did in fact exhibit some sort of radial singularity at r = 2GM/c2. Eventually physicists came to realize that it was not Schwarzschild spacetime that was behaving badly. It was his choice of coordinate system. … the true singularity at r = 0.” P. 126, Enrico Rodrigo, “The Physics of Stargates” (Eridanus Press, New York, 2010). This is true, yet it also does not address an important question. While it is true that a freely falling observer Alice can pass through the event horizon of a large non-rotating black hole without feeling lethal tidal stretch-squeeze Weyl curvature tensor forces, nevertheless the universe will start to look weird to her. More importantly, if Bob is in a spaceship hovering at a fixed distance outside the event horizon with rockets firing radially inward, he will quickly find that there is a minimum distance he can get to without being sucked into the black hole. Indeed, if Bob does not want to exceed a 1g weight that minimum distance is even larger. This is because, the real proper acceleration of hovering, also called the “static LNIF” shoots up to a classical infinity at the event horizon because of the square root of the time-time component g00 that approaches zero at the event horizon in the denominator of the relevant equation in Einstein’s General Relativity. One over zero is infinity. Of course quantum gravity will prevent an actual infinity, but practically speaking that does not change the basic situation. Not only that, but Bob will see a very hot thermal blackbody bath of real photons proportional to his actual tensor proper acceleration that will burn him to a cinder. This will be very peculiar and tragic to Alice who passes close by him in her radial free fall into the black hole. Alice will not feel the heat unless she catches fire etc. from Bob’s burning ship that explodes and flings debris hitting her. This is related to recent speculations by Leonard Susskind et-al on black hole firewalls. 
There is a creative tension conflict between Gerard ‘t Hooft’s pontifical proclamation that the S-Matrix must be unitary even in cosmology and Einstein’s equivalence principle that nothing happens to a freely falling observer passing through a horizon g00 = 0 whether that of a black hole whose horizon is observer independent, or whether through our future dark energy de Sitter cosmological horizon, which is observer-dependent. Roughly, unitarity of the S-Matrix of the universe says that there is nothing new under the Sun that quantum information cannot be created or destroyed. This seems to fly in the face of human creativity. Does it really?

Firewall (physics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A firewall is a hypothetical phenomenon where an observer that falls into an old black hole encounters high-energy quanta at (or near) the event horizon. The "firewall" phenomenon was proposed in 2012 by Almheiri, Marolf, Polchinski, and Sully[1] as a possible solution to an apparent inconsistency i...