It doesnt get as much attention

 

but just like 

energy 

can not be created or destroyed

but can only be transformed

the same is true for 

information 

as well.

There is a question for you 

here at the end:

Revisiting:

Friday, April 19, 2024

Long and complex 

but worth it at the end. (Four Parts)

Can Information Escape a Black Hole?

Quanta Magazine April 11, 2024

On the post it is 

actually linked under the heading:

"Lets see what another physicist says."

Black holes are inescapable traps for most of what falls into them — but there can be exceptions. The theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind speaks with co-host Janna Levin about the black hole information paradox and how it has propelled modern physics.

(This is a guy who also believes in the holographic principal:

"The three-dimensional world of ordinary experience—the universe filled with galaxies, stars, planets, houses, boulders, and people—is a hologram, an image of reality coded on a distant two-dimensional surface."

"Nothing escapes a black hole … or does it? In the 1970s, the physicist Stephen Hawking described a subtle process by which black holes can “evaporate,” with some particles evading gravitational oblivion. That phenomenon, now dubbed Hawking radiation, seems at odds with general relativity, and it raises an even weirder question: If particles can escape, do they preserve any information about the matter that was obliterated?

"Hawking realized that through a remarkable and subtle quantum process, black holes could evaporate, eventually exploding entirely in a burst of radiation. 

(Light, Energy, Data, Information)

Even in this explosion, nothing can escape. The black hole seemed to take everything it had consumed with it into oblivion, including all quantum information. But where did it all go?"

"Few understood the significance of Hawking’s results initially, but one scientist immediately recognized the crisis that would become known as the information loss paradox. He is here with us today, the famed physicist Leonard Susskind — Lenny to anyone who knows him. In today’s episode, Lenny leads us through the Black Hole War as we ask: Is there a quantum escape hatch from black holes? And will we ever know for sure?"

"The problem with it is, it violates a principle of physics. The principle of physics is “nothing ever gets completely lost.” You say, well, that’s crazy. If I take a piece of charcoal and I burn up the charcoal, having maybe written a message on the charcoal, you’ve lost the message. But that’s not true. Whatever you wrote on that piece of charcoal is encoded in the smoke and the products of combustion."

"Stuff comes out of the black hole. Hawking radiation it’s called. But that Hawking radiation cannot carry any information because that information was from behind the horizon, and nothing can get out."

LEVIN: So at this time, Hawking came down squarely in favor of pure general relativity and the absence of quantum mechanics, claiming absolutely nothing can get out? So the information that fell in, even if the black hole evaporates, it’s like you’re yanking a curtain up, but the stuff is gone, and there’s nothing you can do about it. And he fell down on the side of “information was lost.” But you said, “Wait, there’s no way.” Why was it so important to you to say information cannot be lost? What’s so bad about that?"

"SUSSKIND: Well, the conservation of information is at the root of some of the most far-reaching principles of physics, in particular the principles of thermodynamics. The second law of thermodynamics, the first law of thermodynamics, the conservation of energy, the principles of statistical mechanics, the properties of radiation — all of that is 100% dependent on a set of principles that include the zeroth principle of physics, that information is conserved. It’s called unitarity in quantum mechanics. And what it says is that, if there are little differences in what you begin with, those little differences will remain afterwards. Hawking was saying, what comes out of the black hole will be absolutely independent of what fell in."

If you follow that line of reasoning and ask what it implies, it implies chaos. Nothing makes sense anymore. I just felt that couldn’t be right."

SUSSKIND: It didn’t say anything more or less than, the information comes out encoded extremely subtly in the Hawking radiation, much too hard to ever reconstruct. In classical physics, it was impossible."

Mathew 19:26

(With man this is impossible, 

but with God all things are possible.)

"It became a question of what is called complexity. Complexity is a genuine concept in physics and in mathematics, and it’s just a measure of how hard it is to carry out a task. If you ask how hard it is to carry out the task of reconstructing what comes out of the black hole, you’ll find out that it is exponentially complex."

(Isaiah 55:8-9

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,

    neither are your ways my ways,”

declares the Lord.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth,

    so are my ways higher than your ways

    and my thoughts than your thoughts.")

 "The number of little operations that you would have to do in order to reconstruct what fell into the black hole was so extraordinarily high that, for all practical purposes, Stephen was right, the information was lost. 

But in quantum mechanics, 

it just becomes very, very complex to do it. 

So, the principle of complementarity was really just saying to Stephen, “You’re wrong.”

"Entropy is hidden 

information, encoded 

in microscopic details that you don’t have access to."

(Information is always the result of an intellect.

Nowhere do we see it not being.

I wonder who did the encoding?)

"The idea of the holographic principle was more general. 

Every region of space, 

not just a horizon of a black hole, is encoded."

(Things don't just encode themselves.

It takes an intellect to design them to be able to.)

SUSSKIND: Yeah, that’s true. But that’s not terribly surprising. From the outside perspective, the black hole is very hot. It’s doing what this piece of charcoal would do. It’s very hot. It’s evaporating. And there’s no chance that we could reconstruct the smoke, or the products of combustion, that we could reconstruct what the little bit of writing was on the piece of charcoal. Information gets thermalized. It gets scrambled. So badly scrambled that to reconstruct it is complex beyond imagination 

but in principle possible."

(Isaiah 55:8-9

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,

    neither are your ways my ways,”

declares the Lord.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth,

    so are my ways higher than your ways

    and my thoughts than your thoughts.")

"LEVIN: Welcome back to “The Joy of Why.”

"So in principle, 

if somebody does fall into the black hole, 

becomes completely vaporized, 

you could reconstruct them outside the black hole.

SUSSKIND: From the Hawking radiation.

LEVIN: From the Hawking radiation.

SUSSKIND: Right. But you could ask, how long would it take? How many quantum operations would it take? And the answer is exponentially large in the entropy of the black hole. Now the entropy of an ordinary black hole is very large in itself, I don’t know, 1070. So, we’re talking about times to reconstruct it, which are 10 to the 1070 years. That’s what quantum mechanics would say. The right statement, that Hawking should have made, is 

not that it’s impossible, 

but that it’s extraordinarily complex 

once you fall through the horizon.'

SO?

Every single cell that has ever existed

in your body (trillions)

had or has currently

specific information contained in it

in the form of a genetic code

that makes you you.

According to the laws of physics?

That information can not be destroyed

but only transformed.

So what is your specific information 

(Genetic Code)

going to be transformed into?

And where is it going to reside eternally?

The answer to what happens to it

is determined by 

the only eternal decision

you will ever have to make.

I pray you choose wisely.

I really do.

p.s.

 Galaxies not spreading apart 

even though the space they occupy is expanding

just flat out gives it away 

that the Holographic principal is correct.

That and?

If the amount of solid material in an atom

 is equal to the ratio 

of one second in 30 million years?

Wednesday, May 13, 2026

The boundaries of reality. Chuck Missler Angel Series pt1. "The Berean Challenge" Warning! It explains how your reality really works, a lot of people can not deal with it.

"...one second divided by 30 million years 

so how solid is this podium..."

Then why wouldn't everything be:

"a hologram, 

an image of reality 

coded 

on a distant two-dimensional surface"

Coding requires an intelligence to do it.

It doesn't just happen on its own.

Some people might wanna stop

and seriously reconsider

some long held positions.

I would highly encourage it.

Times getting short.

Well? One of them was right :-).

 

Smolin–Susskind debate

Leonard Susskin

Lee Smolin

"The Smolin–Susskind debate refers to the series of intense postings in 2004 between Lee Smolin and Susskind, concerning Smolin's argument that the "anthropic principle" 

"The anthropic principle, also known as the "observation selection effect", is the hypothesis, first proposed in 1957 by Robert Dicke, that the range of possible observations that could be made about the universe is limited by the fact that observations could happen only in a universe capable of developing intelligent life. Proponents of the anthropic principle argue that it explains why the universe has the age and the fundamental physical constants necessary to accommodate conscious life, since if either had been different, no one would have been around to make observations. Anthropic reasoning is often used to deal with the idea that the universe seems to be finely tuned for the existence of life.

(As soon as people go here with me? I go right to the fact that this DOES N OT EXPLAIN HOW INFORMATION GOT INTO THE DNA MOLECULE. NOT ONLY DOES IT NOT EXPLAIN IT? IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT! Response every single time I have brought that up as a rebuttal to people who purpose this as an explanation for all the fine tuning we see in the universe? Crickets...as in silence. So sorry to destroy illusions...nah...not really, but I digress...)

"Smolin's argument that the "anthropic principle" cannot yield any falsifiable predictions, and therefore cannot be a part of science."It began on July 26, 2004, with Smolin's publication of "Scientific alternatives to the anthropic principle." Smolin e-mailed Susskind asking for a comment. Having not had the chance to read the paper, Susskind requested a summarization of his arguments. Smolin obliged, and on July 28, 2004, Susskind responded, saying that the logic Smolin followed "can lead to ridiculous conclusions." The next day, Smolin responded, saying that 

"If a large body of our colleagues feels comfortable believing a theory that cannot be proved wrong, then the progress of science could get stuck, leading to a situation in which false, but unfalsifiable theories dominate the attention of our field." 

This was followed by another paper by Susskind which made a few comments about Smolin's theory of "cosmic natural selection." The Smolin–Susskind debate finally ended with each of them agreeing to write a final letter which would be posted on the edge.org website, with three conditions attached: (1) No more than one letter each; (2) Neither sees the other's letter in advance; (3) No changes after the fact

Lee Smolin

July 29th, 2004

"If a large body of our colleagues feels comfortable 

believing a theory that cannot be proved wrong,

(Multiverse)

 then the progress of science could get stuck, 

("You are doing a disservice to science")

leading to a situation in which false, 

but unfalsifiable theories 

dominate the attention of our field." 

IT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED.

Next thing you know we will have every two-bit hack with an advanced degree going around spouting off any and every hairbrained idea they have ever had as absolute truth.

OH, excuse me, were already there.

Well, at least we don't have respected scientist going around claiming that things are theories and hypotheses that really arent and intentional misleading the general public yet.

OH, my bad, were already there.

Mix in one part internet 

with healthy dose social media 

and an army of  algorithmic bots 

intentionally designed to propagate falsehood 

and negate the truth...

and ask yourself:

What time is it getting ready to be really?

Your heart and your mind already know what your brain refuses to accept, proving mind/brain duality.

What did Christ say again when the disciples asked him:

...“Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, 

and what will be the sign of your coming 

and of the end of the age?”

Jesus answered: 

“Watch out that no one deceives you." 

(Matthew 24:3-4)

I reiterate,

one of them was right:

Lee Smolin 

July 29th, 2004

"If a large body of our colleagues feels comfortable 

believing a theory that cannot be proved wrong, 

then the progress of science could get stuck, 

leading to a situation in which false, 

but unfalsifiable theories 

dominate the attention of our field." 

Romans 10:9

that if you confess with your mouth 

the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart 

that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

How much longer do you really think you have to make a decision?

Long and complex but worth it at the end. (Four Parts)

 

can not for the life of me find 

where I read it,

or a link to it.

or a screenshot of it lol,

 anywhere.

But I do remember reading it 

(somewhere)

or I wouldn't have included it here:

MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2024

Yeah...

(Link is not working, go figure lol.

Wonder why?)

PART #1

"If "Information" is innate in the universe?

Then life in it without consciousness would be impossible."

(I'm pretty sure it was a Big Think piece 

and maybe even my buddy Ethan who wrote it,

 but honestly? I can not be sure)

It just kind of always stuck with me,

and wouldn't ever leave me alone.

Now I know why.

PART#2

Then?

Then I run across this 

in one of Ethan Seigel's articles.

"Encoded on the surface of the black hole 

can be bits of information, 

proportional to the event horizon's surface area. When the black hole decays, 

it decays to a state of thermal radiation. 

As matter and radiation fall into the black hole, the surface area grows, enabling that information to be successfully encoded. 

When the black hole decays, entropy will not decrease, 

but rather will remain constant, 

as Hawking radiation is an entropy- conserving (adiabatic) process."

To be fair, Ethan also stated in a different article:

"In the far future, there will be no more matter around black holes, but instead their emitted energy will be dominated by Hawking radiation, which will cause the size of the event horizon to shrink. The transition from "growing" to "decaying" black holes will occur whenever the accretion rate drops below the mass loss rate due to Hawking radiation, an event estimated to occur some -10^20 years in the future. How the information that went into making the black hole gets encoded into the outgoing radiation, or whether that's even the case, has not yet been determined."

(Not by science anyway :-)

Got all of that?

:-)

Cause there is plenty more ahead lol.

PART #3

From @courtneyhuntmd (IG).

(Berkley and UCLA educated OBGYN)

(My comments are in parenthesis 

as are the words in all caps or red or both)

"Higgs and Francois Englert prediction that we would find the field energy of information that gives rise to every particle of mass that we see, the building blocks of our chemistry was found in a proton-proton collision in 2012 at CERN. 

This discovery is the Higgs Boson or the God particle (as in OMG we finally found it). The particle that ties light to mass.

In 2016 researchers at Northwestern University were looking at metal Ions and how they act IN a human egg at fertilization. They found that at the collisions of the sperm and the egg there was a stunning explosion of Zinc fireworks out of the PERIPHERY of the cell. 20 billion zinc atoms to be exact if it is a healthy egg. With invitro fertilization this INFORMATION is used to choose a healthy zygote to be put back in a mothers uterus. 

We (Courtney Hunt MD and Kara Dunn) purpose that at the collision or at the merger of the sperm and the egg the quantum entaglement of the subatomic particles of the parents gamates open primordial black holes trapping light or qubits of information 

THAT IS CONSCIOUNESS 

(THAT? THAT I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH) 

in the zinc nano antena. This would be the 

thermoelectric transfer of energy from the quantum field to the zygote that allows the eggs 600,000 mitochondria to jumpstart the DNA transcription and translation that builds the baby. This is the unification of science and religion of Quantum gravity and general relativity. This is the science of genesis."

(Anyway(s) as my buddy says lol. What's all that mean? I'm all in with the quantum tunneling of information from black holes (see the bit from Ethan's article above) as the means for information being put in the DNA. But its not consciousness, its the data transfer and it does not have to be primordial black holes.

Consciousness and the soul are both immaterial so there wouldn't be a physical event that takes place. (Zinc Spark) However an energy (ie data or information transfer) would be physical very likely result in a physical event.

And as mentioned before?

No man knows the miracles God works in the womb.

Ecclesiastes 11:5 

You don't know where the wind will blow, 

(the wind is the breath of life)

and you don't know how a baby grows inside the mother. 

In the same way, 

you don't know what God is doing, 

or how he created everything.

Interesting lady, really like her.

Her book is available

For Free

:-)

at her website

courtneyhuntmd.com

(I do also wanna point out there are other mammals which have zinc sparks as well (not nearly as large however) and we know they don't have the consciousness that we do. So I do I offer any explanation for how DNA gets into Avian, reptilian or fungi species.

(Mystery of God.

Well find out when we get to heaven :-)

"We are Hawking radiation

quantum tunneled 

via the zinc nanoantena and

trapped inside 

a biological time crystal"

Something like that

she says...

Like I said, interesting lady

Hey? Laugh all you want to, at least she is offering an explanation as to how the information got in the DNA molecule, unlike certain molecular biologist that just seem intent on making a name for themselves on TV and social media and ignoring the question all together. Funny her theory popped up on my feed when I was thinking about these things.

 

As usual?

 I did not go looking for it.

Things have a way of just finding me.

PART #4

Let see what some physicist might have to say about it:

The case for why our Universe may be a giant neural network

The cosmos and the “connectome”

"For example, scientists have recently emphasized that the physical organization of the Universe mirrors the structure of a brain. Theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder — renowned for her skepticism — wrote a bold article for Time Magazine in August of 2022 titled “Maybe the Universe Thinks. Hear Me Out,” which describes the similarities. Like our nervous system, the Universe has a highly interconnected, hierarchical organization. The estimated 200 billion detectable galaxies aren’t distributed randomly, but lumped together by gravity into clusters that form even larger clusters, which are connected to one another by “galactic filaments,” or long thin threads of galaxies. When one zooms out to envision the cosmos as a whole, the “cosmic web” formed by these clusters and filaments looks strikingly similar to the “connectome,” a term that refers to the complete wiring diagram of the brain, which is formed by neurons and their synaptic connections. Neurons in the brain also form clusters, which are grouped into larger clusters, and are connected by filaments called axons, which transmit electrical signals across the cognitive system."

Hossenfelder explains that this resemblance between the cosmic web and the connectome is not superficial, citing a rigorous study by a physicist and a neuroscientist that analyzed the features common to both, and based on the shared mathematical properties, concluded that the two structures are “remarkably similar.” Due to these uncanny similarities, Hossenfelder speculates as to whether the Universe itself could be thinking."

"Of course, it takes more than a certain type of structure to think thoughts. A dead brain is just as thoughtless as a rock. The information processing that corresponds to thinking is made possible by neuronal signaling, in which electrical messages are passed from one area of the brain to another. What signals could the Universe be transmitting along these galactic filaments, and could they allow for some type of cosmic intelligence?"

(Well duh...)

"Yet the Universe’s vastness imposes limitations. Hossenfelder explains that sending signals across the cosmos, even at light speed, would take 80 billion years, and 11 million years just for a signal to travel to our nearest galaxy. Combine the vast size of the Universe with the fact that it is expanding, and it would seem like some kind of cosmic-scale information processing similar to the global processing going on inside brains is out of the question.

(Somebody tell Sabine 

its through quantum tunneling.

With God?

Anything is possible.

Mathew 19:26)

"But Hossenfelder speculates over whether “hidden connections” could allow for faster signaling. In a section called “Everything is Connected,” she explains how mechanisms like quantum entanglement or other forms of “non-local connections” could enable longer-range computations."

(Yo Sabine?

You should get with 

Courtney Hunt MD)

“A non-locally connected Universe would make sense for many reasons,” Hossenfelder writes. “If these speculations are correct, the Universe might be chock full of tiny portals that connect seemingly distant places. The physicists Fotini Markopoulou and Lee Smolin estimated that our Universe could contain as much as 10 (to the 360 power) of such non-local connections. And since the connections are non-local anyway, it doesn’t matter that they expand with the Universe."

(A non-locally connected Universe would make sense for many reasons,” Hossenfelder writes. “If these speculations are correct, the Universe might be chock full of tiny portals that connect seemingly distant places. 

(That 100% explains 

what I saw 

in my buddy's corn field 

a few years back.

More on that sometime in the future.

Suffice it to say:

"You don't see what I see".)

Hang on

Theres more yet.

Lets see what another physicist says.

Black holes are inescapable traps for most of what falls into them — but there can be exceptions. The theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind speaks with co-host Janna Levin about the black hole information paradox and how it has propelled modern physics.

"Nothing escapes a black hole … or does it? In the 1970s, the physicist Stephen Hawking described a subtle process by which black holes can “evaporate,” with some particles evading gravitational oblivion. That phenomenon, now dubbed Hawking radiation, seems at odds with general relativity, and it raises an even weirder question: If particles can escape, do they preserve any information about the matter that was obliterated?

"Hawking realized that through a remarkable and subtle quantum process, black holes could evaporate, eventually exploding entirely in a burst of radiation. 

(Light, Energy, Data, Information)

Even in this explosion, nothing can escape. The black hole seemed to take everything it had consumed with it into oblivion, including all quantum information. But where did it all go?"

"Few understood the significance of Hawking’s results initially, but one scientist immediately recognized the crisis that would become known as the information loss paradox. He is here with us today, the famed physicist Leonard Susskind — Lenny to anyone who knows him. In today’s episode, Lenny leads us through the Black Hole War as we ask: Is there a quantum escape hatch from black holes? And will we ever know for sure?"

"The problem with it is, it violates a principle of physics. The principle of physics is “nothing ever gets completely lost.” You say, well, that’s crazy. If I take a piece of charcoal and I burn up the charcoal, having maybe written a message on the charcoal, you’ve lost the message. But that’s not true. Whatever you wrote on that piece of charcoal is encoded in the smoke and the products of combustion."

"Stuff comes out of the black hole. Hawking radiation it’s called. But that Hawking radiation cannot carry any information because that information was from behind the horizon, and nothing can get out."

LEVIN: So at this time, Hawking came down squarely in favor of pure general relativity and the absence of quantum mechanics, claiming absolutely nothing can get out? So the information that fell in, even if the black hole evaporates, it’s like you’re yanking a curtain up, but the stuff is gone, and there’s nothing you can do about it. And he fell down on the side of “information was lost.” But you said, “Wait, there’s no way.” Why was it so important to you to say information cannot be lost? What’s so bad about that?"

"SUSSKIND: Well, the conservation of information is at the root of some of the most far-reaching principles of physics, in particular the principles of thermodynamics. The second law of thermodynamics, the first law of thermodynamics, the conservation of energy, the principles of statistical mechanics, the properties of radiation — all of that is 100% dependent on a set of principles that include the zeroth principle of physics, that information is conserved. It’s called unitarity in quantum mechanics. And what it says is that, if there are little differences in what you begin with, those little differences will remain afterwards. Hawking was saying, what comes out of the black hole will be absolutely independent of what fell in."

If you follow that line of reasoning and ask what it implies, it implies chaos. Nothing makes sense anymore. I just felt that couldn’t be right."

SUSSKIND: It didn’t say anything more or less than, the information comes out encoded extremely subtly in the Hawking radiation, much too hard to ever reconstruct. In classical physics, it was impossible."

Mathew 19:26

(With man this is impossible, 

but with God all things are possible.)

"It became a question of what is called complexity. Complexity is a genuine concept in physics and in mathematics, and it’s just a measure of how hard it is to carry out a task. If you ask how hard it is to carry out the task of reconstructing what comes out of the black hole, you’ll find out that it is exponentially complex."

Isaiah 55:8-9

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,

    neither are your ways my ways,”

declares the Lord.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth,

    so are my ways higher than your ways

    and my thoughts than your thoughts."

 "The number of little operations that you would have to do in order to reconstruct what fell into the black hole was so extraordinarily high that, for all practical purposes, Stephen was right, the information was lost. But in quantum mechanics, it just becomes very, very complex to do it. So, the principle of complementarity was really just saying to Stephen, “You’re wrong.”

"Entropy is hidden 

information, encoded 

in microscopic details that you don’t have access to."

(Information is always the result of an intellect.

Nowhere do we see it not being.

I wonder who did the encoding?)

"The idea of the holographic principle was more general. Every region of space, not just a horizon of a black hole, is encoded."

(Things don't just encode themselves.

It takes an intellect to design them to be able to.)

LEVIN: Now, when some of your friends are saying you’re crazy, does that bother you? Do you just press ahead?

SUSSKIND: It doesn’t bother me in a personal way. It’s frustrating. Why can’t they see what I see? On the one hand, it tells me that if it’s right, it’s worth pursuing, because if everybody thinks it’s wrong and it turns out to be right, that’s a big deal.

(Resonates...more than just a lil bit.)

LEVIN: The problem goes away. But you still don’t know how exactly to calculate the information coming out. Is that true?

SUSSKIND: Yeah, that’s true. But that’s not terribly surprising. From the outside perspective, the black hole is very hot. It’s doing what this piece of charcoal would do. It’s very hot. It’s evaporating. And there’s no chance that we could reconstruct the smoke, or the products of combustion, that we could reconstruct what the little bit of writing was on the piece of charcoal. Information gets thermalized. It gets scrambled. So badly scrambled that to reconstruct it is complex beyond imagination but in principle possible."

(Isaiah 55:8-9

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,

    neither are your ways my ways,”

declares the Lord.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth,

    so are my ways higher than your ways

    and my thoughts than your thoughts.")

LEVIN: Welcome back to “The Joy of Why.”

So in principle, if somebody does fall into the black hole, 

becomes completely vaporized, you could reconstruct them outside the black hole.

SUSSKIND: From the Hawking radiation.

LEVIN: From the Hawking radiation.

SUSSKIND: Right. But you could ask, how long would it take? How many quantum operations would it take? And the answer is exponentially large in the entropy of the black hole. Now the entropy of an ordinary black hole is very large in itself, I don’t know, 1070. So, we’re talking about times to reconstruct it, which are 10 to the 1070 years. That’s what quantum mechanics would say. The right statement, that Hawking should have made, is not that it’s impossible, but that it’s extraordinarily complex once you fall through the horizon.'

(You should already know where Im going by now:

(Isaiah 55:8-9

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,

    neither are your ways my ways,”

declares the Lord.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth,

    so are my ways higher than your ways

    and my thoughts than your thoughts.")

LEVIN: You say there’s no omniscient being. There’s nobody who can simultaneously have the perspective of knowing that there’s —

SUSSKIND: There’s no omniscient being who can see both what’s inside and what’s outside. (Of the black hole)

(Well?

If they cant see what's both 

inside and outside

the black hole?

Then they are not

omniscient

(All knowing)

Our God is.

 SUSSKIND simply doesn't acknowledge that he is studding 

the almighty's creation.

Opps.)

"SUSSKIND: And, from that point on, it became obvious that Hawking was wrong, that all of the information was stored on the boundary of the system and never would be lost."

LEVIN: Amazing.

SUSSKIND: Yeah, it is amazing.

LEVIN: So he capitulates, doesn’t he?

SUSSKIND: He did.

SUSSKIND: I don’t talk to those people, so I don’t know, you see. Well, at least until recently, the older generation of relativists, but even they sort of have given up, I think. Let’s put it this way, 

I think you judge what people think 

not by what they say they think, 

but what they do. 

How many people are actually working on a theory of information loss? How many young people? There’s a very brilliant young generation of theorists now. None of them. And if they are, they’re ignored."

("Let’s put it this way, 

I think you judge 

what people think 

not by what they say they think, 

but what they do." 

Resonates.

LOUDLY.)

"Supposing all of the astronomical information that we have about the world was lost."

(That's kind of crazy proposition given another project Ive yet to start working on.

Lets just say somethings belong on paper.)

"And now we wait this trillion years," 

(We arent going to have to wait that long.

Believe that.)

"a new collection of brilliant astronomers and physicists arise. They’re going to look out at the world, and they’re going to say, “We are truly alone.” Emptiness out beyond their own galaxy. How would they ever reconstruct the true story, that there were all these galaxies which just flew apart, and they’re out there, but we just have no access to them."

 

(It will be preserved)

 "So, if you wait a few trillion years, that’ll be what happens. If you wait orders of magnitude longer than that, everything will form black holes and the black holes will evaporate, and there won’t be anything. A little scary."

(Space time will rip apart before that happens.

Revelation 6:14

"Sky peeled back like a scroll")

Okay so....

After all of that lol.

I can hear them already Lucy

"Drew? Dude?

Whats your point?

The point is:

The information in the DNA molecule

is generated from evaporating black holes.

(non-localized portals)

and quantum tunnels itself there.

Consciousness doesn't exist in Quanta, not in its particles or their "fields"

A collection of electrons/etc should not experience consciousness yet they do,

showing it's immaterial and happens outside of "self".

The "zinc spark" is physical evidence of the data/information transfer.

I can hear them Lucy:

"Yeah but Courtney Hunt MD said 

that it was from primordial black holes."

Yes 

and the physicist assert:

"A non-locally connected Universe would make sense for many reasons,” Hossenfelder writes. “If these speculations are correct, the Universe might be chock full of tiny portals that connect seemingly distant places. The physicists Fotini Markopoulou and Lee Smolin estimated that our Universe could contain as much as 10 (to the 360 power) of such non-local connections."

"If "Information" is innate in the universe?

Then life in it without consciousness would be impossible."

Our universe was designed 

for complex, conscious life.

"But dude?

Why are you even bothering with all of this?"

Well?

Because I was told to.

But why?

Revelation 10:7

But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.”

That's why.

Any more questions?