Recent content by PeterDonis

I believe it depends on the Anderson parameter ##\kappa##, yes. If I've done the math right, a pair of Lorentz frame velocities ##v## and ##-v## (equal and opposite) becomes a pair of Anderson frame velocities ##v / \left(1 + \kappa \right)## and ##- v / \left(1 - \kappa \right)##, whose...

What thread? Please give a link. Yes, that's fine, although the specific value of ##\tau_1## has no meaning off of that observer's worldline. At the event of the horizon crossing, meaning at the specific point on the infalling observer's worldline where it crosses the horizon, one can assign a...

The issue is not how to tell an assertion from a question. The issue is what questions you are asking and whether they are answerable without you having to unlearn everything you think you know and start fresh by re-learning basic SR and GR--which is beyond the scope of a PF thread. (And yes, I...

If you're asking why relativity of simultaneity is not involved with what we're discussing in this thread, it's because whether or not the infalling person crosses the horizon is an invariant fact about the spacetime geometry and how that person's worldline (trajectory through spacetime) is...

I think you're misunderstanding my point. We all realize that you didn't understand when you made your OP to this thread that you were proposing your own resolution instead of just asking as @Dale advised. (And apparently you still don't understand that.) That's why we kept trying to tell you...

You missed the part where @Dale said not to propose a resolution of your own. Pretty much all of your OP, as quoted below, was proposing a resolution of your own.

Yes, but you aren't giving any references at all to any literature where this "perspective" is discussed. As I said, even in this subforum, we are discussing interpretations that are given in the literature, not people's own personal home-brewed interpretations. You seem to be describing the...

That's good. Note that the paper answers your original question: see the answer to the first bullet at the top left of p. 2. (The reason why the answer to that question is yes is the same reason why the answer to your question of whether someone can fall through the horizon of an evaporating...

In fairness, those are not a tool that would normally occur to someone not familiar with the subject. But they are a very useful tool, yes.

No, that's not the two spacetimes. Both of the things you describe are true in the same spacetime--the "eternal" black hole spacetime (with the "coordinate time" being Schwarzschild coordinates in the exterior region). The two spacetimes are that "eternal" black hole spacetime, and an...

No, nobody has said that. What we have said is that what questions you can usefully ask will depend on what background you have, so you need to take that into account. Unfortunately, that does mean that many questions you are tempted to ask before you have the requisite background won't be...

I don't see how this is a viable claim, since the screen does not exhibit any of the behaviors we exhibit as agents. I know this is the QM interpretations subforum, where the rules are a little broader, but still personal speculation is off limits here. You still need some kind of reference as...

And I learned a lot about how not to use high explosives from watching Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner. :wink:

Yes: he was up there for "a full two days". Your result is ns/day, so you need to multiply by two. :wink:

The correct premises are the black hole models that have been built using GR. Understanding them requires taking some time to learn them, which, as I've already pointed out, means learning the underlying framework of GR that they're built from. (And, as I've also pointed out, you might need to...