I Holographic principle versus no-cloning

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the holographic principle and its implications for information retention in black holes, specifically addressing the potential contradiction with the no-cloning theorem in quantum mechanics. It is clarified that while information about a particle may seem to exist in two locations—on the event horizon and inside the black hole—no observer can simultaneously perceive both states, thus avoiding a cloning scenario. The analogy of an electron moving in a CRT illustrates that different reference frames can provide distinct views of the same particle without violating quantum principles. Participants also express a desire for links to previous discussions on the topic for further clarification. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of reconciling general relativity and quantum mechanics in the context of black holes.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
243
If I understand the holographic principle for black holes correctly (which is highly unlikely, but this is a start), the information of a particle falling into a black hole is encoded on the event horizon. But from the view of General Relativity, the particle will not notice a change upon passing the event horizon. Therefore, the information will be in two places: on the event horizon and in the interior of the black hole, which would contradict the no-cloning rule of quantum mechanics, no? Obviously there is a basic confusion on my part which I would be grateful for someone to clear up.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
This is not just confusion on your part. There was a PF thread related to this less than a year ago.

I don't see a contradiction. There is no one observer that can see both expressions of the particle or object at the same time.
A single electron can be moved about in a CRT and it isn't cloning because its just one electron - just different places at different times. The same with an electron crossing an event horizon. The view from the reference frame that sees the event horizon will be of a particular moment in the electrons path. The view from the "other side" of the event horizon will be a more typical view of the electron movement - occurring across a longer period of time.
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid
Thanks, .Scott. That seems to make sense. By the way, I searched for the other thread to which you refer: apparently my search capabilities were not up to the task. If you remember where that thread was, could you forward me the link? I would be grateful.
 
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Asteroid, Data - 1.2% risk of an impact on December 22, 2032. The estimated diameter is 55 m and an impact would likely release an energy of 8 megatons of TNT equivalent, although these numbers have a large uncertainty - it could also be 1 or 100 megatons. Currently the object has level 3 on the Torino scale, the second-highest ever (after Apophis) and only the third object to exceed level 1. Most likely it will miss, and if it hits then most likely it'll hit an ocean and be harmless, but...
Back
Top