Non-locality and the Bekenstein bound?

[nomadreid]

On one side, the amount of information is bounded above for any fixed volume of space: this would seem (?) to indicate that information content is local. Yet physical states are not necessarily local, as non-local entanglement shows. So how do you have local information content of a non-local state?

 

[Naty1]

I saved the following which I liked a lot from another discussion in these forums:

The rule for objectivity is not that everyone lives in the same reality, it is that no two observers' realities can be inconsistent with each other. This also means that "complete" information does not imply a unique description of the reality, it merely implies access to all the information that is locally available to that observer in principle. The locality of the information is what preserves causality…”

 

[nomadreid]

Naty1, interesting quote. I shall mull it over. Thanks.

 

[Naty1]

As you probably know, anything outside your timelike [causal] light cone has no effect on you...all the 'space like' stuff is non casual...

and as you also probably know, non local entanglement cannot be used to convey information...
it happens, but we can't utilize it for information transmission.

Also, note that for any 'fixed volume of space' boundary, all you have to do is expand that boundary take a new look, and, viola, all the information resides on the new, larger boundary, along with some new...Just where information 'resides' is not all that clear according to Leonard Susskind.

All in all very intriguing!