imatfaal

3-26, I think Hawking originally said that the information was retained in new black holes in baby universes - but has retreated from that position and now believes that the information is retained within this universe. Susskind, I think, was responsible for the string theory development that AJB referred to.

Boboe - not sure about why you would call your first idea Density, it seems to be a measure of occupancy, and a slightly strange one at that. Personally I would say the rug occupies area_rug/area_floor and not any form of the square root. I think you also need to engage with lorenz boosts rather than just time dilation. Both x and t are transformed by lorenz boosts in a very similar way (x' = (x-vt)gamma and t'=(t-vx)gamma - but they are not the same. The second formula you give is not an equation - as you give it, but does seem to be the factor for calculating proper time through gravitational time dilation. The major question is - why can the two equations for time dilation due to velocity and time dilation due to gravitational effects not co-exist? You state they cannot - but dont give a reason. Not sure about your problem with mass - a kilogram can be viewed as a multiple of the planck mass which is formed from the fundamental universal constants. Many properties of matter do not have maximum finite values. Gravitational effect time dilation has, i believe, been verified in many everyday situations - if it is incorrectly formulated you need to show why experimental data fits.

This question has taxed the greatest minds - Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne had a long running and public bet with John Preskil on whether information was lost or maintained (hawking said lost, preskill maintained.) Hawking has paid up and he now believes that the information is retained within the universe. I don't believe the solution has been found yet; although a group claimed to have done so a few years back.

Further to cypress; could I suggest a thought about units of resistivity and how they come to be what they are.

Could you run that method past me - I only know Euler Matrices as the result of a three dimensional rotation. I hope there is some other Euler Matrix - cos long multiplication is easier for two digit numbers than messing around with Euler Angles/matrices

is this a dastardly combination of heresy and hearsay? Michel and RMW - if you have access to JSTOR then you can find thomas youngs original write up here http://www.jstor.org/pss/107135 . the later experiments showing destruction of the interference when pathway is known are easier to find. And whilst we must be careful to avoid anecdotalism and defending the paradigm merely for its own sake; we must also acknowledge that science is enabled by "standing on the shoulders of giants". QM is remarkably well evidenced, and rigorous.

Hello Wick, not sure which angles you mean. The angle of the two surfaces where they touch is by definition zero. I understand the setup (I think) just not sure of the question

I had always assumed that the extended life in science fiction was merely that the author presumed that by the point in history that we become space-faring we will be better at preventing and curing disease and possibly have some form of gene therapy to combat natural ageing in our genes (telomere extensions or some such) whilst avoiding cancer. Everything I have heard about life in zero gravity tallies with above posts that it is not particularly good for you.

I think this problem is the same as arranging the points in a nice symmetric pattern; ie around the edge of circle - and it is much easier to visualize the relations If you imagine numbering each point 1,2,..n around the circle then a triangle of a single colour is formed when you complete an entire circuit in three legs (ie from point 1 to point 4, point 7 and back to point 1 again). Alternatively you can see this triangle as a journey around in which the total steps add up to n. Example for seven points 1 to 2 to 4 to 1 is three legs making a triangle and the steps (1+2+4 = 7) add up to number of points. With point in a circle and always counting in same direction all triangle must have journey steps adding to total number of points. It is quite easy to show that stars (and possibly a diagonal that halves the shape) that are made from moving a fixed number of steps around the circle will only make a triangle when (total number of points)/(step size) = 3. Similarly it is just a matter of adding three numbers to show that two stars overlaid will not make a triangle iff no three-step combination of their (step size) equals the (total number of points). worked example 14 points steps possible 1 (clockwise) = 13 (anticlock wise) 1,13 2,12 3,11 4,10 5,9 6,8 7,7 these can quite easily be divided into three groups/colours (7,7 6,8 5,9) (3,11 2,12) (4,11 1,13) within these groups no combination of 3 steps makes 14 - there are no triangles formed vertices at points and sides of same colour. Ie there is no 3-combination of 7,7 6,8 5,9 that equals 14, similarly with other two groups. Once all possible steps have been placed it is clear that every point is linked to every other point. For all n from 3 through to 14 this works and at least one formation produces no triangles of one colour (with a little shenanigans for n=6,9,12). For n=15 this Does NOT work. I will continue to think and see if I can find a way to show that 15 is not possible in any method. I will also draw up a nice illustration. Matthew - convinced that this is a dead question on a dead post , but still quite interested in it proof that 14 points can be linked (with links of 3 different colours) and no triangle with vertices at points is made of a single colour