- #1
RabbitWho
- 153
- 18
Please excuse me for being a complete and utter pleb, my meager knowledge of Leonard Susskind's holographic principle comes from the second episode of the documentary "Through the Wormhole" (which is available online but I won't link to in case it is copyright infringement?).
He talks about the difference in perspective from an astronaut falling into a black hole as compared with an astronaut watching her fall.
I thought I was following it until he got to the difference between a lone astronaut falling into a black hole vs. an astronaut in a plane.
I don't understand why the moving propeller looks so different from everything else.
Also, I figured when I was watching it that the woman falling into the black hole really was falling forever, from our perspective, and really was falling for 3 minutes from hers.
However, talking about this with a friend he thinks that only the photons are left over forever, that that's why we can still see her falling a year later, but she is long gone.
So imagine she started falling at 1km an hour (I suppose that is impossible.. let's just take these numbers as being relative) and a year later I can still see her, not very far away at all, stuck in space, still falling but not visibly moving at all, and I take out a stick and very quickly poke her with it. Setting aside for one moment whether that is possible, Is there anything there to poke?
My thinking is that there is something there to poke, and that you are sending the stick back in time. But I don't know, maybe when looking at her we are looking at the past in the same sense as we are when we look at certain distant stars, there is only light reaching us, the source is gone.
Then there are the logistics of poking someone with a stick like that, would the high gravity mean
- that no matter how fast I moved the stick it would never catch up with her? Even if it was 500 times faster than her original speed?
- that if i could poke her I wouldn't feel it, because the gravity would stop the reverberation from traveling up the stickThanks so much in advance for any light you can shed on the subject!
He talks about the difference in perspective from an astronaut falling into a black hole as compared with an astronaut watching her fall.
I thought I was following it until he got to the difference between a lone astronaut falling into a black hole vs. an astronaut in a plane.
I don't understand why the moving propeller looks so different from everything else.
Also, I figured when I was watching it that the woman falling into the black hole really was falling forever, from our perspective, and really was falling for 3 minutes from hers.
However, talking about this with a friend he thinks that only the photons are left over forever, that that's why we can still see her falling a year later, but she is long gone.
So imagine she started falling at 1km an hour (I suppose that is impossible.. let's just take these numbers as being relative) and a year later I can still see her, not very far away at all, stuck in space, still falling but not visibly moving at all, and I take out a stick and very quickly poke her with it. Setting aside for one moment whether that is possible, Is there anything there to poke?
My thinking is that there is something there to poke, and that you are sending the stick back in time. But I don't know, maybe when looking at her we are looking at the past in the same sense as we are when we look at certain distant stars, there is only light reaching us, the source is gone.
Then there are the logistics of poking someone with a stick like that, would the high gravity mean
- that no matter how fast I moved the stick it would never catch up with her? Even if it was 500 times faster than her original speed?
- that if i could poke her I wouldn't feel it, because the gravity would stop the reverberation from traveling up the stickThanks so much in advance for any light you can shed on the subject!
Last edited: