From: goldenfieldquaternions@gmail.com   
      
   On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 11:02:05 AM UTC-6, ben...@hotmail.com wrote:   
   > LC,   
   > Thank you for your pointer, on FQXi, to Strominger for an introduction   
   > to BH hairs.  I have seen two of his 2017 videos of conference sessions   
   > at Cambridge and Edinburgh.   
   >   
   > 1.  I suspect (by analogy with my "Rasch pairs" work making 1-D metrics   
   > from binary judgments made on pairs of mundane classical objects) that   
   > real particle pairs (for Hawking radiation) can only originate in a   
   > spacetime. So in the limit as the (stretched) horizon is asymptotically   
   > approached there is less and less chance of a real fermion pair being   
   > created.  Maybe this could be related to the trans-planckian problem?   
   > If I understand it well enough, the trans-planckinan problem is that the   
   > pairs have huge energy pushing back their pair creation to the time of   
   > the BH creation (and hence before the spacetime is lost on a stretched   
   > horizon). That would seem to fit in with pair creation needing to be set   
   > in a spacetime.  Has  the trans- planckian problem been overcome or has   
   > it been pigeon-holed while work pushes ahead?   
   >   
   > 2.  I have a number of other questions but will limit them to one or two   
   > related to CCCs.  Can Penrose's CCC nodes and BH's stretched boundaries   
   > be equivalent.  One seen from inside our universe (query being inside a   
   > BH) and the other seen within our universe (looking at a BH from outside   
   > the BH)? Could the CCC node have hairs too?  Up until recently I thought   
   > of a CCC node as being a singularity (a BEC of soft photons in one   
   > state), but my rasch work suggests that the CCC spacetime could break   
   > down gradually. Likewise, doesn't the internal metric of a BH break down   
   > gradually as the Page Time is appproached?   
   >   
   > The smaller the confinement, the larger the energy required. QCD->   
   > QED/weak -> gravity.  The less energy the bigger the theatre of   
   > operations. Do gravitons formed from very soft photon entanglements have   
   > a role connecting very large spacetimes to one another?   
      
   I am not sure about Penrose's CCC, which is not regarded much by most   
   cosmologists. The quantum numbers for a triplet entanglement state of   
   two gluons is identical to the quantum numbers of a graviton. The only   
   difference is that a gravition is weak, while gluons are strong. So a   
   T-duality of r --> 1/r flips a strong coupling constant to a weak one.   
      
   LC   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)