Darrin R. Smith:
> Ok, I've had all I can handle of keeping quiet. I am currently
> reading _About_Time_ by Paul Davies, and I haven't gotten to anything
> explaining 'action at a distance' yet though I've read half the book
> so far. Does this have anything to do with the Swarchoid(sp?) radius
> effect where the observer at the critical radius actually does fall
> into the black hole/singularity while the observer far will see the
> event "frozen in time"??
In general, quantum effects are noise. They're effects that occur at
the limits of observability. You can make observations about them,
but it's only when you observe lots of them that you have anything
"real".
So, yes, single bit errors can happen anywhere, irregardless of time
and distance. When you get lots of quantum effects, you start seeing
patterns, and certain classes of patterns (the ones that correspond to
the existence of energy) are limited in how fast they can propagate.
There is even a relationship between the propagation speed of energy
and the nature of its interaction with the observable environment
(which is a larger scale phenomena).
In principle you could maybe classify an the transition across an
event horizon as a quantum effect, but this is one of those areas
where "it seems like it ought to work" hasn't met up with "here's a
consistent way of looking at things". Look up stuff on grand unified
field theories for random viewpoints.
Obligatory kernel related comment: if you're paranoid about security,
you'll probably want to worry about the hardware you're running on.
Who knows what secrets are buried in the gates of vlsi?
[Insert jokes about shadow passwords here.]
-- Raul