Re: The Bekenstein Bound

Eugene Leitl (
Tue, 24 Dec 1996 09:45:37 +0100 (MET)

On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, John K Clark wrote:

> The Bekenstein Bound is thought by almost everybody to be true, because it
> just seems like Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle expressed in a different
> way, however nobody has yet been able to formally prove it. There are several
> "proofs" floating around in the literature, but all of them are wrong,
> I think even Bekenstein would admit that.

Um, of course the "proof" floating around in Tipler's "The physics of
immortality" is just an outline of a proof (because a formal derivation
would go way beyond the scope of that book), but aren't the other ones
supposed to be rigorous proofs? John, since your mathematical/physical
capabilites are quite formidable, could you perhaps have a look at these
proofs in the original literature, and tell us what you think?