And in turn thanks tashja for that well balanced and positive message - refreshingly entirely free of the invective and bluster others seem wedded to.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! As per an earlier post, I could have kept it going by pressing one or more of the 3 Profs with further probing questions - especially trying to tie down the elusive nature of the assumed physically real -ve energy quanta. Which must according to HR models be 'physically there' in precisely the same sense as the predicted +ve quanta HR received externally are 'there'. And whether modelling of such is in terms of particle or field is unimportant. Similarly for trying to fit it all into the perspective of a near-horizon observer. Any final 'accounting balance' must be able to be performed from the coordinate perspective of a distant observer. Only Prof. Helfer acknowledged there was a problem with all that. Anyway one gets to be able to predict the direction kicking the can further along would all take - going from courteous to curt - at best. In a way it was stupid of me to participate at all, given my overall position as per 2nd para in #135. Sometimes the temptation gets too much.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And yes I liked at least the spirit of much of RJB's postings, but haven't seen him around for quite some time. Wouldn't blame him for having gotten jack of SF and just moved on to more pleasant pastures!