And even then you won't really be able to decide what it means. As you are free to define all momentum and freed energy to yourself as well as only to the one colliding with you, or anything in between.
In relativity your relative speeds, you being at rest with something else, doesn't matter for that rest mass you define. It's the same all the way to a collision, in where the energy freed will be a result of momentum's interacting.
The most common disagreement with being at rest with a light quanta is that it never can be said to be so. But that is just as true about anything of mass. the only rest we can define is relative something else, an 'absolute rest frame' can't exist unless you have a way of defining what it means universally.
It's even worse that this, depending on your faction. Light as waves, or as particles, or both. From a wave perspective it red shifts into oblivion, I have still to see that explained through a quanta perspective. so I go for the third definition, lights duality.
One thing we define though is that at relative rest with something you can find a restmass, and energy, that is its own, undisturbed by other circumstances. From that follows both red and blue shifts as becoming examples of 'things' interacting with it. As well as if you were able to be at rest with a light quanta you should find it to be the same, no matter what anyone else would like to define it as. So do a accelerating expansion redshift light into oblivion?
energy is a strange subject, and depending on definitions. People talk about 'negative energy' making it sound as if energy quanta comes in two forms. 'Positive' and 'Negative'. That's not correct. Energy is just energy, and how it behave is circumstantial. Mathematically you can set a minus sign in front of part of a calculation but that doesn't mean that this specific quanta just transformed from positive to negative. More than in your mind that is.
Energy has only one real sign as far as I see, positive, so in that motto this just becomes mystical. Apropos Hawking radiation.
" Because of the law that energy must be conserved, the particles trapped inside must then carry negative energy to account for the decrease in the total energy of the black hole. "
But it is circumstantial meaning that f,ex somethings (f.ex a light quantas) absolute red shift will make us unable to measure a energy, And also that it depends on relative positions in time and space for what energy, momentum, etc, you will define it to have. Traveling with it or against it, colliding. The same goes for calling gravity a 'negative energy' as the only thing it produce is 'positive', aka f.ex a watermill. In relativity gravity is about SpaceTime's behavior, not about negative energy or other mysterious gravitons interaction with mass.
I don't really know what the OP is asking, he talks about nutritional perspective, but the difference between animal & vegetable, or fruit & vegetable isn't about nutrition.
"Not only does information spill out, anything new that falls in is regurgitated almost immediately. The revised semiclassical theory has yet to explain how exactly the information gets out, but such has been the pace of discovery in the past two years that theorists already have hints of the escape mechanism."
Still not meaningful information, to us. So I differ between them and so should you, just as I differ between what we define as 'intelligence' and what it might mean from the aspect of life and evolution, cosmic evolution's, physical laws, entropy, dimensions, speeds, ad infinity.