On 11/6/2019 3:28 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 6:12 PM 'Brent Meeker'
v<everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> wrote:
Black Holes: Complementarity or Firewalls?
<https://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.3123.pdf>
They say a inertial observer would encounter a firewall and
burn up as soon as he passed the Event Horizon, do you disagree?
>/I disagree./
Where did they go wrong?
*A Note on (No) Firewalls: The Entropy Argument**
**Yasunori Nomura, Jaime Varela*
(Submitted on 29 Nov 2012 (v1), last revised 8 Jul 2013 (this version, v4))
An argument for firewalls based on entropy relations is refuted.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.7033.pdf
*Branches of the Black Hole Wave Function**
**Need Not Contain Firewalls**
**Ning Bao,1 Sean M. Carroll,2 Aidan Chatwin-Davies,2**
**Jason Pollack,3**
**and Grant N. Remmen1*
We discuss the branching structure of the quantum-gravitational wave
function that describes the evaporation of a black hole. A global wave
function which initially describes a
classical Schwarzschild geometry is continually decohered into distinct
semiclassical branches
by the emission of Hawking radiation. The laws of quantum mechanics
dictate that the
wave function evolves unitarily, but this unitary evolution is only
manifest when considering
the global description of the wave function; it is not implemented by
time evolution on a
single semiclassical branch. Conversely, geometric notions like the
position or smoothness of
a horizon only make sense on the level of individual branches. We
consider the implications
of this picture for probes of black holes by classical observers in
definite geometries, like
those involved in the AMPS construction. We argue that individual
branches can describe
semiclassical geometries free of firewalls, even as the global wave
function evolves unitarily.
We show that the pointer states of infalling detectors that are robust
under Hamiltonian
evolution are distinct from, and incompatible with, those of exterior
detectors stationary
with respect to the black hole horizon, in the sense that the pointer
bases are related to
each other via nontrivial transformations that mix the system,
apparatus, and environment.
This result describes a Hilbert-space version of black hole complementarity.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.04955.pdf
*Cool horizons for entangled black holes**
**Juan Maldacena, Leonard Susskind*
General relativity contains solutions in which two distant black holes
are connected through the interior via a wormhole, or Einstein-Rosen
bridge. These solutions can be interpreted as maximally entangled states
of two black holes that form a complex EPR pair. We suggest that similar
bridges might be present for more general entangled states.
In the case of entangled black holes one can formulate versions of the
AMPS(S) paradoxes and resolve them. This suggests possible resolutions
of the firewall paradoxes for more general situations.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0533
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/27816375-f4cf-4397-fe5e-015d69259f35%40verizon.net.
