Complementarity is not enough
By R. Bousso. 2012
151 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The near-horizon field B of an old black hole is maximally entangled with the early Hawking radiation R, by unitarity of the S-matrix. But B must be maximally entangled with the black hole interior A, by the equivalence principle. Causal patch complementarity fails to reconcile these conflicting requirements. The system B can be probed by a freely falling observer while there is still time to turn around and remain outside the black hole. Therefore, the entangled state of the BR system is dictated by unitarity even in the infalling patch. If, by monogamy of entanglement, B is not entangled with A, the horizon is replaced by a singularity or "firewall". To illustrate the radical nature of the ideas that are needed, I briefly discuss two approaches for avoiding a firewall: the identification of A with a subsystem of R; and a combination of patch complementarity with the Horowitz-Maldacena final-state proposal.
Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/05c8e9741c00f70aeb4d01de0239afd7f5a7f7c2
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Astronomy and Astrophysics
In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
In Nuclear and High Energy Physics
Citations in the corpus
- Replica wormholes and the black hole interior (2019, methodology): “lations implied the absense of a rewall. Using the Petz map, one can also show that gravitational calculations imply that the interior modes can be reconstructed on the Hawking radiation, i.e. ER=EPR [30, 31, 32, 33]. D A ensemble boundary dual of the simple model In this appendix, we show that the ”
- Quantum computation vs. firewalls (2013, background): “d \A= R B" for reasons we will soon see. It has been suggested by several people10 as a way out of rewalls, but it has so far run into various paradoxes involving apparent cloning and acausality [14,18]. We postpone further discussion of these two options until after we present the rewall argum”
- An apologia for firewalls (2013, background): “Since we for the moment neglect evaporation, we may set aside the concerns of section 2 and take the point of view of strong complementarity (see v1 of [38], and [37]), that the external observer can measure |i〉 but not b̃†, and the infalling observer can measure b̃† but not |i〉.”
- Lessons from the information paradox (2020, result): “) Similar, but somewhat distinct, ideas were considered earlier in [60] and [61] but eventually rejected in favour of firewalls.”
- Time Dependence of Hawking Radiation Entropy (2013, background): “” This paper has elicited a large number of responses, some of which support the firewall idea [162, 163, 164, 165, 166], others seem rather agnostic [167, 168, 169], and yet others of which raise skepticism about it [170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 154, 175, 157, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183].”
- Jerusalem Lectures on Black Holes and Quantum Information (2014, background): “We then find ourselves confronted by the following issues [150, 151, 170] (see also [162, 171]):”
- Comments on black holes I: the possibility of complementarity (2012, background): “Recently there have appeared several papers discussing the relations between the information paradox, entanglement theorems, complementarity and other issues involving the quantum theories of black holes [32–35].”
- Black hole entanglement and quantum error correction (2012, background): “This provocative conclusion has led to a lively debate [9][10].”
- Nonviolent nonlocality (2012, background): “Also, arguments of [5] appear to indicate that the alternate scenario of “black hole complementarity[11]”(1) instead yields a firewall[12,13].”