Entanglement wedge reconstruction and the information paradox

By Geoffrey Penington. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2019

929 citations recorded by the source corpus.

When absorbing boundary conditions are used to evaporate a black hole in AdS/CFT, we show that there is a phase transition in the location of the quantum Ryu-Takayanagi surface, at precisely the Page time. The new RT surface lies slightly inside the event horizon, at an infalling time approximately the scrambling time β/2πlogSBH into the past. We can immediately derive the Page curve, using the Ryu-Takayanagi formula, and the Hayden-Preskill decoding criterion, using entanglement wedge reconstruction. Because part of the interior is now encoded in the early Hawking radiation, the decreasing entanglement entropy of the black hole is exactly consistent with the semiclassical bulk entanglement of the late-time Hawking modes, despite the absence of a firewall. By studying the entanglement wedge of highly mixed states, we can understand the state dependence of the interior reconstructions. A crucial role is played by the existence of tiny, non-perturbative errors in entanglement wedge reconstruction. Directly after the Page time, interior operators can only be reconstructed from the Hawking radiation if the initial state of the black hole is known. As the black hole continues to evaporate, reconstructions become possible that simultaneously work for a large class of initial states. Using similar techniques, we generalise Hayden-Preskill to show how the amount of Hawking radiation required to reconstruct a large diary, thrown into the black hole, depends on both the energy and the entropy of the diary. Finally we argue that, before the evaporation begins, a single, state-independent interior reconstruction exists for any code space of microstates with entropy strictly less than the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, and show that this is sufficient state dependence to avoid the AMPSS typical-state firewall paradox.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5e13a5954ece712832ff094719e0603f908af95b

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

  1. S. Raju
  2. D. Stanford
  3. R. Myers
  4. J. Maldacena
  5. D. Harlow
  6. S. Shenker
  7. Thomas Hartman
  8. L. Susskind

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

  1. S. Raju
  2. D. Stanford
  3. R. Myers
  4. J. Maldacena
  5. S. Shenker
  6. Ahmed Almheiri
  7. H. Chen
  8. Zhenbin Yang

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

  1. S. Raju
  2. R. Myers
  3. D. Stanford
  4. J. Maldacena
  5. D. Harlow
  6. S. Shenker
  7. Thomas Hartman
  8. H. Chen

Citations in the corpus