Paper detail

A divergent volume for black holes calls for no "firewall"

The presumption that Hawking radiations are thermally distributed can be considered to result from their entanglement with the internal degrees of freedom for a black hole. This leads to the "firewall" paradox if unitary evolution continues into Page's time when a black hole evaporates away half of its initial entropy. However, if the interior of a black hole houses sufficient degrees of freedom to maintain entanglement with the outside at all times, unitarity can be preserved during the complete radiation process and no firewall will be required. This paper proposes a scenario that rescinds firewall by introducing the concept of volume for a black hole. Based on the operational definition by Christodoulou and Rovelli [1], we show that the volume and its associated entropy for a collapsed black hole diverges if the final evaporation stage is treated using noncommutative space. This implicates the interior of a black hole possesses adequate space to store information for a black hole of any mass, like the inside of a "magician's bag".

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.