Paper detail

Cool horizons lead to information loss

There are two evidences for information loss during black hole evaporation: (i) a pure state evolves to a mixed state and (ii) the map from the initial state to final state is non-invertible. Any proposed resolution of the information paradox must address both these issues. The firewall argument focuses only on the first and this leads to order one deviations from the Unruh vacuum for maximally entangled black holes. The nature of the argument does not extend to black holes in pure states. It was shown by Avery, Puhm and the author that requiring the initial state to final state map to be invertible mandates structure at the horizon even for pure states. The proof works if black holes can be formed in generic states and in this paper we show that this is indeed the case. We also demonstrate how models proposed by Susskind, Papadodimas et al. and Maldacena et al. end up making the initial to final state map non-invertible and thus make the horizon "cool" at the cost of unitarity.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 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.