Paper detail

The Width Paradox and the Internal Structure of a Black-Hole

In the early days of Black Hole Thermodynamics, Bekenstein calculated the mass dispersion of a macroscopic black hole that results from the stochasticity of the thermal radiation it emits -- it turned out to be negative for black holes massive than $M \stackrel{>}{\sim} 10^{30}g$. He named it the {\it "mass width paradox"}. Here we revisit his early calculation, in an axiomatic approach with a set of more economical assumptions and reach similar conclusions. We argue that the mass paradox results from considering a black hole as a classical system, without an inner quantum structure. As a matter of fact, when we take into account the discreteness of the area levels and assume identical probability transition between contiguous quantum states \cite{bekenstein}, the paradox disappears. In the process we obtain the probability of finding a black-hole in some area eigenstate for a given averaged area. As a by-product, the quantum scenario also points towards a possible solution of the black hole information conundrum.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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.