Professor Corda,

Your essay approaches the density of a BH and doesn't evaporate.

"The physical state and the correspondent wave-function are written in terms of an unitary evolution matrix instead of a density matrix."

So the "heat death" prediction by some physicists after billions of years is off? What does your pure quantum state concept do with Big Bang prediction literature, considering the relationship oft made between BHs and the BB? And is there a difference between super-massive black holes and solar black holes?

Jim

    Dear Christian,

    Your interesting essay provides a thorough and clear description of the developments on the paradox. I always had doubts about Hawking's results, but my arguments are altogether different: The

    quantization of the right hand side of Einstein's equations, in a given spacetime, has yielded the interesting effects of the Hawking radiation [SW Hawking, Comm. Math. Phys. 43, 199, 1975]. (However, even here the role of back reaction has not been fully understood.) Recently it has been shown that the right hand side of Einstein's equations, i.e., the energy-stress tensor T^ik, has serious problems [arXiv:1204.1553]. Hence, the results obtained by using it also become doubtful.

    Your essay makes important contribution to this subject. I rated your essay high and wish you best of luck in the contest.

    ___Ram

      Some definitions.

      Dear professor Corda ,

      because FQXi contest is not pure scientific forum, I'd like to introduce some common definitions on BHIP ( may be, for readers - poets and philosophers if You agree )

      Following Hawking, the black hole (BH) information paradox started in 1967 when Werner Israel showed that the Schwarzschild metric was the only static vacuum black hole solution. Later generalizations showed that all information ( i.e. hypothetical quantities about the collapsing body , which we can define as "pseudo-bits of BH information ") ) was lost from the outside region apart from three conserved quantities: the mass, the angular momentum, and the electric charge. This loss of pseudo-bits of information wasn't a problem in the classical theory ( A classical black hole would exist for ever and the information could be thought of as preserved inside it, but just not very accessible ). However, the situation changed when Hawking discovered that quantum effects would cause a black hole to radiate at a steady rate Such sort of the radiation from the black hole would be completely thermal and would carry no pseudo-bits of information. Hence, as is known,

      BHI paradox : What would happen to all that pseudo-bits of information locked inside a black hole that evaporated away and disappeared completely? It seemed the only way the information could come out would be if the radiation was not exactly thermal but had subtle correlations. No one has found a mechanism to produce correlations but most physicists believe one must exist.

      Hawking predicted that if information were lost in black holes, pure quantum states would decay into mixed states and quantum gravity wouldn't be unitary.(1975)

      In other words, any information that falls in a black hole ( in anti de Sitter space ) must come out again. But it still wasn't clear how information could get out of a black hole. Later Hawking (and Hartle ) showed that the radiation could be thought of as tunnelling out from inside the black hole." It was therefore not unreasonable to suppose that it could carry information out of the black hole.

      As the next step, as is known, Hawking invented new

      Law of information conservation - "The information remains firmly in our universe. Thus, If you jump into a black hole, your mass energy will be returned to our universe but in a mangled form which contains the information about what you were like but in a state where it can not be easily recognized. It is like burning an encyclopaedia. Information is not lost, if one keeps the smoke and the ashes. But it is difficult to read. In practice, it would be too difficult to re-build a macroscopic object like an encyclopaedia that fell inside a black hole from information in the radiation, but the information preserving result is important for microscopic processes involving virtual black holes. If these had not been unitary, there would have been observable effects, like the decay of baryons" ( 2005 )

      Let us take here initial definition of Shannon's foundational principle : "One device with two stable positions can store one bit of information, correspondingly, n such devices can store n bits, since the total number of possible states is 2ⁿ and log 2 2ⁿ = n " (1948). Thus, using Shannon-like association between bit and "one device with two stable positions" ( transistor), we can make global generalizations on entity Information in theoretical physics and philosophy of physics. For example,

      we always can translate Hawking law of information conservation in the following form :

      Universe could be considered as a set of transistors with two at least stable positions which can store n bit of information. Because it is based on analogy, we can say that the Universe as a set of transistors can store n pseudo-bit of information. Pseudo-bit information remains firmly in our universe. Thus, If you jump into a black hole, your mass energy will be returned to our universe but in a mangled form which contains the pseudo-bits of information about what you were like but in a state where it can not be easily recognized. It is like burning an encyclopaedia ( another poetical metaphor ) Information is not lost, if one keeps the smoke and the ashes. But it is difficult to read because there is no such thing as physical measurement of pseudo-bits of BH thermal radiation ( thermal information ). Hence, thus, BHIP could be understood also as pseudo-problem, indeed.

      As a consequence, your mathematical solution of BHIP based on non-Weyl solution of Schrodinger equation cannot provide final resolution of this kind of pseudo-problem.

      Respectfully,

      Michael (" Bit from It. Mathematical Clarification ")

        Dear Steve,

        I have no words to thank you for your high judgement on my Essay. I am strongly honoured by that judgement, even if I am not sure to deserve it. Ley me know if you will organize a discussion group on my Essay, I will be pleasured to discuss with you and your friends if you agree.

        I am surely going to read, comment and rate your Essay in next days.

        Thanks again!

        Cheers,

        Ch.

        Dear Jim,

        Thanks for your kind comments with interesting questions.

        Actually, the unitary evolution discussed in my Essay does not imply that the BH does not evaporate, but only that the evaporation process is information preserving. Avoiding evaporation is usually claimed when one invokes the Generalized Uncertainly Principle which should stop evaporation at the Planck scale.

        I did not yet work on potential consequences of the paradox solution on the Big Bang, but they could be intriguing. Mathur recently started to work on this issue. I suggest you to read his paper Awarded in the 2012 Gravity Research Foundation Competition that can be easily download in the Foundation web-site.

        My analysis works for both solar and super massive BH. The difference is that for the latter the evaporation time is much longer.

        Let me know if my replies are OK or if you need more details.

        Thanks again.

        Cheers,

        Ch.

        Hi Christian,

        Great essay and completely in line with the intent of the contest.

        Could I over simplify your work by saying BHs evaporate via quantum jumps with no blackbody

        radiation involved?

        Don Limuti

          Hello Dr Corda

          I found your essay very challenging due to the dense equation set with (necessarily due to page constraints) insufficient description of what prompted each equation. What was unfortunately not clear to me was the reasoning behind each step made. My own work had to recreate mathematics from the ground up, and placed natural constraints on physics that would question the possibility of a singularity (not shown in my essay, but follows immediately from it) and for that matter, the Schrodinger equation as a differential (rather it ought to align with CDT). As such, one wonders at the effect the absence of a singularity within a black hole would have on information that would otherwise be lost within a finite time.

          I would love to know your line of thinking that gave you the approach to this problem, and guided you through the application of the equations used.

          PS. Is there a typo in equation (20) or (22) exp - (...) rather than exp(-...)?

          PPS. I would be keen to receive critical feedback on my essay: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1904

          Hi Ram,

          Thanks for your kind comments and for the high rate you gave to my Essay.

          You know that I have a high opinion on your ideas concerning the deletion of the stress-energy tensor in the right hand side of Einstein Field Equation. It could be interesting to develop your approach in the framework of the gravitational collapse in order to see if Hawking's prevision of black hole radiation is again confirmed.

          Thanks again.

          Cheers,

          Ch.

          Dear Michael,

          Thanks for your particular approach to the BHPI. The metaphor of an encyclopaedia works in my case too. Here, the difference with Hawking's approach is that the emitted radiation is not strictly thermal. Now, the encyclopaedia is not more burned. Instead, one can think as its internal pages have been cutted and cutted and cutted. .. an enormous number of times. Inother words, the encyclopaedia becomes an enormous puzzle. My mathematical solution permits to reconstruct the puzzle. Thus, it also a final solution of your pseudo-problem.

          I am going to read your Essay in next days.

          Cheers,

          Ch.

          Hi Don,

          Thanks for your kind congrats. Concerning your question, we can say that BHs evaporate via quantum jumps generating a quasi-thermal radiation.

          I will surely read your Essay in next days.

          Cheers,

          Ch.

          Hi Christian,

          There is something about your work that reminds me of a though I had about black body radiation and emission spectra of gases. Your work is very different, but there is something about it that may apply to other areas of physics besides BHs. It is just a hunch but take a look at:

          http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/DWT/31_Thermodynamics.html

          And please forgive my unsophisticated techniques, but quasi thermal kinda fits.

          Don L.

          Hello Christian,

          The main task of contests FQXi - new fundamental ideas. You are fine, revolutionary ideas on the fundamental issues of the Universe, primarily in «one of the most famous and intriguing scientific controversies in the whole history of Science is the so called BH information paradox». You had a brilliant analysis of the problem in the spirit of Descartes: "has come under question." You made sweeping conclusions. They provide an opportunity to take a fresh look at the nature of the information and its essence, a deeper understanding of the concepts of 'matter' and 'energy' and their limits and states.

          I wish you every success and respect,

          Vladimir

            Dear Stephen,

            Thanks for your comments. Yes, page constraints limits description of what prompted each equation. On the other hand, after a rigorous definition of the quantum problem, I used a standard method of calculation in quantum mechanics following the textbook by Sakurai. Concerning the line of thinking that gave me the approach to this problem, and guided me through the application of the equations used, actually, I started to work on the problem of black hole quantum levels from two years. I had the intuition to replace the Hawking temperature with the effective temperature in order to take into account the non-strictly thermal character of the radiation spectrum in my paper JHEP 1108, 101 (2011). After this, I refined my results in my Essay Int. Journ. Mod. Phys. D 21, 1242023 (2012), which received an honorable mention in the 2012 Essay Competition of the Gravity Research Foundation, by discussing in detail the correspondence between Hawking radiation and BH QNMs. This winter, I had another intuition, i.e. that energies of Hawking quanta should be proportional to the effective temperature instead of to the Hawking temperature in case of deviation from the strict thermality of the radiation spectrum. At that point, by interpreting the absolute values of the QNMs in terms of total emitted energies, and, in turn, in terms of quantum levels, I developed my Essay by using standard techniques of quantum mechanics.

            Cheers,

            Ch.

            P.S.

            I checked eq. (22), it should be the same writing exp - (...) rather than exp(-...), or not?

            P.P.S.

            I am going to read your Essay in next days.

            Thanks Don. OK, I am going read something on your Digital Wave Theory.

            Cheers,

            Ch.

            Much pleased to have discussions with you, dear Prof. Corda,

            Hawking radiation itself is indicative of the continuum nature of information, in that we may differentiate information paradox in general from specified BH information paradox. This implies that in particle scenario the observational information is not observational in continuum, which has been defined as information paradox in general. Thus we recommend an alternative cosmological model in a scenario of eigen-rotational segments of string-matter continuum is expressional to resolve these information paradoxes, in that the relationship of Planck constant with energy and frequency is not been altered though the Reduced Planck constant is not applicable. Thus time dependent Schrödinger equation is not descriptive in this paradigm, yet unitary matrix is much germane in describing the observational information continuum, in that discrete incident time from linear flow of time may be quantised for near-reality observations.

            With best wishes

            Jayakar

              Christian,

              Your response was quite adequate. Being somewhat of a neophyte in physics and cosmology, I marvel that I can begin to understand some of the issues. Thank you for your research reference.

              Jim

              Dear Vladimir,

              Thank you very much for your kind congrats. I am very honoured by them. I am going to read your Essay in next days. I wish you good luck in the Contest, every success and respect to you too.

              Cheers,

              Ch.

              Dear Christian,

              It was a happy moment for me, among others, when Hawking reversed himself on the issue of black hole information loss.

              What I could never make sense of, is why the transition from initial to final state in black hole thermodynamics (ground to excited state) should be equivalent to a quantum jump -- where we lose information of the time evolution -- because if Hawking radiation exists at all, it should be a classical map t --> T, for the reason that the extreme condition of the black hole horizon gives us a perfect t = 0 potential that is lacking when we choose t arbitrarily.

              So I am all in favor of 't Hooft's efforts to unite classical determinism with quantum mechanics, and I so appreciate your careful argument from pure potential to pure kinetic state. I'm always impressed with your essays and as usual wish you the best in the compeitition! You can count on a high score from me.

              Tom

                Dear Jayakar,

                Thanks for your comments. Yes, you are absolutely right. The issue that in particle scenario the observational information is not observational in continuum is exactly the core of the information paradox. I am surely going to read your Essay in next days. Thanks again.

                Cheers,

                Ch.

                Hi Tom,

                Nice to re-meet you here. Thanks for your kind congrats and for giving an high score to my Essay. I am very honoured by this. I am surely going to read your Essay in next days.

                All the best in the Contest to you too!

                Cheers,

                Ch.