arxiv:hep-th/ v1 19 May 2004

Similar documents
Effective temperature for black holes

arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 26 Apr 2008

The Generalized Uncertainty Principle and Black Hole Remnants* Ronald J. Adler

Introduction to Black Hole Thermodynamics. Satoshi Iso (KEK)

Physics 161 Homework 3 Wednesday September 21, 2011

Physics 161 Homework 3 - Solutions Wednesday September 21, 2011

Lecture notes 1. Standard physics vs. new physics. 1.1 The final state boundary condition

Hawking radiation via tunnelling from general stationary axisymmetric black holes

In the case of a nonrotating, uncharged black hole, the event horizon is a sphere; its radius R is related to its mass M according to

Hawking radiation via tunneling from the spacetime of a spinning cosmic string black holes arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 26 Oct 2015

Hawking s genius. L. Sriramkumar. Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai

Chapter 12. Quantum black holes

Yasunori Nomura. UC Berkeley; LBNL; Kavli IPMU

Generalized Painlevé-Gullstrand metrics

A New Decay Mode For Black Holes

The quantum nature of black holes. Lecture III. Samir D. Mathur. The Ohio State University

The Black Hole Information Paradox, and its resolution in string theory

A Panoramic Tour in Black Holes Physics

Inside the horizon 2GM. The Schw. Metric cannot be extended inside the horizon.

The fuzzball paradigm

Cosmic acceleration from fuzzball evolution. Great Lakes 2012

On quasi-normal modes, area quantization and Bohr correspondence principle

The universe or nothing: The heat death of the universe and it s ultimate fate

Black Hole Thermodynamics and the Tunnelling Method for Particle Emission by Ryan James Kerner

The Black Hole Information Paradox, and its resolution in string theory

Hawking radiation and universal horizons

Entropy of Quasiblack holes and entropy of black holes in membrane approach

TOPIC X ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS TO RESOLVE THE INFORMATION PARADOX

Approaching the Event Horizon of a Black Hole

On the deformed Einstein equations and quantum black holes

Entanglement and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy

κ = f (r 0 ) k µ µ k ν = κk ν (5)

15. Black Hole Thermodynamics

Holography Duality (8.821/8.871) Fall 2014 Assignment 2

TOPIC VIII BREAKDOWN OF THE SEMICLASSICAL APPROXIMATION

arxiv: v1 [hep-th] 16 Sep 2008

Radiation energy flux of Dirac field of static spherically symmetric black holes

Quantum Field Theory The Future

Introduction to Quantum fields in Curved Spaces

Black Holes, Quantum Mechanics, and Firewalls

Questions for Black Hole evaporation from Quantum Statistical Mechanics

Black Holes, Holography, and Quantum Information

TOPIC VII ADS/CFT DUALITY

Excluding Black Hole Firewalls with Extreme Cosmic Censorship

Black-Holes in AdS: Hawking-Page Phase Transition

A Model of Holographic Dark Energy

Synchronization of thermal Clocks and entropic Corrections of Gravity

arxiv: v1 [hep-th] 29 Sep 2017

On the partner particles for black-hole evaporation

Black Holes. Jan Gutowski. King s College London

Black Hole thermodynamics

TOPIC V BLACK HOLES IN STRING THEORY

BLACK HOLES: THEIR LARGE INTERIORS. Ingemar Bengtsson

Nonlocal Effects in Quantum Gravity

The One-World-Per-Observer Paradigm of Modern Cosmology

Critical Phenomena in Gravitational Collapse

arxiv: v1 [physics.pop-ph] 14 Aug 2018

Astronomy 421. Lecture 24: Black Holes

Black hole thermodynamics under the microscope

TeV-scale Black Holes

The imaginary part of the GR action and the large-spin 4-simplex amplitude

The Temperature of a System as a Function of the Multiplicity and its Rate of Change

The fuzzball paradigm for black holes: FAQ

Duality and Holography

Quantum Gravity and Black Holes

3 Rindler Space and Hawking Radiation

Monday, April 2, 2012 Reading: Chapter 9: all except 9.6.3, Astronomy in the news?

Does the third law of black hole thermodynamics really have a serious failure?

microscopic theory of gravitation must involve new and previously unanticipated degrees of freedom, which have nothing to do with strings or membranes

Implication of Negative Temperature in the Inner Horizon of Reissner-Nordström Black Hole

SEMI-CLASSICAL ASPECTS OF BLACK HOLE PHYSICS

arxiv: v3 [gr-qc] 4 Feb 2014

BLACK HOLE ENTROPY ENTANGLEMENT AND HOLOGRAPHIC SPACETIME. Ted Jacobson University of Maryland

From Quantum Mechanics to String Theory

Announcement. Station #2 Stars. The Laws of Physics for Elementary Particles. Lecture 9 Basic Physics

8.821 String Theory Fall 2008

The tunneling radiation of Kehagias-Sfetsos black hole under generalized uncertainty principle

Linkage of new formalism for cosmological constant with the physics of wormholes

Why we need quantum gravity and why we don t have it

arxiv:gr-qc/ v1 2 Mar 1999

Decay of a Black Hole

BLACK HOLES (ADVANCED GENERAL RELATIV- ITY)

Black Holes, Complementarity or Firewalls Joseph Polchinski

Focus of Week 5 The information loss paradox in black holes, an example of scientific controversy

Einstein s Theory Relativistic 0 < v < c. No Absolute Time. Quantization, Zero point energy position & momentum obey Heisenberg uncertainity rule

Counting Schwarzschild and Charged Black Holes

Gauss-Bonnet Black Holes in ds Spaces. Abstract

Planck s Hypothesis of Blackbody

Cosmology holography the brain and the quantum vacuum. Antonio Alfonso-Faus. Departamento de Aerotécnia. Madrid Technical University (UPM), Spain

The Cardy-Verlinde equation and the gravitational collapse. Cosimo Stornaiolo INFN -- Napoli

Physics 311 General Relativity. Lecture 18: Black holes. The Universe.

Black Holes: Complementarity vs. Firewalls

Black holes as open quantum systems

arxiv:gr-qc/ v1 31 Jul 2001

What ideas/theories are physicists exploring today?

Scott A. Hughes, MIT SSI, 28 July The basic concepts and properties of black holes in general relativity

Planck s Hypothesis of Blackbody

Black Hole Evaporation and Complementarity. summary of lectures presented by Erik Verlinde y

Simple observations concerning black holes and probability. Abstract

Modern Physics notes Paul Fendley Lecture 35. Born, chapter III (most of which should be review for you), chapter VII

Transcription:

CU-TP-1114 arxiv:hep-th/0405160v1 19 May 2004 A Secret Tunnel Through The Horizon Maulik Parikh 1 Department of Physics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 Abstract Hawking radiation is often intuitively visualized as particles that have tunneled across the horizon. Yet, at first sight, it is not apparent where the barrier is. Here I show that the barrier depends on the tunneling particle itself. The key is to implement energy conservation, so that the black hole contracts during the process of radiation. A direct consequence is that the radiation spectrum cannot be strictly thermal. The correction to the thermal spectrum is of precisely the form that one would expect from an underlying unitary quantum theory. This may have profound implications for the black hole information puzzle. This essay was awarded First Prize in the 2004 Essay Competition of the Gravity Research Foundation. 1 mkp@phys.columbia.edu

Classically, a black hole is the ultimate prison: anything that enters is doomed; there is no escape. Moreover, since nothing can ever come out, a classical black hole can only grow bigger with time. Thus it came as a huge shock to physicists when Stephen Hawking demonstrated that, quantum mechanically, black holes could actually radiate particles. With the emission of Hawking radiation, black holes could lose energy, shrink, and eventually evaporate completely. How does this happen? When an object that is classically stable becomes quantum-mechanically unstable, it is natural to suspect tunneling. Indeed, when Hawking first proved the existence of black hole radiation [1], he described it as tunneling triggered by vacuum fluctations near the horizon. The idea is that when a virtual particle pair is created just inside the horizon, the positive energy virtual particle can tunnel out no classical escape route exists where it materializes as a real particle. Alternatively, for a pair created just outside the horizon, the negative energy virtual particle, which is forbidden outside, can tunnel inwards. In either case, the negative energy particle is absorbed by the black hole, resulting in a decrease in the mass of the black hole, while the positive energy particle escapes to infinity, appearing as Hawking radiation. This heuristic picture has obvious visual and intuitive appeal. But, oddly, actual derivations of Hawking radiation did not proceed in this way at all [1, 2]. There were two apparent hurdles. The first was technical: in order to do a tunneling computation one needed to have a coordinate system that was wellbehaved at the horizon; none of the well-known coordinate systems were suitable. The second hurdle was conceptual: there didn t seem to be any barrier! 1

Typically, whenever a tunneling event takes place, there are two separated classical turning points which are joined by a trajectory in imaginary or complex time. In the WKB or geometrical optics limit, the probability of tunneling is related to the imaginary part of the action for the classically forbidden trajectory via Γ exp( 2 Im I), (1) where I is the action for the trajectory. So, for example, in Schwinger pair production in an electric field, the action for the trajectory that takes the electronpositron pair to their required separation yields the rate of production. Now, the problem with black hole radiation is that if a particle is even infinitesimally outside the horizon, it can escape classically. The turning points therefore seem to have zero separation, and so it s not immediately clear what joining trajectory is to be considered. What sets the scale for tunneling? Where is the barrier? In this essay, I will show that the intuitive picture is more than a picture: particles do tunnel out of a black hole, much as Hawking had first imagined. But they do this in a rather subtle way since, as just argued, there is no preexisting barrier. Instead, what happens is that the barrier is created by the outgoing particle itself. The crucial point is that energy must be conserved [3]. As the black hole radiates, it loses energy. For black holes, the energy and radius are related, and this means that the black hole has to shrink. It is this contraction that sets the scale: the horizon recedes from its original radius to a new, smaller radius. Moreover, the amount of contraction depends on the energy of the outgoing particle so, in a sense, it is the tunneling particle itself 2

that secretly defines the barrier. Now, one might fear that a calculation of Hawking radiation in which energy conservation is critical would require a quantum theory of gravity because the metric must fluctuate to account for the contraction of the hole. This is true but, fortunately, there is at least one regime in which gravitational back-reaction can be accounted for reliably and that is the truncation to spherical symmetry. Intuitively, in a transition from one spherically symmetric configuration to another, no graviton is emitted because the graviton has spin two and each of the spherically symmetric configurations has spin zero. So quantizing a spherically symmetric matter-gravity system is possible because no quantization of gravitons is required. Indeed, the only degree of freedom is the position of the particle (which, being spherically symmetric, is actually a shell). Armed with these insights, we can compute the imaginary part of the action for a particle to go from inside the black hole to outside. A convenient line element for this purpose is ( ds 2 = 1 2M r ) 2M dt 2 + 2 r dt dr + dr2 + r 2 dω 2 2. (2) This line element was first written down by Painlevé and Gullstrand long ago [4, 5], but they apparently missed the significance of their discovery. What they had unwittingly found was a coordinate system that was well-behaved at the horizon. Other nice features of their coordinate system are that there is no explicit time dependence, and constant-time slices are just flat Euclidean space. Working in these coordinates within the spherically symmetric truncation, 3

one calculates the imaginary part of the action, rout Im I = Im p dr, (3) r in where p is the momentum, r in = 2M is the initial radius of the black hole, and r out = 2(M E) is the final radius of the hole. Here E is the energy of the outgoing particle. Notice that this fixes the scale: the classical turning points, 2M and 2(M E) are separated by an amount that depends on the energy of the particle. It is the forbidden region from r = 2M to r = 2(M E) that the tunneling particle must traverse. That s the barrier. One would then expect that, in the WKB limit, the probability of tunneling would take the form Γ exp( 2 Im I) exp( βe), (4) where e βe is the Boltzmann factor appropriate for an object with inverse temperature β. Indeed, this is almost what is found. But, remarkably, an exact calculation [3, 6] of the action for a tunneling spherically symmetric particle yields ( ( Γ exp 8πME 1 E )). (5) 2M If one neglects the E/2M term in the expression, it does take the form e βe with precisely the inverse of the temperature that Hawking found. So at this level we have confirmed that Hawking radiation can be viewed as tunneling particles and, furthermore, we have verified Hawking s thermal formula. But, unlike traditional derivations, we have also taken into account the conservation 4

of energy and this yields a correction, the additional term E/2M. Thus the spectrum is not precisely thermal! This is exciting news because arguments that information is lost during black hole evaporation rely in part on the assumption of strict thermality of the spectrum [7]. That the spectrum is not precisely thermal may open the way to looking for information-carrying correlations in the spectrum work on this continues. Indeed, the exact expression including the E/2M term can be cast rather intriguingly in the form Γ exp( S), (6) where S is the change in the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the hole. This is a very interesting form for the answer to take for a number of reasons, including the fact that it is consistent with unitarity. Put another way, our result agrees exactly with what we would expect from a quantum-mechanical microscopic theory of black holes in which there is no information loss! For quantum theory teaches us that the rate for a process is expressible as the square of the amplitude multiplied by the phase space factor. In turn, the phase space factor is obtained by summing over final states and averaging over initial states. But, for a black hole, the number of such states is just given by the exponent of the final and initial Bekenstein-Hawking entropy: Γ = amplitude 2 (phase space factor) es final e S initial = exp( S). (7) Quantum mechanics, we observe, is in perfect agreement with our answer. 5

References [1] S. W. Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes, Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975) 199. [2] G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, Action integrals and partition functions in quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D15 (1977) 2752. [3] M. K. Parikh, Energy Conservation and Hawking Radiation, hep-th/0402166. [4] P. Painlevé, La mécanique classique et la théorie de la relativité, Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris) 173 (1921) 677. [5] A. Gullstrand, Allgemeine Lösung des statischen Einkörper-problems in der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie, Arkiv. Mat. Astron. Fys. 16 (1922) 1. [6] M. K. Parikh and F. Wilczek, Hawking Radiation as Tunneling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 5042; hep-th/9907001. [7] S. W. Hawking, Breakdown of Predictability in Gravitational Collapse, Phys. Rev. D14 (1976) 2460. 6