CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 754Black Holes and Theoretical PhysicsNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesStatistical Mechanics and Entropy

Black hole entropy in canonical quantum gravity and superstring theory

Open access
Susskind, Leonard, Uglum, John·1994·Physical Review D
DOI 10.1103/physrevd.50.2700
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this paper the entropy of an eternal Schwarzschild black hole is studied in the limit of an infinite black hole mass. The problem is addressed from the point of view of both canonical quantum gravity and superstring theory. The entropy per unit area of a free scalar field propagating in a fixed black hole background is shown to be quadratically divergent near the horizon. It is shown that such quantum corrections to the entropy per unit area are equivalent to the quantum corrections to the gravitational coupling. Unlike field theory, superstring theory provides a set of identifiable configurations which give rise to the classical contribution to the entropy per unit area. These configurations can be understood as open superstrings with both ends attached to the horizon. The entropy per unit area is shown to be finite to all orders in superstring perturbation theory. The importance of these conclusions to the resolution of the problem of black hole information loss is reiterated.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.50.2700

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Black hole complementarity postulates that the violation cannot be observed operationally via a quantum complexity conjecture due to Harlow and Hayden.

    “A simple way to resolve this paradox is to invoke the philosophy of black hole complementarity [254,255] which postulates that the violation cannot be observed operationally via a quantum complexity conjecture due to Harlow and Hayden [256]”

    From Holographic spacetime, black holes and quantum error correcting codes: a review (2022) · cites this paper as [255]

    The Introduction (p. 2) discusses the black-hole information paradox, and the Conclusions (p. 27) describe a stretched horizon and information emitted in Hawking radiation. Neither passage states that a violation cannot be observed operationally. Searches for complementarity, observer-dependent observations, and the Harlow–Hayden complexity conjecture found no passage addressing that claim; the citing sentence attaches a separate citation to the conjecture. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The statement that 'a black hole has no hair' is now known to be not always true.

    “In addition, the well-known statement that 'a black hole has no hair'-i.e., from a distance all black holes with the same charge and angular momentum look essentially alike - is now known to be not always true 91 -93 .”

    From Ultimate physical limits to computation (2000) · cites this paper as [92]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [4]4. M. Srednicki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993), 666.
  2. [6]6. M. Ba˜ nados, C. Teitelboim, and J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994), 957; S. Carlip and C. Teitelboim, The Off Shell Black Hole, preprint IASSNS-HEP-93-84, November 1993, gr-qc/9312002. · arXiv
  3. [8]8. J. Polchinski, Commun. Math. Phys. 104 (1986), 37.
  4. [11]11. M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz, and E. Witten, Superstring Theory, Vol. 2 , Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Susskind, L., & Uglum, J.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
ORCID
Susskind, Leonard
Venue
Physical Review D
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
1994-08-15
Volume
50
Issue
4
Pages
2700-2711
ISSN
0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1103/physrevd.50.2700
OpenAlex
W2174613881
Cited by
754
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 12
FWCI
32.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Statistical Mechanics and Entropy
Keywords
black hole entropy, Schwarzschild black hole, canonical quantum gravity, superstring theory, quadratic divergences, open superstring, black hole information loss

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review