CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 56Black Holes and Theoretical PhysicsNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesQuantum many-body systems

Entanglement Wedge Reconstruction and the Information Paradox

Open access
Penington, Geoffrey·2019·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1905.08255arXiv 1905.08255
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

When absorbing boundary conditions are used to evaporate a black hole in AdS/CFT, we show that there is a phase transition in the location of the quantum Ryu-Takayanagi surface, at precisely the Page time. The new RT surface lies slightly inside the event horizon, at an infalling time approximately the scrambling time $β/2π\log S_{BH}$ into the past. We can immediately derive the Page curve, using the Ryu-Takayanagi formula, and the Hayden-Preskill decoding criterion, using entanglement wedge reconstruction. Because part of the interior is now encoded in the early Hawking radiation, the decreasing entanglement entropy of the black hole is exactly consistent with the semiclassical bulk entanglement of the late-time Hawking modes, despite the absence of a firewall. By studying the entanglement wedge of highly mixed states, we can understand the state dependence of the interior reconstructions. A crucial role is played by the existence of tiny, non-perturbative errors in entanglement wedge reconstruction. Directly after the Page time, interior operators can only be reconstructed from the Hawking radiation if the initial state of the black hole is known. As the black hole continues to evaporate, reconstructions become possible that simultaneously work for a large class of initial states. Using similar techniques, we generalise Hayden-Preskill to show how the amount of Hawking radiation required to reconstruct a large diary, thrown into the black hole, depends on both the energy and the entropy of the diary. Finally we argue that, before the evaporation begins, a single, state-independent interior reconstruction exists for any code space of microstates with entropy strictly less than the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, and show that this is sufficient state dependence to avoid the AMPSS typical-state firewall paradox.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1905.08255

Cites

22 of 22 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?

  • The calculation in [4, 5] gives the Page curve of the black hole, not the radiation.

    “It is important to note that this calculation gives the Page curve of the black hole, not the radiation, which is where the paradox lies; we return to this momentarily.”

    From Replica wormholes and the entropy of Hawking radiation (2020) · cites this paper as [4]

    Section 2.3 (p. 25) says the calculation finds the entanglement entropy between the Hawking-radiation reservoir and the CFT (and hence the black hole), and thereby derives the entire Page curve. The paper does say that deriving the curve alone does not explain why extracting radiation decreases that entropy, but it does not say the curve is for the black hole rather than the radiation. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Under very general conditions [42,43] argued that one could obtain this result by computing the generalized entropy S_gen = A/4G + S_bulk of an appropriate codimension-2 quantum extremal surface (QES), where the surface is chosen so that holography suggests this might represent S_rad.

    “In particular, under very general conditions [42,43] argued that one could obtain this result by computing the generalized entropy S gen = A 4G +S bulk of an appropriate comdimension-2 quantum extremal surface (QES) , where the surface is chosen so that holography suggests this might represent S rad .”

    From Transcending the ensemble: baby universes, spacetime wormholes, and the order and disorder of black hole information (2020) · cites this paper as [42]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Due to a maximin argument, one expects this to occur whenever the number of a priori independent quantum states that can exist inside a given bulk domain of dependence with fixed exterior geometry exceeds the area of the codimension-2 surface where the past and future boundaries of this domain of dependence intersect.

    “And due to a maximin argument [42,43], one expects this to occur whenever the number of a priori independent quantum states that can exist inside a given bulk domain of dependence with fixed exterior geometry exceeds the area of the codimension-2 surface where the past and future boundaries of this domain of dependence intersect; see also [110] for more on quantum maximin surfaces.”

    From Transcending the ensemble: baby universes, spacetime wormholes, and the order and disorder of black hole information (2020) · cites this paper as [42]

    Section 2 (pp. 12–13) uses a maximin argument to show that, after the Page time, a non-empty surface near the black-hole horizon has lower generalized entropy than the empty surface. This supports the proposed entropy-versus-area mechanism in the evaporating-black-hole setting. The paper does not establish the stated criterion for arbitrary bulk domains of dependence with fixed exterior geometry, or identify the relevant area as the intersection of such a domain’s past and future boundaries. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The paper proposes a new rule for computing the entropy of quantum systems entangled with gravitational systems that involves searching for islands in determining the entanglement wedge.

    “Inspired by this, we propose a new rule for computing the entropy of quantum systems entangled with gravitational systems which involves searching for “islands” in determining the entanglement wedge.”

    From The Page curve of Hawking radiation from semiclassical geometry (2020) · cites this paper as [8]

    Section 2 (p. 11) discusses computing the entropy and entanglement wedge of a nonholographic radiation system using a quantum extremal surface. But it says the relevant rule was previously considered in [38]; it does not present the quoted island-searching rule as its own new proposal. In the citing sentence, “we propose” refers to the citing authors, not Penington. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The factor of two in equation (3.3) arises because the Hawking radiation is not adiabatic and it generates coarse-grained entropy.

    “The factor of two in (3.3) arises because the Hawking radiation is not adiabatic and it generates coarse grained entropy [4] (see also [8]).”

    From The Page curve of Hawking radiation from semiclassical geometry (2020) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Introduction (p. 6) says black-hole evaporation is a thermodynamic-entropy-increasing process, and Section 2 (p. 12) says it is thermodynamically irreversible. That supports the entropy-generation explanation, but the available passages do not establish that this is the cause of the specific factor of two in the citing paper’s equation (3.3). The factor-of-two discussion in Appendix A (pp. 60–61) concerns coordinate-dependent cut-offs instead. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 73

  1. [1][1] Juan Maldacena. The large-N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity. International journal of theoretical physics , 38(4):1113-1133, 1999. -
  2. [2][2] Edward Witten. Anti de Sitter space and holography. arXiv preprint hep-th/9802150 , 1998. - · arXiv
  3. [3][3] William G Unruh and Robert M Wald. Information loss. Reports on Progress in Physics , 80(9):092002, 2017. -
  4. [4][4] Stephen W Hawking. Black hole explosions? Nature , 248(5443):30, 1974. -
  5. [8][8] Patrick Hayden and John Preskill. Black holes as mirrors: quantum information in random subsystems. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2007(09):120, 2007. -
  6. [10][10] Ahmed Almheiri, Donald Marolf, Joseph Polchinski, and James Sully. Black holes: complementarity or firewalls? Journal of High Energy Physics , 2013(2):62, 2013. -
  7. [12][12] Yasunori Nomura, Jaime Varela, and Sean J Weinberg. Complementarity endures: no firewall for an infalling observer. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2013(3):59, 2013. -
  8. [13][13] Raphael Bousso. Complementarity is not enough. Physical Review D , 87(12):124023, 2013. -
  9. [14][14] Leonard Susskind. Singularities, firewalls, and complementarity. arXiv preprint arXiv:1208.3445 , 2012. - · arXiv
  10. [15][15] Erik Verlinde and Herman Verlinde. Black hole entanglement and quantum error correction. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2013(10):107, 2013. -
  11. [16][16] Leonard Susskind. The transfer of entanglement: the case for firewalls. arXiv preprint arXiv:1210.2098 , 2012. - · arXiv
  12. [18][18] Juan Maldacena and Leonard Susskind. Cool horizons for entangled black holes. Fortschritte der Physik , 61(9):781-811, 2013. -
  13. [19][19] Bartłomiej Czech, Joanna L Karczmarek, Fernando Nogueira, and Mark Van Raamsdonk. The gravity dual of a density matrix. Classical and Quantum Gravity , 29(15):155009, 2012. -
  14. [20][20] Matthew Headrick, Veronika E Hubeny, Albion Lawrence, and Mukund Rangamani. Causality & holographic entanglement entropy. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2014(12):162, 2014. -
  15. [21][21] Aron C Wall. Maximin surfaces, and the strong subadditivity of the covariant holographic entanglement entropy. Classical and Quantum Gravity , 31(22):225007, 2014. -
  16. [23][23] Xi Dong, Daniel Harlow, and Aron C Wall. Reconstruction of bulk operators within the entanglement wedge in gauge-gravity duality. Physical Review Letters , 117(2):021601, 2016. -
  17. [26][26] Shinsei Ryu and Tadashi Takayanagi. Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from the anti-de Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence. Physical Review Letters , 96(18):181602, 2006. -
  18. [27][27] Matthew Headrick and Tadashi Takayanagi. Holographic proof of the strong subadditivity of entanglement entropy. Physical Review D , 76(10):106013, 2007. -
  19. [28][28] Veronika E Hubeny, Mukund Rangamani, and Tadashi Takayanagi. A covariant holographic entanglement entropy proposal. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2007(07):062, 2007. -
  20. [29][29] Netta Engelhardt and Aron C Wall. Quantum extremal surfaces: holographic entanglement entropy beyond the classical regime. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2015(1):73, 2015. -
  21. [30][30] Xi Dong and Aitor Lewkowycz. Entropy, extremality, euclidean variations, and the equations of motion. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2018(1):81, 2018. -
  22. [31][31] Ahmed Almheiri. Holographic quantum error correction and the projected black hole interior. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.02055 , 2018. - · arXiv
  23. [32][32] Kyriakos Papadodimas and Suvrat Raju. An infalling observer in AdS/CFT. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2013(10):212, 2013. -
  24. [34][34] Daniel Harlow. Aspects of the Papadodimas-Raju proposal for the black hole interior. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2014(11):55, 2014. -
  25. [35][35] Kyriakos Papadodimas and Suvrat Raju. Remarks on the necessity and implications of state-dependence in the black hole interior. Physical Review D , 93(8):084049, 2016. -
  26. [36][36] Jan de Boer, Rik van Breukelen, Sagar F Lokhande, Kyriakos Papadodimas, and Erik Verlinde. On the interior geometry of a typical black hole microstate. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.10580 , 2018. - · arXiv
  27. [37][37] Ioanna Kourkoulou and Juan Maldacena. Pure states in the SYK model and nearlyAdS 2 gravity. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.02325 , 2017. - · arXiv
  28. [38][38] Patrick Hayden and Geoffrey Penington. Learning the alpha-bits of black holes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.06041 , 2018. - · arXiv
  29. [39][39] Cédric Bény, Achim Kempf, and David W Kribs. Generalization of quantum error correction via the Heisenberg picture. Physical Review Letters , 98(10):100502, 2007. -
  30. [40][40] Cédric Bény. Conditions for the approximate correction of algebras. In Workshop on Quantum Computation, Communication, and Cryptography , pages 66-75. Springer, 2009. -
  31. [41][41] Cédric Bény and Ognyan Oreshkov. General conditions for approximate quantum error correction and near-optimal recovery channels. Physical Review Letters , 104(12):120501, 2010. -
  32. [42][42] Gary T Horowitz and Juan Maldacena. The black hole final state. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2004(02):008, 2004. -
  33. [43][43] Ahmed Almheiri, Netta Engelhardt, Donald Marolf, and Henry Maxfield. The entropy of bulk quantum fields and the entanglement wedge of an evaporating black hole. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.08762 , 2019. - · arXiv
  34. [44][44] Stephen W Hawking and Don N Page. Thermodynamics of black holes in anti-de Sitter space. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 87(4):577-588, 1983. -
  35. [45][45] Jorge V Rocha. Evaporation of large black holes in AdS: coupling to the evaporon. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2008(08):075, 2008. -
  36. [46][46] Mark Van Raamsdonk. Evaporating firewalls. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2014(11):38, 2014. -
  37. [48][48] Chris Akers, Netta Engelhardt, Geoff Penington, and Mykhaylo Usatyuk. Quantum maximin surfaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.02799 , 2019. - · arXiv
  38. [49][49] Raphael Bousso, Zachary Fisher, Stefan Leichenauer, and Aron C Wall. Quantum focusing conjecture. Physical Review D , 93(6):064044, 2016. -
  39. [52][52] Shohreh Abdolrahimi, Don N Page, and Christos Tzounis. Ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein metric of an evaporating black hole. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.05280 , 2016. - · arXiv
  40. [54][54] Daniel Harlow. Jerusalem lectures on black holes and quantum information. Reviews of Modern Physics , 88(1):015002, 2016. -
  41. [57][57] Pasquale Calabrese and John Cardy. Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment , 2004(06):P06002, 2004. -
  42. [60][60] Don N Page. Average entropy of a subsystem. Physical review letters , 71(9):1291, 1993. -
  43. [61][61] Don N Page. Particle emission rates from a black hole: massless particles from an uncharged, nonrotating hole. Physical Review D , 13(2):198, 1976. -
  44. [63][63] Dennis Kretschmann and Reinhard F Werner. Tema con variazioni: quantum channel capacity. New Journal of Physics , 6(1):26, 2004. -
  45. [64][64] Beni Yoshida. Firewalls vs. scrambling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.09763 , 2019. - · arXiv
  46. [65][65] Ahmed Almheiri, Donald Marolf, Joseph Polchinski, Douglas Stanford, and James Sully. An apologia for firewalls. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2013(9):18, 2013. -
  47. [67][67] Patrick Hayden and Andreas Winter. Weak decoupling duality and quantum identification. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 58(7):4914-4929, 2012. -
  48. [68][68] Juan Maldacena. Eternal black holes in anti-de Sitter. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2003(04):021, 2003. -
  49. [69][69] Sean Cooper, Moshe Rozali, Brian Swingle, Mark Van Raamsdonk, Christopher Waddell, and David Wakeham. Black hole microstate cosmology. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.10601 , 2018. - · arXiv
  50. [70][70] Patrick Hayden, Sepehr Nezami, Xiao-Liang Qi, Nathaniel Thomas, Michael Walter, and Zhao Yang. Holographic duality from random tensor networks. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2016(11):9, 2016. -
  51. [71][71] Patrick Hayden, Michał Horodecki, Andreas Winter, and Jon Yard. A decoupling approach to the quantum capacity. Open Systems & Information Dynamics , 15(01):7-19, 2008. -
  52. [72][72] Frédéric Dupuis. The decoupling approach to quantum information theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:1004.1641 , 2010. - · arXiv
  53. [73][73] Phil Saad, Stephen H Shenker, and Douglas Stanford. JT gravity as a matrix integral. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.11115 , 2019. - · arXiv
  54. [74][74] Seth Lloyd and John Preskill. Unitarity of black hole evaporation in final-state projection models. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2014(8):126, 2014. -
  55. [77][77] Ning Bao, Geoffrey Penington, Jonathan Sorce, and Aron Wall. Beyond toy models: Distilling tensor networks in full AdS/CFT. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.01171 , 2018. - · arXiv
  56. [79][79] Thomas Faulkner and Aitor Lewkowycz. Bulk locality from modular flow. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2017(7):151, 2017. -
  57. [80][80] Chi-Fang Chen, Geoffrey Penington, and Grant Salton. Entanglement wedge reconstruction using the Petz map. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.02844 , 2019. - · arXiv
  58. [81][81] Alex Hamilton, Daniel Kabat, Gilad Lifschytz, and David A Lowe. Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT correspondence: A boundary view of horizons and locality. Physical Review D , 73(8):086003, 2006. -
  59. [82][82] Andrea Cavaglià, Stefano Negro, István M Szécsényi, and Roberto Tateo. T ¯ T -deformed 2d quantum field theories. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2016(10):112, 2016. -
  60. [83][83] Lauren McGough, Márk Mezei, and Herman Verlinde. Moving the cft into the bulk with T ¯ T . Journal of High Energy Physics , 2018(4):10, 2018. -
  61. [84][84] Per Kraus, Junyu Liu, and Donald Marolf. Cutoff ads3 versus the T ¯ T deformation. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2018(7):27, 2018. -
  62. [85][85] William Donnelly and Vasudev Shyam. Entanglement entropy and T ¯ T deformation. Physical review letters , 121(13):131602, 2018. -
  63. [86][86] Victor Gorbenko, Eva Silverstein, and Gonzalo Torroba. dS/dS and T ¯ T . arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.07965 , 2018. - · arXiv
  64. [87][87] Ahmed Almheiri, Raghu Mahajan, and Juan Maldacena. Islands outside the horizon. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.11077 , 2019. - · arXiv
  65. [90][90] Juan Maldacena and Douglas Stanford. Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model. Physical Review D , 94(10):106002, 2016. -
  66. [91][91] Joseph Polchinski and Vladimir Rosenhaus. The spectrum in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2016(4):1, 2016. -
  67. [92][92] Jordan S Cotler, Guy Gur-Ari, Masanori Hanada, Joseph Polchinski, Phil Saad, Stephen H Shenker, Douglas Stanford, Alexandre Streicher, and Masaki Tezuka. Black holes and random matrices. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2017(5):118, 2017. -
  68. [93][93] Phil Saad, Stephen H Shenker, and Douglas Stanford. A semiclassical ramp in SYK and in gravity. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.06840 , 2018. - · arXiv
  69. [94][94] Ahmed Almheiri and Joseph Polchinski. Models of AdS 2 backreaction and holography. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2015(11):14, 2015. -
  70. [95][95] Julius Engelsöy, Thomas G Mertens, and Herman Verlinde. An investigation of AdS 2 backreaction and holography. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2016(7):139, 2016. -
  71. [96][96] Kristan Jensen. Chaos in AdS 2 holography. Physical review letters , 117(11):111601, 2016. -
  72. [97][97] Juan Maldacena, Douglas Stanford, and Zhenbin Yang. Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two-dimensional nearly anti-de Sitter space. Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics , 2016(12), 2016. -
  73. [98][98] Masanori Ohya and Dénes Petz. Quantum entropy and its use . Springer Science & Business Media, 2004.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Penington, G.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1905.08255
arXiv
1905.08255
OpenAlex
W3081775050
Cited by
56
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-, FA9550-16-1-0082, FA9550-16, -16-1-, FA9550-16-1)
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 › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
Keywords
entanglement wedge reconstruction, black hole information paradox, Page curve, Ryu-Takayanagi surface, Page time, black hole evaporation, AdS/CFT correspondence, absorbing boundary conditions, Hawking radiation, scrambling time, entanglement entropy, firewall paradox, black hole microstates, Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, quantum phase transitions

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