CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 2

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Quantum mechanics and observers for gravity in a closed universe

Harlow, Daniel, Usatyuk, Mykhaylo, Zhao, Ying·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2501.02359arXiv 2501.02359
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Recent arguments based on the quantum extremal surface formula or the gravitational path integral have given fairly compelling evidence that the Hilbert space of quantum gravity in a closed universe is one-dimensional and real. How can this be consistent with the complexity of our own experiences? In this paper we propose that the experiences of any observer $Ob$ in a closed universe can be approximately described by a quantum mechanical theory with a Hilbert space whose dimension is roughly $e^{S_{Ob}}$, where $S_{Ob}$ is the number of degrees of freedom of $Ob$. Moreover we argue that the errors in this description are exponentially small in $S_{Ob}$. We give evidence for this proposal using the gravitational path integral and the coding interpretation of holography, and we explain how similar effects arise in black hole physics in appropriate circumstances.

Overview

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.2501.02359

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Modified encoding map ˆ V including an entangled observer Ob ′ who is cloned out of the system. The orthogonal map O is the same as in figure 1.
Figure 2 Modified encoding map ˆ V including an entangled observer Ob ′ who is cloned out of the system. The orthogonal map O is the same as in figure 1.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 3
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Using the gravitational path integral to compute the average of the closed universe inner product. In general geometries where the boundaries separately cap off can also contribute, but we don't draw them since in the models we consider below they vanish.
Figure 4 Using the gravitational path integral to compute the average of the closed universe inner product. In general geometries where the boundaries separately cap off can also contribute, but we don't draw them since in the models we consider below they vanish.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Computing the averages of the two sides of (2.3) using the gravitational path integral; they are equal by the permutation invariance of the set of things we sum over [5].
Figure 5 Computing the averages of the two sides of (2.3) using the gravitational path integral; they are equal by the permutation invariance of the set of things we sum over [5].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 Preparing a closed universe state | i ⟩ on a Cauchy slice Σ using the gravitational path integral with a past Euclidean AdS boundary of length β with an operator O i inserted.
Figure 6 Preparing a closed universe state | i ⟩ on a Cauchy slice Σ using the gravitational path integral with a past Euclidean AdS boundary of length β with an operator O i inserted.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Using the dual CFT to compute the inner product between two closed universe states.
Figure 7 Using the dual CFT to compute the inner product between two closed universe states.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 Sample calculations in the topological model with matter.
Figure 8 Sample calculations in the topological model with matter.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 9 Computing the square of the inner product in the topological model.
Figure 9 Computing the square of the inner product in the topological model.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 10 Computing the second Renyi entropy of a purifying matter system.
Figure 10 Computing the second Renyi entropy of a purifying matter system.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 11 An observer Ob entangled with an environment E and some matter M being fed into the holographic map V for a closed universe.
Figure 11 An observer Ob entangled with an environment E and some matter M being fed into the holographic map V for a closed universe.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 12 Modifying the rule for the inner product by applying a quantum-to-classical channel to the observer, disrupting the product structure of the inner product.
Figure 12 Modifying the rule for the inner product by applying a quantum-to-classical channel to the observer, disrupting the product structure of the inner product.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 13 Cloning the observer out of the system. Before acting with ⟨ 0 | O the cloned observer Ob ′ , the observer Ob , and the environment E are in a shared GHZ-type state in the pointer basis. We can interpret this as defining a new holographic map ˆ V : M → Ob ′ .
Figure 13 Cloning the observer out of the system. Before acting with ⟨ 0 | O the cloned observer Ob ′ , the observer Ob , and the environment E are in a shared GHZ-type state in the pointer basis. We can interpret this as defining a new holographic map ˆ V : M → Ob ′ .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 14 Computing the closed universe inner product for the topological model in the presence of an observer.
Figure 14 Computing the closed universe inner product for the topological model in the presence of an observer.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 15 Leading contributions to the square of the inner product in the topological model.
Figure 15 Leading contributions to the square of the inner product in the topological model.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 16 A big bang/big crunch closed universe in Lorentzian JT gravity with an observer (blue) and additional matter (orange). We clone the observer out to reference Ob ′ and entangle the matter to an external reference M ′ . After taking into account the backreaction of the matter on the dilaton, two QESs are generated denoted by ' x ' . These QESs give a fundamental bottleneck on the observers Hilbert space in a closed universe.
Figure 16 A big bang/big crunch closed universe in Lorentzian JT gravity with an observer (blue) and additional matter (orange). We clone the observer out to reference Ob ′ and entangle the matter to an external reference M ′ . After taking into account the backreaction of the matter on the dilaton, two QESs are generated denoted by ' x ' . These QESs give a fundamental bottleneck on the observers Hilbert space in a closed universe.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 17
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 17 Dominant contribution to the fully connected second Renyi entropy. The observer and matter worldlines connect as indicated in the figure, giving a contribution that scales as e -2 S 0 Tr( χ ) 2 Tr( ω ) 2 = e -2 S 0 .
Figure 17 Dominant contribution to the fully connected second Renyi entropy. The observer and matter worldlines connect as indicated in the figure, giving a contribution that scales as e -2 S 0 Tr( χ ) 2 Tr( ω ) 2 = e -2 S 0 .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 18 The three different quantum extremal surfaces for the entropy of the cloned observer system Ob'. The bulk entanglement wedge is denoted by the blue circle. In the first case the entanglement wedge contains Ob ′ . In the second case the entire closed universe, while in the third case the entanglement wedge ends at two QESs ' x ' and excludes the matter system M ′ .
Figure 18 The three different quantum extremal surfaces for the entropy of the cloned observer system Ob'. The bulk entanglement wedge is denoted by the blue circle. In the first case the entanglement wedge contains Ob ′ . In the second case the entire closed universe, while in the third case the entanglement wedge ends at two QESs ' x ' and excludes the matter system M ′ .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 19 A simple code for the emergence of the black hole interior.
Figure 19 A simple code for the emergence of the black hole interior.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 21
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 22
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 22 Computing the inner product between states with different matter species in presence of a quantum extremal surface and an observer.
Figure 22 Computing the inner product between states with different matter species in presence of a quantum extremal surface and an observer.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 23 An example where the model of island in this section is embedded into a more complete Penrose diagram. The right portion of the diagram is included in the full spacetime, but we study the shaded region.
Figure 23 An example where the model of island in this section is embedded into a more complete Penrose diagram. The right portion of the diagram is included in the full spacetime, but we study the shaded region.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 24 Path integral computation of the square of the inner product |⟨ j | i ⟩| 2 .
Figure 24 Path integral computation of the square of the inner product |⟨ j | i ⟩| 2 .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 25 Computing the Haar integral of four powers of an orthogonal matrix using pairings and Weingarten coefficients.
Figure 25 Computing the Haar integral of four powers of an orthogonal matrix using pairings and Weingarten coefficients.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 26 Computing a code integral with four O s.
Figure 26 Computing a code integral with four O s.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 28
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 28 Construction of the geometry Z 1 used in the main text. The cylinder with four total operator insertions can be evaluated by gluing rectangular geometries together. In the figure we have cut the cylinder open into two rectangles that are glued along their geodesic boundaries. The geodesic distance between the blue operator insertions is given by ℓ 1 , and the distance between the orange is given by ℓ 2 .
Figure 28 Construction of the geometry Z 1 used in the main text. The cylinder with four total operator insertions can be evaluated by gluing rectangular geometries together. In the figure we have cut the cylinder open into two rectangles that are glued along their geodesic boundaries. The geodesic distance between the blue operator insertions is given by ℓ 1 , and the distance between the orange is given by ℓ 2 .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 29 QES saddle point at fixed ρ and ρ 1 .
Figure 29 QES saddle point at fixed ρ and ρ 1 .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 30 QES saddle point including backreaction.
Figure 30 QES saddle point including backreaction.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 72

  1. G. Penington, Entanglement Wedge Reconstruction and the Information Paradox, JHEP 09 (2020) 002 [arXiv:1905.08255] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  2. A. Almheiri, N. Engelhardt, D. Marolf and H. Maxfield, The entropy of bulk quantum fields and the entanglement wedge of an evaporating black hole, JHEP 12 (2019) 063 [arXiv:1905.08762] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  3. A. Almheiri, R. Mahajan, J. Maldacena and Y. Zhao, The Page curve of Hawking radiation from semiclassical geometry, JHEP 03 (2020) 149 [arXiv:1908.10996] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  4. A. Almheiri, R. Mahajan and J. Maldacena, Islands outside the horizon, arXiv:1910.11077 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  5. G. Penington, S.H. Shenker, D. Stanford and Z. Yang, Replica wormholes and the black hole interior, JHEP 03 (2022) 205 [arXiv:1911.11977] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  6. A. Almheiri et al., Replica Wormholes and the Entropy of Hawking Radiation, JHEP 05 (2020) 013 [arXiv:1911.12333] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  7. A. Almheiri et al., The entropy of Hawking radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93 (2021) 035002 [arXiv:2006.06872] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  8. C. Akers and G. Penington, Quantum minimal surfaces from quantum error correction, SciPost Phys. 12 (2022) 157 [arXiv:2109.14618] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  9. C. Akers et al., The black hole interior from non-isometric codes and complexity, JHEP 06 (2024) 155 [arXiv:2207.06536] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  10. I.H. Kim and J. Preskill, Complementarity and the unitarity of the black hole S-matrix, JHEP 02 (2023) 233 [arXiv:2212.00194] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  11. A. Kar, Non-isometric quantum error correction in gravity, JHEP 02 (2023) 195 [arXiv:2210.13476] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  12. J. Chandra and T. Hartman, Toward random tensor networks and holographic codes in CFT, JHEP 05 (2023) 109 [arXiv:2302.02446] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  13. D. Marolf and A.C. Wall, Eternal Black Holes and Superselection in AdS/CFT, Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 025001 [arXiv:1210.3590] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  14. A. Almheiri et al., An Apologia for Firewalls, JHEP 09 (2013) 018 [arXiv:1304.6483] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  15. K. Papadodimas and S. Raju, Remarks on the necessity and implications of state-dependence in the black hole interior, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 084049 [arXiv:1503.08825] [INSPIRE]. JHEP02(2026)108 · DOI
  16. I. Kourkoulou and J. Maldacena, Pure states in the SYK model and nearly-AdS 2 gravity, arXiv:1707.02325 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  17. A. Almheiri, Holographic Quantum Error Correction and the Projected Black Hole Interior, arXiv:1810.02055 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  18. D. Marolf and H. Maxfield, Transcending the ensemble: baby universes, spacetime wormholes, and the order and disorder of black hole information, JHEP 08 (2020) 044 [arXiv:2002.08950] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  19. J. McNamara and C. Vafa, Baby Universes, Holography, and the Swampland, arXiv:2004.06738 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  20. M. Usatyuk, Z.-Y. Wang and Y. Zhao, Closed universes in two dimensional gravity, SciPost Phys. 17 (2024) 051 [arXiv:2402.00098] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  21. J.A. Wheeler, Beyond the black hole, in Some strangeness in the proportion, Harry Woolf ed., Addison Wesley Publishing Company (1980) 341-375.
  22. J. Hartle and T. Hertog, The Observer Strikes Back, in the proceedings of the Philosophy of Cosmology UK/US Conference, Tenerife, Spain, September 12-16 (2014) [DOI:10.1017/9781316535783.010] [arXiv:1503.07205] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  23. V. Chandrasekaran, R. Longo, G. Penington and E. Witten, An algebra of observables for de Sitter space, JHEP 02 (2023) 082 [arXiv:2206.10780] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  24. E. Witten, Algebras, regions, and observers, Proc. Symp. Pure Math. 107 (2024) 247 [arXiv:2303.02837] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  25. E. Shaghoulian, Quantum gravity and the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, arXiv:2305.10635 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  26. J. Maldacena, Real observers solving imaginary problems, arXiv:2412.14014 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  27. K. Jensen, S. Raju and A.J. Speranza, Holographic observers for time-band algebras, JHEP 06 (2025) 242 [arXiv:2412.21185] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  28. A. Almheiri, X. Dong and D. Harlow, Bulk Locality and Quantum Error Correction in AdS/CFT, JHEP 04 (2015) 163 [arXiv:1411.7041] [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  29. D. Harlow, The Ryu-Takayanagi Formula from Quantum Error Correction, Commun. Math. Phys. 354 (2017) 865 [arXiv:1607.03901] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  30. D. Harlow and T. Numasawa, Gauging spacetime inversions in quantum gravity, arXiv:2311.09978 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  31. D. Harlow and L. Susskind, Crunches, Hats, and a Conjecture, arXiv:1012.5302 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  32. T. Banks, W. Fischler and S. Paban, Recurrent nightmares? Measurement theory in de Sitter space, JHEP 12 (2002) 062 [hep-th/0210160] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  33. X. Dong, X.-L. Qi, Z. Shangnan and Z. Yang, Effective entropy of quantum fields coupled with gravity, JHEP 10 (2020) 052 [arXiv:2007.02987] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  34. A. Sahu and M. Van Raamsdonk, Holographic black hole cosmologies, JHEP 05 (2025) 233 [arXiv:2411.14673] [INSPIRE]. JHEP02(2026)108 · DOI
  35. S. Antonini, P. Simidzija, B. Swingle and M. Van Raamsdonk, Cosmology from the vacuum, Class. Quant. Grav. 41 (2024) 045008 [arXiv:2203.11220] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  36. S. Antonini, M. Sasieta and B. Swingle, Cosmology from random entanglement, JHEP 11 (2023) 188 [arXiv:2307.14416] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  37. S. Antonini and P. Rath, Do holographic CFT states have unique semiclassical bulk duals?, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 34 (2025) 2544025 [arXiv:2408.02720] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  38. V. Balasubramanian, Y. Nomura and T. Ugajin, De Sitter space is sometimes not empty, JHEP 02 (2024) 135 [arXiv:2308.09748] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  39. D. Marolf, On the nature of ensembles from gravitational path integrals, J. Phys. A 58 (2025) 035204 [arXiv:2407.04625] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  40. N. Engelhardt and A.C. Wall, Quantum Extremal Surfaces: Holographic Entanglement Entropy beyond the Classical Regime, JHEP 01 (2015) 073 [arXiv:1408.3203] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  41. V. Balasubramanian, A. Lawrence, J.M. Magan and M. Sasieta, Microscopic Origin of the Entropy of Black Holes in General Relativity, Phys. Rev. X 14 (2024) 011024 [arXiv:2212.02447] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  42. P. Saad, S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, JT gravity as a matrix integral, arXiv:1903.11115 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  43. J.M. Maldacena and L. Maoz, Wormholes in AdS, JHEP 02 (2004) 053 [hep-th/0401024] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  44. B. McInnes, Quintessential Maldacena-Maoz cosmologies, JHEP 04 (2004) 036 [hep-th/0403104] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  45. M. Van Raamsdonk, Comments on wormholes, ensembles, and cosmology, JHEP 12 (2021) 156 [arXiv:2008.02259] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  46. S.R. Coleman, Black holes as red herrings: Topological fluctuations and the loss of quantum coherence, Nucl. Phys. B 307 (1988) 867 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  47. E. Gesteau and M.J. Kang, Holographic baby universes: an observable story, arXiv:2006.14620 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  48. W.H. Zurek, Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75 (2003) 715 [quant-ph/0105127] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  49. J. Watrous, The Theory of Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press (2018).
  50. D.L. Danielson, G. Satishchandran and R.M. Wald, Gravitationally mediated entanglement: Newtonian field versus gravitons, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 086001 [arXiv:2112.10798] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  51. D.L. Danielson, G. Satishchandran and R.M. Wald, Black holes decohere quantum superpositions, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 31 (2022) 2241003 [arXiv:2205.06279] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  52. A. Biggs and J. Maldacena, Comparing the decoherence effects due to black holes versus ordinary matter, arXiv:2405.02227 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  53. W.K. Wootters and W.H. Zurek, A single quantum cannot be cloned, Nature 299 (1982) 802 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  54. R. Jackiw, Lower Dimensional Gravity, Nucl. Phys. B 252 (1985) 343 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  55. C. Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 126 (1983) 41 [INSPIRE]. JHEP02(2026)108 · DOI · Paper page
  56. M. Srednicki, Chaos and Quantum Thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 50 (1994) 888 [cond-mat/9403051] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  57. D.L. Jafferis, D.K. Kolchmeyer, B. Mukhametzhanov and J. Sonner, Jackiw-Teitelboim gravity with matter, generalized eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, and random matrices, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 066015 [arXiv:2209.02131] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  58. J. Pollack, M. Rozali, J. Sully and D. Wakeham, Eigenstate Thermalization and Disorder Averaging in Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 021601 [arXiv:2002.02971] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  59. A. Belin and J. de Boer, Random statistics of OPE coefficients and Euclidean wormholes, Class. Quant. Grav. 38 (2021) 164001 [arXiv:2006.05499] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  60. C. Akers and P. Rath, Holographic Renyi Entropy from Quantum Error Correction, JHEP 05 (2019) 052 [arXiv:1811.05171] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  61. X. Dong, D. Harlow and D. Marolf, Flat entanglement spectra in fixed-area states of quantum gravity, JHEP 10 (2019) 240 [arXiv:1811.05382] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  62. A. Goel, H.T. Lam, G.J. Turiaci and H. Verlinde, Expanding the Black Hole Interior: Partially Entangled Thermal States in SYK, JHEP 02 (2019) 156 [arXiv:1807.03916] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  63. P. Hayden and G. Penington, Learning the Alpha-bits of Black Holes, JHEP 12 (2019) 007 [arXiv:1807.06041] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  64. J.D. Bekenstein, A Universal Upper Bound on the Entropy to Energy Ratio for Bounded Systems, Phys. Rev. D 23 (1981) 287 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  65. H. Casini, Relative entropy and the Bekenstein bound, Class. Quant. Grav. 25 (2008) 205021 [arXiv:0804.2182] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  66. M. Usatyuk and Y. Zhao, Closed universes, factorization, and ensemble averaging, JHEP 02 (2025) 052 [arXiv:2403.13047] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  67. D.K. Kolchmeyer and H. Liu, Chaos and the Emergence of the Cosmological Horizon, arXiv:2411.08090 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  68. B. Collins and P. Śniady, Integration with Respect to the Haar Measure on Unitary, Orthogonal and Symplectic Group, Commun. Math. Phys. 264 (2006) 773 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  69. Z. Yang, The Quantum Gravity Dynamics of Near Extremal Black Holes, JHEP 05 (2019) 205 [arXiv:1809.08647] [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  70. P. Saad, Late Time Correlation Functions, Baby Universes, and ETH in JT Gravity, arXiv:1910.10311 [INSPIRE]. · DOI · Paper page
  71. D. Stanford, More quantum noise from wormholes, arXiv:2008.08570 [INSPIRE]. · DOI
  72. P.-S. Hsin, L.V. Iliesiu and Z. Yang, A violation of global symmetries from replica wormholes and the fate of black hole remnants, Class. Quant. Grav. 38 (2021) 194004 [arXiv:2011.09444] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Harlow, D., Usatyuk, M., & Zhao, Y.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2501.02359
arXiv
2501.02359
References
0
Type
Preprint
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

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