The DOI matches its DataCite record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 23 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT
Open accessAbstract
We argue that a large class of asymptotically AdS geometries with a semiclassical baby universe cannot be realized within the AdS/CFT correspondence. This in particular resolves a recent puzzle introduced by Antonini and Rath, in which a single CFT state appeared to simultaneously describe an AdS spacetime with a baby universe and one without. We construct a low-energy (and low complexity) boundary operator whose expectation values in the descriptions with and without the baby universe cannot match if the baby universe is semiclassical. This operator conclusively identifies the actual bulk dual: the spacetime without a semiclassical baby universe. This result assumes only that AdS/CFT admits an extrapolate dictionary and an asymptotically isometric encoding of the causal wedge into the dual CFT, without which the correspondence may well be vacuous.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper argues that a large class of asymptotically AdS geometries with a semiclassical baby universe cannot be realized in AdS/CFT, resolving the Antonini-Rath puzzle by showing the CFT dual is the spacetime without a semiclassical baby universe. It constructs a boundary operator \(S_\partial\) whose expectation value is \(1\), forcing any consistent baby universe to have a one-dimensional Hilbert space.
Key findings
- The authors construct an \(O(1)\)-complexity boundary operator \(S_\partial\), localized in the causal wedge, whose bulk dual \(S\) distinguishes a baby-universe bulk from one without: \(\langle S_\partial\rangle \approx e^{-\log \dim \mathcal H_{\text{baby universe}}}\) if the bulk dual has a baby universe (Eq. 1.1), and \(\langle S_\partial\rangle = 1\) if it does not (Eq. 1.2). They compute \(\langle S_\partial\rangle = 1\), matching the no-baby-universe description.
- This implies the Antonini-Rath baby universe cannot be semiclassical; if it is to be consistent with the extrapolate dictionary, its effective Hilbert space must be one-dimensional.
- The result generalizes to any state with no nontrivial QES homologous to the complete asymptotic boundary and representable as an \(O(1)\) number of local, possibly heavy operators acting on an \(O(1)\)-energy state.
- The paper also shows that truncation to an \(O(1)\) microcanonical window cannot explain the discrepancy: the untruncated and truncated states are close in 1-norm, while the swap expectation values differ by \(\gtrsim 1 - e^{-S_{\rm vN}[\psi^{(1)}_i]}\) (Eq. 3.20).
Methods
- Reviews the Antonini-Rath setup: two CFTs in a thermal state below the Hawking-Page transition with a heavy operator insertion, whose Euclidean path integral yields two disconnected asymptotically AdS regions plus a baby universe, while the same CFT state is also represented by \(O(1)\) low-conformal-dimension operators acting on the vacuum.
- Defines a bulk swap operator \(S\) that swaps the causal wedges \(ab\) and \(a'b'\) but not the baby universe, then encodes it to a boundary operator \(S_\partial\) using the isometric causal-wedge encoding map; computes \(\langle S\rangle_{\psi^{(1)}_{ab}\otimes\psi^{(1)}_{a'b'}} \sim e^{-S[\psi^{(1)}_i]}\) and \(\langle S\rangle_{\psi^{(2)}_{ab}\otimes\psi^{(2)}_{a'b'}} = 1\).
- Uses Markov, Cauchy-Schwarz, Hölder, and Fannes inequalities to show truncated and untruncated states are close in trace distance and to infer the existence of a single-copy distinguishing operator; generalizes via the simple entropy construction.
Limitations
- Stated: the argument assumes the extrapolate dictionary and an asymptotically isometric encoding of the causal wedge; the generalization additionally assumes the simple entropy construction applies when the horizon changes topology to the empty set, and that the state can be represented as \(O(1)\) simple operators acting on an \(O(1)\)-energy state.
- Stated: the paper explicitly constructs \(S_\partial\), but does not construct the single-copy distinguishing operator; it leaves observer conditioning and Python’s Lunch cases to future work, noting Python’s Lunch violates the assumptions of Sec. 4.
- Evident from the text: the conclusions rely on large-\(N\)/infinite-\(N\) limits and \(O(1)\) microcanonical truncation, and apply to the specified class of geometries/states rather than all possible AdS/CFT baby-universe constructions.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
50 Own interpretation · 15 Sources not found · 12 No basis given · 2 Own result · 1 Not checked yet
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We construct a low-energy (and low complexity) boundary operator whose expectation values in the descriptions with and without the baby universe cannot match if the baby universe is semiclassical.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: AdS/CFT admits the extrapolate dictionary: the algebra of boundary operators obtained as limits or via the timelike tube theorem of bulk operators in M is contained in the algebra of operators of the dual CFT in the large-N limit.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We construct a low-energy (and low complexity) boundary operator whose expectation values in the descriptions with and without the baby universe cannot match if the baby universe is semiclassical.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
“In particular, we construct an O(1) complexity boundary operator whose expectation value has the power to determine whether a semiclassical baby universe exists or not.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > Abstract
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: AdS/CFT admits the extrapolate dictionary: the algebra of boundary operators obtained as limits or via the timelike tube theorem of bulk operators in M is contained in the algebra of operators of the dual CFT in the large-N limit.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Now we use our proof from Sec. 3 that the truncation of a state with O(1) energy to a microcanonical window of size O(1) cannot result in a new state that has a large trace distance from the untruncated state, at least in the infinite-N limit.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3. No nonempty QESs that are homologous to the asymptotic boundary(ies) A.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“⟨S⟩ ψ (1) ab ⊗ψ (1) a ′ b ′ = tr ψ (1) ab 2 ∼ e -S[ψ (1) i ]”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“⟨S⟩ ψ (2) ab ⊗ψ (2) a ′ b ′ = tr ψ (2) ab 2 = 1”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We compute the expectation value of this operator and find that it agrees exactly with the case in which the baby universe is absent.”
- Also stated in: § 3 Swapping Causal Wedges · boosted
“We have computed the expectation value of the corresponding CFT operator S ∂ and found that it conclusively agrees with the state in which the baby universe is absent.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: AdS/CFT admits the extrapolate dictionary: the algebra of boundary operators obtained as limits or via the timelike tube theorem of bulk operators in M is contained in the algebra of operators of the dual CFT in the large-N limit.
- Also stated in: § 3 Swapping Causal Wedges · boosted
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular we explicitly exhibit one such operator S ∂ .This also manifestly excludes the possibility of equivalence of semiclassical descriptions 1 and 2.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: AdS/CFT admits the extrapolate dictionary: the algebra of boundary operators obtained as limits or via the timelike tube theorem of bulk operators in M is contained in the algebra of operators of the dual CFT in the large-N limit.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus the untruncated and truncated states are close in 1-norm.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The encoding map V ⊗ V yields a representation S ∂ of S in the CFT on ABA ′ B ′ such thatfoot_8 S ∂ (V ⊗ V ) = (V ⊗ V )S.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Recall now that during our review of AR's work, we established that Ψ AB = V ψ(2) ab V † .”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 19
- Probably not a substantial claim. 15
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus ⟨S ∂ ⟩ Ψ AB ⊗Ψ A ′ B ′ = ⟨S ∂ ⟩ V ψ (2) ab V † ⊗V ψ(2) a ′ b ′ V † = ⟨S⟩ ψ (2) ab ⊗ψ (2) a ′ b ′ = 1”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The encoding map is asymptotically isometric: its action on states in the code subspace of low energy perturbations limits to an isometry in the infinite-N limit.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since in the AR setup none of the bulk quantities scale with N , this is an O(1) complexity operator in the bulk effective field theory, whose expectation value can used as a distinguisher between states.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We define S to be the swap operator that swaps ab with a ′ b ′ : thus S has support exclusively in the causal wedge of ABA ′ B ′ .It has no support on the baby universe.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this paper, we constructed a simple boundary operator whose bulk dual has support exclusively in the causal wedge, which can conclusively diagnose if a semiclassical baby universe is encoded in the CFT.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 5 Discussion
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the limit that the black hole evaporates fully, the interior resembles a closed baby universe with a singularity that pinches off.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus if we can turn off the appropriate sources at I , we would remove the infalling or outgoing matter, resulting in a stationary horizon.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even though the minimal QES is always the empty set, the entanglement wedge of |Ψ⟩ A depends on the entanglement of the bulk state: if the bulk state has entanglement between a and i, the entanglement wedge of the pure state |Ψ⟩ A includes i.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3. No nonempty QESs that are homologous to the asymptotic boundary(ies) A.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The primary observation is that horizons are only nonstationary due to matter (or gravitational radiation) falling across them from the asymptotic region.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [30]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [31]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By our assumption on |Ψ⟩ A , |Ψ (c) ⟩ A has O(1) energy.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3. No nonempty QESs that are homologous to the asymptotic boundary(ies) A.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: |Ψ⟩A can be represented as an O(1) number of simple (but possibly heavy) operators acting on a state of O(1) energy.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“AR then argue that this state can also be represented by an O(1) number of operators of low conformal dimension acting on the vacuum”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [16]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [17]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since the duals are the same state up to a truncation of the thermal tails, we conclude option (2): if it is to be encoded into the CFT, the baby universe cannot be semiclassical.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We could also act on the AR state with heavy operators in Lorentzian time; that would also satisfy this assumption.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The simple entropy construction [20,30,31], which iteratively removes all sources that result in non-stationarity of horizons, applies when the horizon changes topology to the empty set.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The AR puzzle arises from the fact that there are now two apparent bulk geometries -one with a baby universe and one without -which are dual to the same CFT state.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“without some additional degrees of freedom (as suggested in e.g.[6,7]), a one-dimensional Hilbert space results in large fluctuations in observables, inconsistent with the local physics experienced in the universe: the baby universe cannot admit a semiclassical description.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [6]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [7]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Can |Ψ (c) ⟩ A contain the baby universe in its entanglement wedge?The answer is no: because |Ψ (c) ′ ⟩ A and |Ψ (c) ⟩ A are close in trace distance, ⟨S ∂ ⟩ must be approximately the same for the two states.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3. No nonempty QESs that are homologous to the asymptotic boundary(ies) A.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, the holographic map can be indeed be extremely nonlocal: the entanglement wedge of a boundary region can reach much deeper into the bulk than its causal wedge and even be disconnected from it 1 , a feature that was crucial for the holographic realization of the Page curve [1,2].”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [2]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we insist on validity of the path integral approach, we must have e -S[ψ (1) i ] ∼ ⟨S⟩ ψ (1 ) ab ⊗ψ (1) a ′ b ′ = ⟨S⟩ ψ (2) ab ⊗ψ (2) a ′ b ′ = 1”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because V is an isometry, if ⟨S ∂ ⟩ = 1, |Ψ⟩ AB must be dual to description 2, whereas if ⟨S ∂ ⟩ ≪ 1, the dual must be description 1.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The encoding map is asymptotically isometric: its action on states in the code subspace of low energy perturbations limits to an isometry in the infinite-N limit.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since this operator is localized to ab -i.e., the causal wedge -it can be encoded into the CFT via an isometry, which will preserve expectation values.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We emphasize that the sources involved propagate causally from the boundary: they cannot act on the baby universe or change its state.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3. No nonempty QESs that are homologous to the asymptotic boundary(ies) A.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a spacetime with no nontrivial QESs homologous to the complete asymptotic boundary, this removes horizons altogether.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Note that we did not need to make this assumption in the AR setup as we had started with a horizonless geometry and an explicit state.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“AR show that the path integral preparation of this state results in two disconnected asymptotically AdS regions with no horizons and a baby universe.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [16]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [17]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For both ψ (1) and ψ (2) to have CFT duals, there are only two options: (1) the duals are nearly orthogonal, or (2) the entropy of the baby universe is bounded from above by 0.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The expectation value ⟨S ∂ ⟩ = 1, and we find that the entanglement wedge of |Ψ (c) ′ ⟩ A does not contain the baby universe unless |H i | = 1, and then the baby universe cannot be semiclassical.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3. No nonempty QESs that are homologous to the asymptotic boundary(ies) A.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: |Ψ⟩A can be represented as an O(1) number of simple (but possibly heavy) operators acting on a state of O(1) energy.
In the paper
“The work of [31] proved this in the absence of such topological transitions, but asserted that the result should continue to hold under such topological transitions.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [31]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Within the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence, there is a sense, spelled out in a tensor network toy model in [15], in which a closed universe must have a one-dimensional Hilbert space: the CFT Hilbert space is defined via the boundary conditions, and in the absence of a boundary, the CFT Hilbert space must be onedimensional.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [15]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is certainly true in e.g.Vaidya thin-shell collapse: turning off the heavy operator sourcing the shell restores the spacetime to pure AdS.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 4 Baby Universes Simply Can't Result from Simple Black Holes
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The simple entropy construction [20,30,31], which iteratively removes all sources that result in non-stationarity of horizons, applies when the horizon changes topology to the empty set.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which is only possible if |H i | = 1.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we were to apply an encoding map to aib, the only way in which we could obtain an answer that is consistent with ⟨S ∂ ⟩ = 1 is if the baby universe is not semiclassical: that is, the holographic encoding map must throw out the baby with the bathwater.”
§ Further Evidence Against a Semiclassical Baby Universe in AdS/CFT > 3 Swapping Causal Wedges
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
AdS/CFT admits the extrapolate dictionary: the algebra of boundary operators obtained as limits or via the timelike tube theorem of bulk operators in M is contained in the algebra of operators of the dual CFT in the large-N limit.
“1.The extrapolate dictionary.The algebra of boundary operators A ∂M obtained as limits (or via the timelike tube theorem) of bulk operators in M is contained in the algebra of operators of the dual CFT in the large-N limit.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The encoding map is asymptotically isometric: its action on states in the code subspace of low energy perturbations limits to an isometry in the infinite-N limit.
“In the continuum limit, the encoding map is asymptotically isometric [26]: its action on states |ϕ⟩ and |ψ⟩ in the code subspace of low energy perturbations limits to an isometry in the infinite-N limit:”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The simple entropy construction [20,30,31], which iteratively removes all sources that result in non-stationarity of horizons, applies when the horizon changes topology to the empty set.
“Assumption: the simple entropy construction [20,30,31], which iteratively removes all sources that result in non-stationarity of horizons, applies when the horizon changes topology to the empty set.”
“We will operate under the assumption that it does indeed continue to hold.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
|Ψ⟩A can be represented as an O(1) number of simple (but possibly heavy) operators acting on a state of O(1) energy.
“We make one further assumption, which is that |Ψ⟩ A can be represented as an O(1) number of simple (but possibly heavy) operators acting on a state of O(1) energy.”
Citations
Cites
Entanglement wedge reconstruction and the information paradox
Penington, G. (2020) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep09(2020)002 · Cited by 968
The Page curve of Hawking radiation from semiclassical geometry
Almheiri, A., Mahajan, R., Maldacena, J., & Zhao, Y. (2020) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep03(2020)149 · Cited by 898
Quantum extremal surfaces: holographic entanglement entropy beyond the classical regime
Engelhardt, N., & Wall, A. C. (2015) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep01(2015)073 · Cited by 836
Self-citationThe entropy of bulk quantum fields and the entanglement wedge of an evaporating black hole
Almheiri, A., Engelhardt, N., Marolf, D., & Maxfield, H. (2019) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep12(2019)063 · Cited by 818
Self-citationReplica wormholes and the black hole interior
Penington, G., Shenker, S. H., Stanford, D., & Yang, Z. (2022) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep03(2022)205 · Cited by 807
Bulk locality and quantum error correction in AdS/CFT
Almheiri, A., Dong, X., & Harlow, D. (2015) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep04(2015)163 · Cited by 802
Holographic representation of local bulk operators
Hamilton, A., Kabat, D., Lifschytz, G., & Lowe, D. A. (2006) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.066009 · Cited by 509
The Ryu–Takayanagi Formula from Quantum Error Correction
Harlow, D. (2017) · Communications in Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1007/s00220-017-2904-z · Cited by 459
Maldacena, J., & Maoz, L. (2004) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/02/053 · Cited by 426
Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT correspondence: A boundary view of horizons and locality
Hamilton, A., Kabat, D., Lifschytz, G., & Lowe, D. A. (2006) · Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields · doi:10.1103/physrevd.73.086003 · Cited by 402
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The baby universe is fine and the CFT knows it: on holography for closed universes
Antonini, S., Rath, P., Sasieta, M., Swingle, B., & Vilar López, A. (2025) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep12(2025)159 · Cited by 35
Emergent mixed states for baby universes and black holes
Kudler-Flam, J., & Witten, E. (2026) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep05(2026)090 · Cited by 32
Towards a holographic description of closed universesPreprint
Liu, H. (2025) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.14327 · Cited by 31
A no-go theorem for large $N$ closed universesPreprint
Gesteau, E. (2025) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.14338 · Cited by 23
Self-citation"Filtering" CFTs at large N: Euclidean Wormholes, Closed Universes, and Black Hole InteriorsPreprint
Liu, H. (2025) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.13807 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Engelhardt, N., & Gesteau, E.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- California Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2504.14586
- OpenAlex
- W6910642482
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 8
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (2309135)
- U.S. Department of Energy
- John Templeton Foundation
- Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara (PHY-2309135, 2309135)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
- Keywords
- baby universes, AdS/CFT correspondence, semiclassical gravity, boundary operators, holography
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
