Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Complementarity, not Firewalls

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1207.6243 v3 pith:IZYEUXK6 submitted 2012-07-26 hep-th gr-qc

classification hep-thgr-qc
keywords observerargueblackcomplementarityenergyfirewallsholehorizons
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this note I argue that a version of complementarity is possible which evades the need for the "firewalls" recently proposed by Almheiri, Marolf, Polchinski, and Sully to burn up observers falling into black hole horizons. In particular I claim that it is consistent for an infalling observer to fall through an "old" black hole horizon without burning up, without this observer or any other seeing information loss or a violation of low energy effective field theory in an unexpected place. The reason that AMPS find the opposite conclusion is because they attempt to use low energy physics to translate between the quantum mechanics of different observers rather than to describe the experiments of only a single observer; I argue that this translation is polluted by short-distance physics related to stretched horizons.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools