Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 29 references

Black-hole decoherence of charged superpositions is a leading-soft QED Schur channel whose residual holonomy is a measurable symplectic area in horizon soft phase space.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-10 19:13 UTC pith:MTBCNSW7

load-bearing objection Solid packaging of known horizon decoherence into a Schur channel plus multi-branch holonomy tests; the residual after exterior erasure is clean only inside a controlled factorization regime the paper itself flags. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.07342 v1 pith:MTBCNSW7 submitted 2026-07-08 hep-th cs.ITgr-qcmath.ITquant-ph

Horizon-Restricted Leading Soft QED as Open Quantum System

Soo-Jong Rey This is my paper
classification hep-th cs.ITgr-qcmath.ITquant-ph
keywords horizon decoherenceleading soft QEDopen quantum systemSchur channelBargmann holonomyFeynman-Vernon influence functionalcharged interferometerGram positivity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper recasts black-hole-induced loss of coherence among charged branches as ordinary leading soft QED, but restricted to the exterior observer’s algebra and treated as an open quantum system. Fixed-history infrared unitarity remains exact; the residual decoherence is the unequal-history influence factor that exterior monitoring cannot erase because it lives in the complementary horizon output. In the coherent eikonal regime that factor becomes a completely positive Schur multiplier on the branch density matrix, built from the Gram matrix of horizon soft records. The same construction supplies Gram positivity, an exterior eraser bound, soft/hard scaling tests, and a concrete three-arm charged interferometer whose cyclic visibility isolates a rephasing-invariant phase equal to the symplectic area of a triangle in horizon soft phase space. Those multi-branch identities are falsifiable beyond ordinary two-path visibility, giving a clean operational signature of the horizon channel.

Core claim

Horizon-induced decoherence of charged branch codes is the leading-soft QED channel restricted to an exterior algebra: after exterior monitoring the residual unequal-history Feynman–Vernon factor is the complementary horizon Gram matrix, which multiplies coherences by a completely positive Schur map whose three-branch Bargmann product is the rephasing-invariant symplectic area of the corresponding triangle in horizon soft phase space.

What carries the argument

The completely positive horizon Schur channel (E_H^{(0)} ρ)_ab = ⟨Φ_b^{H,(0)} | Φ_a^{H,(0)}⟩ ρ_ab, obtained by projecting the leading eikonal soft factor onto the horizon radiative algebra; its three-branch Bargmann product B_123 = G_12 G_23 G_31 isolates the rephasing-invariant holonomy phase.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that exterior and horizon radiative records factorize cleanly so that the residual visibility after exterior erasure is exactly the pure horizon Gram factor.

What would settle it

Prepare a charged qutrit in a three-arm triangular interferometer outside a black hole, perform ideal exterior soft-photon erasure, reconstruct the residual cyclic visibility B_exp = ρ_12 ρ_23 ρ_31 / (ρ_11 ρ_22 ρ_33), and check whether its phase and moduli satisfy the orientation, common-mode, triangulation, and complete-positivity determinant identities of a Gram matrix; violation falsifies the claimed leading-soft Schur channel.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reformulates black-hole horizon-induced decoherence of charged branch codes as leading-soft QED restricted to an exterior algebra, cast as an open quantum system. Fixed-history Feynman–Vernon normalization F[J,J]=1 is retained exactly; decoherence arises from the unequal-history influence factor that survives exterior monitoring and is assigned to the complementary horizon output. In the coherent eikonal regime the horizon contribution is the completely positive Schur channel (E_H^{(0)} ρ)_ab = ⟨Φ_b^{H,(0)}|Φ_a^{H,(0)}⟩ ρ_ab, obtained by projecting the eikonal soft factor onto the horizon radiative algebra. Operational consequences include Gram-positivity constraints, an exterior quantum-eraser bound, finite-time non-Markovianity diagnostics, soft/hard scaling criteria, and a charged-qutrit interferometer that measures a leading-soft Bargmann holonomy whose phase is the rephasing-invariant symplectic area of a triangle in horizon soft phase space. Orientation, common-mode, triangulation and CP-determinant identities are proposed as multi-branch falsifiability tests beyond pairwise visibility.

Significance. If the controlled-regime claims hold, the work supplies a clean quantum-channel language that unifies earlier horizon-overlap and local-noise treatments of charged decoherence near black holes, while adding multi-branch Gram and Bargmann tests that are in principle experimentally sharper than two-path visibility. Strengths that should be credited include the explicit Kraus representation of the Schur channel (Prop. 1 and App. D), the retention of fixed-history unitarity, the exterior eraser bound framed via complementary fidelity, and the concrete qutrit protocol that isolates a symplectic-area holonomy. These are genuine operational additions relative to the two-branch literature. The construction is, however, tightly tied to the author’s own very recent soft-QED OQS papers and to a factorized I+/H regime whose domain of validity is left largely qualitative; the significance of the residual-holonomy predictions is therefore regime-dependent rather than universal.

major comments (3)
  1. §8, Eqs. (38)–(42) and (45), (57): The residual horizon holonomy B^H_123 after ideal exterior erasure (the central multi-branch prediction of Prop. 2 and the qutrit protocol of §10) is derived under the controlled factorization G_ab = G^{I+}_ab G^H_ab. The text itself states that the general Gaussian kernel contains cross blocks N_{I+H}+N_{HI+} and that the product “is not a kinematic identity but rather characterizes a controlled factorized-channel regime.” When those cross kernels are non-negligible, exterior instruments can condition on I+–H correlations, so the residual is a conditional complementary fidelity rather than the pure horizon Gram factor. The manuscript needs either (i) a quantitative criterion (in terms of branch-current support, black-hole parameters, and state) under which the cross terms are parametrically small for the protocols of interest, or (ii) a rewritten resid
  2. §5–§6 and the dependence on arXiv:2606.27498 / 2606.29804: The soft-QED OQS channel structure, the influence-functional identity, and the interpretation of the Schur multiplier as the open-system map are imported from the author’s two contemporaneous preprints. The present paper should make self-contained which statements are new (horizon projection, residual complementary factor, multi-branch holonomy tests) versus which are direct applications of that framework. As written, a reader who has not absorbed those works cannot verify the inheritance claims or the precise scope of the “leading soft input.” A short self-contained derivation of the flat-space Schur channel (or an explicit pointer to the equations being reused) is needed for the central claim to stand alone.
  3. §2, Eq. (8): The electromagnetic Schwarzschild estimate ⟨N⟩_H ∼ G^{3}M^{3} q^{2} d^{2} / (ℏ c^{6} ε_{0} b^{6}) T is presented as determining “the physical regime accurately reproduced by the channel,” yet no derivation or external reference is supplied for the scaling. Because this estimate is used to justify the coherent-eikonal window in which the Schur channel is claimed to apply, either a short derivation (or citation to the Danielson–Satishchandran–Wald series) or an explicit statement that the formula is schematic and order-of-magnitude only is required. Without it the regime of validity remains unanchored.
minor comments (5)
  1. Figures 1–3 are helpful schematic aids but the captions are long and partially repeat the main text; tightening them would improve readability.
  2. Notation for the leading-order superscript (0) is introduced carefully in §6 and then suppressed; a single sentence in §7 reminding the reader that all subsequent G^H, Γ^H, Φ^H are understood to be leading would prevent occasional ambiguity.
  3. Appendix A (ASRD / Harlow–Hayden) is interesting but sits somewhat apart from the main channel construction; a clearer statement of which results of the main text it is meant to protect or extend would help.
  4. Typographical: “Errooherence” in the abstract; “the horizon-overlap framework to the status…” (sentence fragment after Prop. 1); occasional missing spaces around math mode.
  5. References [9,10] are the author’s own contemporaneous preprints; if they remain unpublished at the time of revision, the journal’s policy on citation of unpublished work should be checked and the dependence minimized as noted above.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged

Schur channel and holonomy identities are definitional from coherent-state Gram overlaps; OQS foundation load-bearing on author's concurrent soft-QED papers

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. 5 (and Abstract, Introduction, refs [9,10])]
    "The soft-QED OQS analysis of [9,10] provides the foundation employed in this work; however, it should be adopted with modification. ... The fixed-history Feynman–Vernon identity F[J,J]=1 remains exact."

    The entire open-system channel language, influence functional, fixed-history normalization, and hard-sector Schur form are taken from the author's own two concurrent arXiv preprints (2606.27498, 2606.29804). Those works are not externally verified or machine-checked; the present paper's horizon application therefore rests on an unverified self-citation chain for its foundational OQS machinery.

  2. renaming known result [Prop. 1, Eqs. (3),(31),(33); Sec. 7]
    "the map ρ ↦ G^H ◦ ρ, where ◦ denotes the Hadamard (entrywise) multiplication in the branch basis, is completely-positive and trace-preserving. ... Complete positivity follows directly from the Schur product theorem, or can be demonstrated explicitly by diagonalizing G^H = ∑_r λ_r v^{(r)} v^{(r)†} and constructing the Kraus operators K_r = √λ_r ∑_a v_a^{(r)} |a⟩⟨a|."

    Once the horizon records are coherent states |Φ_a^H⟩, the reduced map is definitionally the Schur multiplier by the Gram matrix G_ab = ⟨Φ_b|Φ_a⟩. Complete positivity and the Kraus form are the standard Schur-product theorem for any unit-diagonal PSD Gram matrix; the paper merely renames this textbook fact as the 'leading horizon Schur channel' derived in the eikonal regime.

  3. self definitional [Def. 1, Prop. 2, Eqs. (47)–(56); Sec. 8 and 10]
    "define B_123 = G_12 G_23 G_31, U_123 = B_123/|B_123| = e^{i Θ_123}. ... the normalized horizon holonomy obeys U_132 = (U_123)^{-1}, U_123[α_a+β]=U_123[α_a], U_123 U_134 = U_124 U_234 ... if G_ab = r_ab e^{i(φ_a-φ_b)} then Θ_123=0 ... positivity of the 3×3 principal Gram minor requires 1+2 r_12 r_23 r_31 cos Θ - r_12² - r_23² - r_31² ≥ 0."

    B_123 and Θ_123 are defined directly from the Gram entries; the orientation, common-mode, triangulation and CP-determinant identities are pure algebraic consequences of any Hermitian unit-diagonal PSD matrix (or of the symplectic area of three coherent displacements). They hold by construction for the input channel and therefore cannot constitute independent 'predictions' or 'falsifiable tests beyond pairwise visibility' that go beyond assuming the Schur form itself.

full rationale

The paper's central Schur-channel claim and multi-branch Bargmann tests follow immediately once horizon coherent states (or any environment vectors) are granted: the map is the textbook Hadamard/Schur multiplier by the Gram matrix, and the orientation/common-mode/triangulation/CP-determinant identities are pure algebraic consequences of that Gram matrix (or of the symplectic form on one-particle displacements). No independent dynamical derivation is required beyond the standard coherent-state overlap formula. The flat-space soft-QED open-system language, fixed-history Feynman–Vernon identity, and influence-functional setup are imported wholesale from the author's own concurrent arXivs (2606.27498, 2606.29804). These self-citations are load-bearing for the channel formalism, yet the horizon projection, exterior-eraser bound, and residual-holonomy isolation after I+/H factorization supply genuine additional content. No data fitting, uniqueness theorems, or smuggled ansätze appear. The result is therefore partially circular by construction and self-citation, but not empty; score 4 reflects that the advertised 'derivation' and 'falsifiable tests' largely restate the input Gram structure while the black-hole application remains non-tautological.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 7 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard soft-QED and open-systems mathematics plus several domain assumptions about semiclassical horizons and algebraic bipartition. No free parameters are fitted to data. The main invented packaging is the “horizon-restricted leading-soft Schur channel” and the operational “leading-soft Bargmann holonomy”; both are reformulations of known overlaps rather than new physical entities. Load-bearing domain assumptions are the initial dressed product state, the leading-eikonal projection onto the horizon algebra, and the controlled factorization of exterior versus horizon records.

axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Fixed-history Feynman–Vernon identity F[J,J]=1 remains exact for the inclusive soft channel (normalization / Bloch–Nordsieck cancellation).
    Invoked throughout §§5,8 and Theorem 1; standard for soft QED but assumed to survive the horizon bipartition without diagonal anomaly.
  • domain assumption After gauge dressing, the initial state factorizes as ρ_in_tot = ρ_in_br ⊗ ρ_in_rad between dressed charged branches and independent radiation.
    Eq. (1)/(15), §4; required to obtain a pure Schur channel rather than a more general process tensor.
  • domain assumption Leading soft theorem supplies the eikonal displacement α_a = K_Ω J_a; horizon contribution is the projection P_H K_Ω J_a.
    §6 Eqs. (22)–(24); subleading Low–Burnett–Kroll terms are explicitly deferred.
  • ad hoc to paper In the controlled regime the late radiation algebra factorizes so that G_ab = G^{I+}_ab G^H_ab (cross kernels negligible on the branch-current family).
    Eqs. (40)–(42); paper acknowledges this is not kinematic. Load-bearing for residual holonomy after exterior erasure.
  • domain assumption Exterior operations cannot act on A_H+; horizon soft records remain complementary for the semiclassical exterior observer.
    §3 algebraic bipartition and Theorem 1; semiclassical complementarity assumption, not derived from full quantum gravity.
  • standard math Schur product theorem: entrywise multiplication by a PSD matrix with unit diagonal is completely positive and trace-preserving.
    Prop. 1 and App. D; standard linear algebra / quantum information.
  • standard math Coherent-state overlap formula ⟨β|α⟩ = exp(−½‖α−β‖² + i Im⟨β,α⟩) for bosonic one-particle data.
    App. C; used to obtain Γ and Φ in the Gram entries.
invented entities (2)
  • Horizon-restricted leading-soft Schur channel E_H^{(0)} no independent evidence
    purpose: Packages the horizon soft overlap as a completely positive map on charged branch codes with operational consequences (eraser bound, Gram tests).
    Reformulation of known coherent-state overlaps into channel language; no new microscopic degree of freedom.
  • Leading-soft Bargmann holonomy Θ^H_123 (symplectic area of soft-displacement triangle) no independent evidence
    purpose: Supplies a rephasing-invariant multi-branch observable and falsifiability suite beyond pairwise visibility.
    Bargmann invariants are standard; applying them to horizon soft phase space as a concrete interferometric test is the paper’s packaging. Falsifiable in principle via qutrit tomography, but no independent experimental handle is provided here.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 26203 in / 4292 out tokens · 54007 ms · 2026-07-10T19:13:53.105884+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

I formulate black-hole-horizon-induced decoherence of charged branch codes as the leading-soft QED restricted to an exterior algebra, formulated as an open quantum system. The fixed-history Feynman--Vernon identity ${\cal F}[J,J]=1$ remains exact. Decoherence enters through the unequal-history influence factor that survives exterior monitoring and belongs to the complementary horizon output. In the coherent eikonal regime, I derive the completely positive Schur channel $({\cal E}_H^{(0)}\rho)_{ab}=\langle\Phi_b^{H,(0)}|\Phi_a^{H,(0)}\rangle \, \rho_{ab}$. The leading soft input is the eikonal factor, projected onto the horizon radiative algebra. The channel yields Gram-positivity constraints, an exterior quantum-eraser bound, finite-time non-Markovianity tests, soft/hard scaling criteria, and a charged-qutrit interferometer measuring a leading-soft Bargmann holonomy. The holonomy phase is the rephasing-invariant symplectic area of a triangle in horizon soft phase space. I show that its orientation, common-mode, triangulation, and completely positive determinant identities render falsifiable tests beyond pairwise two-path visibility.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07342 by Soo-Jong Rey.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Penrose-diagram illustrating the horizon-restricted open-system channel. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Planar (r, t) Penrose diagram of the fully extended eternal Schwarzschild geometry, drawn in the conventional hexagon form. The thick upper and lower hori￾zontal segments represent the spacelike singularities r = 0. The diagonal line labelled H+ R is the future event horizon bounding the right exterior region occupied by Alice. Branch-dependent radiative records reaching I + R are, up to detector resolutio… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Minimal three-arm charged-qutrit interferometer designed to measure the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Note on the radiation field of the electron,

    F. Bloch and A. Nordsieck, “Note on the radiation field of the electron,” Phys. Rev.52, 54 (1937)

    work page 1937

  2. [2]

    The infrared divergence phenom- ena and high-energy processes,

    D. R. Yennie, S. C. Frautschi, and H. Suura, “The infrared divergence phenom- ena and high-energy processes,” Annals Phys.13, 379 (1961)

    work page 1961

  3. [3]

    Kinoshita, ”Mass singularities of Feynman amplitudes,” J

    T. Kinoshita, ”Mass singularities of Feynman amplitudes,” J. Math. Phys.3, 650 (1962)

    work page 1962

  4. [4]

    Lee, and M

    T.D. Lee, and M. Nauenberg, ”Degenerate systems and mass singularities,” Phys. Rev.133, B1549 (1964)

    work page 1964

  5. [5]

    Chung, ”Infrared divergence in quantum electrodynamics,” Phys

    V. Chung, ”Infrared divergence in quantum electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev.140, B1110 (1965)

    work page 1965

  6. [6]

    Kibble,Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences

    T.W.B. Kibble,Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. I–IV, J. Math. Phys.9, 315 (1968); Phys. Rev.174, 1882;175, 1624 (1968)

    work page 1968

  7. [7]

    Asymptotic conditions and infrared divergences in quantum electrodynamics,

    P. P. Kulish and L. D. Faddeev, “Asymptotic conditions and infrared divergences in quantum electrodynamics,” Theor. Math. Phys.4, 745 (1970)

    work page 1970

  8. [8]

    Infrared photons and gravitons,

    S. Weinberg, “Infrared photons and gravitons,” Phys. Rev.140, B516 (1965)

    work page 1965

  9. [9]

    Soft QED as Open Quantum System: Infrared Cancellation and Soft-Shell Coarse Graining

    S.-J. Rey, “Soft QED as open quantum system: infrared cancellation and soft- shell coarse graining,”arXiv:2606.27498[hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    Infrared Safety from ZX-Diagrams: A Categorical Proof of Soft-QED as Open Quantum System

    S.-J. Rey, “Infrared safety from ZX-diagrams: a categorical proof of soft-QED as open quantum system,”arXiv:2606.29804[quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    False loss of coherence,

    W. G. Unruh, “False loss of coherence,” inRelativistic Quantum Measurement and Decoherence, edited by H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione (Springer, Berlin, 2000), pp. 125–140

    work page 2000

  12. [12]

    Black Holes Decohere Quantum Superpositions

    D. L. Danielson, G. Satishchandran, and R. M. Wald, “Black holes deco- here quantum superpositions,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D31, 2241003 (2022), arXiv:2205.06279[hep-th]. 30

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Killing horizons decohere quantum superpositions,

    D. L. Danielson, G. Satishchandran, and R. M. Wald, “Killing horizons decohere quantum superpositions,” Phys. Rev. D108, 025007 (2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Local description of decoherence of quantum superpositions by black holes and other bodies,

    D. L. Danielson, G. Satishchandran, and R. M. Wald, “Local description of decoherence of quantum superpositions by black holes and other bodies,” Phys. Rev. D111, 025014 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    How to minimize the decoherence caused by black holes,

    D. L. Danielson, J. Kudler-Flam, G. Satishchandran, and R. M. Wald, “How to minimize the decoherence caused by black holes,” Phys. Rev. D112, 025012 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Horizons and soft quantum informa- tion,

    D. L. Danielson and G. Satishchandran, “Horizons and soft quantum informa- tion,” arXiv:2512.20754[hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  17. [17]

    Decoherence from horizons: General formulation and rotating black holes,

    S. E. Gralla and H. Wei, “Decoherence from horizons: General formulation and rotating black holes,” Phys. Rev. D109, 065031 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Decoherence of quantum superpositions by Reissner–Nordstrom black holes,

    R. Li, “Decoherence of quantum superpositions by Reissner–Nordstrom black holes,” Phys. Rev. D111, 024040 (2025)

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Decoherence by warm horizons,

    J. Wilson-Gerow, A. Dugad, and Y. Chen, “Decoherence by warm horizons,” Phys. Rev. D110, 045002 (2024)

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Comparing the decoherence effects due to black holes versus ordinary matter

    A. Biggs and J. Maldacena, “Comparing the decoherence effects due to black holes versus ordinary matter,” arXiv:2405.02227[hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Bargmann, ”Note on Wigner?s theorem on symmetry operations,” J

    V. Bargmann, ”Note on Wigner?s theorem on symmetry operations,” J. Math. Phys.5, 862 (1964); R. Simon and N. Mukunda, ”Bargmann invariant and the geometry of the G¨ uoy effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 880 (1993)

    work page 1964

  22. [22]

    The transition probability in the state space of a *-algebra,

    A. Uhlmann, “The transition probability in the state space of a *-algebra,” Rep. Math. Phys.9, 273 (1976)

    work page 1976

  23. [23]

    Black holes and information theory,

    J. D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and information theory,” Contemp. Phys.45, 31 (2004)

    work page 2004

  24. [24]

    Black holes are one-dimensional,

    J. D. Bekenstein and A. E. Mayo, “Black holes are one-dimensional,” Gen. Relativ. Gravit.33, 2095 (2001)

    work page 2095

  25. [25]

    Entropy content and information flow in systems with limited energy,

    J. D. Bekenstein, “Entropy content and information flow in systems with limited energy,” Phys. Rev. D30, 1669 (1984)

    work page 1984

  26. [26]

    Petz, ”Sufficient subalgebras and the relative entropy of states of a von Neumann algebra”, Commun

    D. Petz, ”Sufficient subalgebras and the relative entropy of states of a von Neumann algebra”, Commun. Math. Phys.105, 123 (1986); D. Petz, ”Suffi- ciency of channels over von Neumann algebras”, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math.39, 97 (1988); M. Ohya and D. Petz, ’Quantum Entropy and Its Use’ (Springer, New York, 1993); H. Barnum and E. Knill, ”Reversing quantum dy...

    work page 1986

  27. [27]

    General con- ditions for approximate quantum error correction and near-optimal recovery channels,

    D.W. Leung, M.A. Nielsen, I.L. Chuang and Y. Yamamoto, ”Approximate quan- tum error correction can lead to better codes.” Phys. Rev. A56, 2567 (1997); B. Schumacher and M.D. Westmoreland, ”Approximate quantum error correc- tion.” Quant. Info. Proc.1, 5 (2002); C. Beny and O. Oreshkov, “General con- ditions for approximate quantum error correction and near...

    work page 1997

  28. [28]

    What exactly does Bekenstein bound?

    P. Hayden and J. Wang, “What exactly does Bekenstein bound?,” arXiv:2309.07436[hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [29]

    Quantum computation vs. firewalls,

    D. Harlow and P. Hayden, “Quantum computation vs. firewalls,” JHEP06, 085 (2013). 32

    work page 2013