Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 75 references

A thermal bath surrounding a black hole suppresses Hawking radiation, making a distant observer see weaker radiation than an isolated hole would emit.

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 09:15 UTC pith:VF2EXXD2

load-bearing objection A textbook Keldysh derivation bolted to a numerical claim that does not establish the title: the bath temperature never enters the final equation, and the plotted suppression is |R(r)| with arbitrary boundary conditions, not an emission rate. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.21664 v1 pith:VF2EXXD2 submitted 2026-07-23 gr-qc

Thermal bath induced suppression of Hawking radiation

Hong Wang , Jin Wang This is my paper
classification gr-qc MSC 81T2083C57 PACS 04.62.+v04.70.Dy
keywords Hawking radiationthermal bathopen quantum systemsKeldysh actionSchwarzschild black holeeffective dynamical equationscalar fieldradiation suppression
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.

Realistic black holes sit in a bath—the cosmic microwave background, accreting gas—and this paper asks whether that bath changes the radiation a distant observer sees. Treating the radiation field as an open quantum system bilinearly coupled to a thermal-bath scalar field, it derives an effective closed-time-path action and an integro-differential dynamical equation for the field. In the weak-coupling, small-mass limit on a Schwarzschild background, the equation reduces to a one-dimensional inhomogeneous differential equation, which is solved numerically. The central numerical finding is that the magnitude of the radial wavefunction decreases as the bath coupling increases, which the authors read as suppression of Hawking radiation: a distant observer detects weaker radiation than Hawking's original prediction. If correct, this means the environment around a black hole is not passive but actively dampens the emitted flux.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that an environment matters for black-hole radiation: when Hawking-radiation particles are bilinearly coupled to a thermal bath represented by a separate scalar field, the bath acts as a dissipative environment and suppresses the radiation. Concretely, after tracing out the bath, the authors obtain an effective action and a nonlocal dynamical equation for the radiation field; for a Schwarzschild black hole with small mass and weak coupling they reduce this to a one-dimensional inhomogeneous equation and solve it numerically. The magnitude of the radial wavefunction at large radius—the proxy for detected radiation—is smaller when the coupling to the bath is nonzer

What carries the argument

The argument runs through the closed-time-path (Keldysh) effective action: the bath is integrated out, leaving an influence functional built from the retarded Green function of the bath field and a Keldysh Green function that drops out in the semiclassical limit. Varying the effective action gives an integro-differential equation for the radiation field, valid on any stationary spacetime and at arbitrary coupling. For the numerical step, the paper approximates the retarded Green function by its flat-spacetime form, uses the standard outgoing-wave solution with the analytic continuation across the horizon as the source, and reduces the problem to a one-dimensional inhomogeneous differential e

Load-bearing premise

The central numerical conclusion assumes that the magnitude of the radial wavefunction |R(r)| at a large but finite radius—computed with arbitrarily chosen boundary conditions at the origin, identical for bath and no-bath cases—is a faithful proxy for what a distant observer detects, since no emission rate, flux, or tunneling probability is derived from R(r).

What would settle it

Compute the particle flux or tunneling probability that the effective equation actually implies—for instance by extracting the analytic-continuation coefficient at the horizon—and check whether the bath-induced change in |R(r)| translates into a reduced detected flux. A calculation using a Schwarzschild retarded Green function instead of its flat-space approximation would also settle whether the suppression survives the full curved-space treatment; if it does not, the paper's central claim fails.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • If a thermal bath suppresses radiation, then observed fluxes from black holes embedded in the CMB or accreting material should be systematically below the isolated-Hawking prediction.
  • The suppression grows with the system-bath coupling α, so environments that interact more strongly with radiation should show a larger deficit.
  • The mass dependence is preserved: heavier black holes radiate less both with and without the bath, so the bath does not invert the usual temperature hierarchy.
  • The effective dynamical equation itself is offered for arbitrary stationary curved spacetimes and arbitrary coupling, so the same machinery can be applied to rotating or charged black holes.
  • In the flat-spacetime limit the bath influence has a fixed magnitude independent of position, meaning the suppression is a genuine curvature-related effect, not a flat-space baseline.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test of the claim would be to compute an actual emission rate or tunneling probability from the effective equation rather than the wavefunction magnitude; if the flux is unchanged, the suppression may be an artifact of the chosen boundary conditions.
  • The result hints that a bath acts like a friction term on the outgoing mode; if that analogy holds, the same suppression should appear as a reduced transmission coefficient in a standard tunneling treatment, giving a quantitative prediction for the effective emission temperature.
  • A natural extension would be to include a nonzero bath temperature: the present analysis uses the zero-temperature retarded Green function for the bath, and a finite-temperature treatment could reveal whether suppression coexists with stimulated emission.

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

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper models Hawking-radiation particles as a scalar field φ bilinearly coupled to a second scalar field χ that plays the role of a thermal bath, in a stationary Schwarzschild background. Using the closed-time-path formalism, the authors trace out the bath and derive an effective Keldysh action and an integro-differential effective dynamical equation [Eq. (45)]. For small black hole mass and small coupling, the retarded Green function is approximated by the Minkowski propagator, the inhomogeneous term F(x) is evaluated in closed form, and the reduced radial equation [Eq. (87)] is solved numerically with arbitrary boundary conditions at r=0. The numerical solutions show that |R(r)| at large r decreases with increasing coupling α, which the authors interpret as suppression of Hawking radiation by the thermal bath.

Significance. The formal part of the paper — the Keldysh reduction, the derivation of Eq. (45), and the perturbative evaluation of F(x) — is careful, self-contained, and supported by detailed appendices. There are no fitted parameters, and the derivation is transparent enough to be checked. However, the physical conclusion does not follow from the calculation as presented. The quantity plotted in Figs. 4–5 is not an emission rate or flux; the bath temperature never enters the final equation; and the Minkowski Green function approximation is used in a regime where it is not justified. The numerical demonstration therefore does not establish suppression of Hawking radiation by a thermal bath.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5, Eq. (87), Figs. 4–5] The central claim is based on comparing |R(r)| at r=0.4 for α=0 and α>0 with the same boundary conditions R(0)=1+i, R'(0)=-0.1-0.1i. But |R(r)| is not an observable radiation intensity. For a scalar mode in Schwarzschild, the physical quantity is the conserved radial flux or the Bogoliubov coefficients; for a field coupled to a bath one must compute the asymptotic particle current. Equation (87) is linear and inhomogeneous, so with fixed boundary data the α>0 solution is the α=0 solution plus a particular solution; whether |R| decreases at one radius depends on that particular solution and on the arbitrary normalization. The statement that 'smaller |R(r)| corresponds to a smaller probability of finding a particle' is not justified for a semiclassical field configuration.
  2. [Secs. 3–4, Eqs. (44), (55), (56)] The bath temperature Tχ does not enter the numerical computation. Equation (44) drops the Keldysh Green function, and Eq. (55) uses the zero-temperature retarded Green function. The retarded function is temperature-independent for free fields, but this only means that the result is identical for a zero-temperature environment; no Tχ-dependent quantity is computed. Thus the abstract's statement that 'a thermal bath suppresses Hawking radiation' is not supported. Finite-temperature effects, such as stimulated emission, would require retaining G_K or computing T-dependent observables; the present calculation cannot distinguish Tχ=0 from Tχ≠0.
  3. [Eq. (55), Sec. 4] Approximating G_R by the Minkowski retarded Green function is assumed to be valid for small M, with o_1(M) corrections described as higher order. This is problematic because the numerical domain includes r<2M, where the Schwarzschild curvature is not weak; the Minkowski propagator is not a controlled approximation near the horizon. The statement that the detailed form of o_1(M) is unimportant because α is small does not follow: the correction enters as α^2 times an integral over the horizon region, and it is not shown to be small compared with the α^2 Minkowski term. Since F(x) drives the suppression, this approximation is load-bearing.
  4. [Sec. 5, Eq. (127)] The boundary conditions are imposed at r=0, which is the curvature singularity, and the solution is continued through the horizon. The role of the Damour–Ruffini analytic continuation [Eq. (127)] in the numerical integration of Eq. (87) is not specified. For a distant observer, the relevant object is the exterior solution with appropriate outgoing boundary conditions at infinity; solving an inhomogeneous ODE from the singularity with arbitrary data has no clear relation to the scattering problem that defines Hawking radiation. This reinforces Major Comment 1.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 1] Typo: 'paticles' should be 'particles' in the Introduction. Please proofread the manuscript.
  2. [Sec. 5, Fig. 3] The color-map figure is described only qualitatively. Please specify the color scale and state explicitly which panel/curve corresponds to which parameter set, since Figs. 2 and 3 use different parameter values from Figs. 4 and 5.
  3. [Sec. 5, text before Figs. 4–5] The claim that the oscillation period of F(x) is 'on the order of 10^5' is not demonstrated quantitatively for the parameter values used in the numerical solution. A short estimate would make the neglect of oscillations checkable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the suppression result is a numerical consequence of a first-principles effective equation, not a restatement of its inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained: Eq. (25) and the influence functional are obtained by tracing out the bath from the bilinear action (1); the effective Keldysh action and Eq. (45) follow by variation; the inhomogeneous term F(x) in Eq. (87) is computed from the Damour–Ruffini solution (51) and a Minkowski retarded Green function (54)-(55). No parameter is fitted to the output, no boundary condition is tuned to force |R_alpha|<|R_0|, and no load-bearing result is imported through self-citations (Refs. 53-54 are technique citations). The comparison with equal arbitrary boundary conditions and the identification of |R(r)| with radiation intensity are interpretive and could affect physical validity, but they are not a formal reduction of the conclusion to the inputs; changing alpha changes the ODE's source term and a smaller |R| is a derived, nontrivial numerical outcome. The fact that the retarded Green function is temperature-independent and the Keldysh component is dropped (Eq. 44) is a physical limitation of the model as a 'thermal' effect, not a circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model relies on a thermal Gibbs bath, negligible backreaction, semiclassical truncation, a zero-temperature Minkowski-like retarded Green function, and an unproved identification of |R| with radiation intensity. No new fundamental entities are introduced; χ is a conventional scalar field used to model the bath.

free parameters (4)
  • coupling constant α = 0.001, 0.01, 0.1 (numerics)
    Interaction strength chosen small and scanned; no data constraint; it drives the suppression.
  • field masses m_φ, m_χ = 0
    Set to zero to simplify the reduction of the dynamical equation.
  • bath temperature Tχ = set but unused (effectively 0)
    The bath state (24) depends on Tχ, but the computation uses the zero-temperature retarded Green function and drops the Keldysh sector, so Tχ never enters the final result.
  • boundary conditions R(0), R'(0) = R(0)=1+1i, R'(0)=-0.1-0.1i
    Chosen arbitrarily; the comparison across α relies on keeping them fixed, but no physical justification is given.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption System and bath are initially unentangled and the bath is in a thermal Gibbs state ρχ ∝ exp(-Hχ/Tχ).
    Needed for the influence functional, Eqs. (24)-(25).
  • domain assumption Scalar fields φ and χ with bilinear coupling represent the HRP and the bath.
    Model action Eq. (1); ignores spin and other interactions.
  • domain assumption Backreaction of the bath on the spacetime metric is negligible.
    Stated in Sec. 2 to ignore greybody factors.
  • domain assumption Semiclassical truncation: φ_q is small, so the G_K term and φ_q² terms are dropped.
    Leads from Eq. (43) to Eqs. (44)-(45).
  • ad hoc to paper The retarded Green function can be approximated by the zero-temperature free-field Minkowski Green function plus negligible o₁(M) corrections, even near the horizon.
    Eqs. (54)-(55); this is not justified near r=2M where M/r ~ 1/2.
  • ad hoc to paper |R(r)| at large r is a direct proxy for the detected radiation intensity.
    Used to interpret the numerical solutions in Sec. 5; no flux or tunneling-rate derivation is given.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 26354 in / 13433 out tokens · 145453 ms · 2026-08-01T09:15:42.810552+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Thermal bath induced suppression of Hawking radiation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VF2EXXD2

@misc{pith2026260721664,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Thermal bath induced suppression of Hawking radiation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VF2EXXD2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.21664}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

The cosmic microwave background radiation or particles surrounding a black hole can be modeled as a thermal bath coupled to the black hole. In this study, we investigate the effects of such a thermal bath on black hole radiation. The model involves Hawking radiation particles that are bilinearly coupled to the thermal bath. In this framework, the Hawking radiation particles are treated as the system, and the bath serves as the environment. We analytically derive the effective Keldysh action and the dynamical equation of the system, which are essential for studying the effective dynamics of Hawking radiation. For the specific case of a bath weakly coupled to the radiation particles from a Schwarzschild black hole, we numerically solve the effective dynamical equation. The results indicate that the bath suppresses Hawking radiation. Consequently, an observer located far away from the black hole will detect radiation that is weaker than Hawking's original prediction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21664 by Hong Wang, Jin Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The closed time path contour. The blue arrowed line represents the forward time path, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Variations of the function F(x) with respect to the Schwarzschild radial coordinate r. The horizontal axes of panels (a), (b) and (c) correspond to the coordinate r. The vertical axes, labeled Re(F), Im(F), and |F|, represent the real part, the imaginary part, and the magnitude of the function F(x), respectively. The parameters are set to: M = 0.1, ω = 0.01, α = 0.1, and t = 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/ful… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Variations of the function F(x). The horizontal and vertical axes represent the black hole mass M and the Schwarzschild radial coordinate r, respectively. Different colors represent different values of |F|. The parameters are set to: ω = 0.01, α = 0.01, and t = 1. 22 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Variations of the radial wavefunction over the Schwarzschild radial coordinate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Variations of the radial wavefunction with respect to the Schwarzschild radial coordinate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png] view at source ↗

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

75 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    S. W. Hawking, Black hole explosions, Nature248(1974) 30

    1974

  2. [2]

    S. W. Hawking, Particle creation by black holes, Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975) 199

    1975

  3. [3]

    J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, Path integral derivation of black hole radiance, Phys. Rev. D13(1976) 2188

    1976

  4. [4]

    D. N. Page, Particle emission rates from a black hole: Massless particles from an uncharged, nonrotating hole, Phys. Rev. D13(1976) 198

    1976

  5. [5]

    Kraus and F

    P. Kraus and F. Wilczek, Effect of selfinteraction on charged black hole radiance, Nucl. Phys. B437(1995) 231

    1995

  6. [6]

    Srinivasan and T

    K. Srinivasan and T. Padmanabhan, Particle production and complex path anal- ysis, Phys. Rev. D60(1999) 024007

    1999

  7. [7]

    Shankaranarayanan, T

    S. Shankaranarayanan, T. Padmanabhan and K. Srinivasan, Hawking radiation in different coordinate settings: complex paths approach, Class. Quant. Grav.19 (2002) 2671

    2002

  8. [8]

    A. J. M. Medved, Radiation via tunneling in the charged BTZ black hole, Class. and Quant. Grav.19(2002) 589

    2002

  9. [9]

    E. C. Vagenas, Generalization of the KKW analysis for black hole radiation, Phys. Lett. B559(2003) 65

    2003

  10. [10]

    Banerjee and S

    R. Banerjee and S. Kulkarni, Hawking radiation, effective actions and covariant boundary conditions, Phys. Lett. B659(2008) 827. 37

    2008

  11. [11]

    Gangopadhyay, Hawking radiation from a Reissner-Nordstr¨ om black hole with a global monopole via covariant anomalies and effective action, Phys

    S. Gangopadhyay, Hawking radiation from a Reissner-Nordstr¨ om black hole with a global monopole via covariant anomalies and effective action, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 044026

    2008

  12. [12]

    C. M. Chen, J. R. Sun, F. Y. Tang and P. Y. Tsai, Spinor particle creation in near extremal Reissner–Nordstr¨ om black holes, Class. Quant. Grav.32(2015) 195003

    2015

  13. [13]

    Almheiri, N

    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

    2019

  14. [14]

    T. J. Hollowood and S. P. Kumar, Islands and page curves for evaporating black holes in JT gravity, JHEP08(2020) 094

    2020

  15. [15]

    Damour and R

    T. Damour and R. Ruffini, Black-hole evaporation in the Klein-Sauter-Heisenberg- Euler formalism, Phys. Rev. D14(1976) 332

    1976

  16. [16]

    Zhao and J

    Z. Zhao and J. Y. Zhu, Damour-Ruffini and Unruh theories of the Hawking effect, Int. J. Theor. Phys.33(1994) 2147

    1994

  17. [17]

    H. W. Yu and J. L. Zhang, Understanding Hawking radiation in the framework of open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 024031

    2008

  18. [18]

    C. K. Dumlu, Stokes phenomenon and Hawking radiation, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 125006

    2020

  19. [19]

    M. K. Parikh and F. Wilczek, Hawking radiation as tunneling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85(2000) 5042

    2000

  20. [20]

    E. T. Akhmedov, V. Akhmedova and D. Singleton, Hawking temperature in the tunneling picture, Phys. Lett. B642(2006) 124

    2006

  21. [21]

    E. T. Akhmedov, T. Pilling and D. Singleton, Subtleties in the quasi-classical calculation of Hawking radiation, arXiv:0805.2653

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  22. [22]

    Q. Q. Jiang, S. Q. Wu and X. Cai, Hawking radiation as tunneling from the Kerr and Kerr-Newman black holes, Phys. Rev. D73(2006) 064003. 38

    2006

  23. [23]

    Nadalini, L

    M. Nadalini, L. Vanzo and S. Zerbini, Hawking radiation as tunnelling: the D- dimensional rotating case, J. Phys. A39(2006) 6601

    2006

  24. [24]

    Banerjee and B

    R. Banerjee and B. R. Majhi, Quantum tunneling beyond semiclassical approxi- mation, JHEP06(2008) 095

    2008

  25. [25]

    Angheben, M

    M. Angheben, M. Nadalini, L. Vanzo and S. Zerbini, Hawking radiation as tun- neling for extremal and rotating black holes, JHEP05(2005) 014

    2005

  26. [26]

    J. Y. Zhang, Z. Zhao, Massive particles’ black hole tunneling and de Sitter tun- neling, Nucl. Phys. B725(2005) 173

    2005

  27. [27]

    J. Y. Zhang, Z. Zhao, Hawking radiation of charged particles via tunneling from the Reissner-Nordstr¨ om black hole, JHEP10(2005) 055

    2005

  28. [28]

    J. Y. Zhang, Z. Zhao, Charged particles’ tunnelling from the Kerr–Newman black hole, Phys. Lett. B638(2006) 110

    2006

  29. [29]

    S. Q. Wu and Q. Q. Jiang, Remarks on Hawking radiation as tunneling from the BTZ black holes, JHEP03(2006) 079

    2006

  30. [30]

    Mitra, Hawking temperature from tunnelling formalism, Phys

    P. Mitra, Hawking temperature from tunnelling formalism, Phys. Lett. B648 (2007) 240

    2007

  31. [31]

    B. C. Zhang, Q. Y. Cai and M. S. Zhan, The temperature in Hawking radiation as tunneling, Phys. Lett. B671(2009) 310

    2009

  32. [32]

    X. K. He and W. B. Liu, Modified Hawking radiation in a BTZ black hole using Damour–Ruffini method, Phys. Lett. B653(2007) 330

    2007

  33. [33]

    Almheiri, T

    A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini, The entropy of Hawking radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys.93(2021) 035002

    2021

  34. [34]

    Penington, Entanglement wedge reconstruction and the information paradox, JHEP09(2020) 002

    G. Penington, Entanglement wedge reconstruction and the information paradox, JHEP09(2020) 002

    2020

  35. [35]

    Hartman, E

    T. Hartman, E. Shaghoulian and A. Strominger, Islands in asymptotically flat 2D gravity, JHEP07(2020) 022. 39

    2020

  36. [36]

    K. Goto, T. Hartman and A. Tajdini, Replica wormholes for an evaporating 2D black hole, JHEP04(2021) 289

    2021

  37. [37]

    Penington, S

    G. Penington, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford and Z. Yang, Replica wormholes and the black hole interior, JHEP03(2022) 205

    2022

  38. [38]

    Almheiri, R

    A. Almheiri, R. Mahajan, J. Maldacena and Y. Zhao, The Page curve of Hawking radiation from semiclassical geometry, JHEP03(2020) 149

    2020

  39. [39]

    H. Z. Chen, Z. Fisher, J. Hernandez, R. C. Myers and S. M. Ruan, Evaporating black holes coupled to a thermal bath, JHEP01(2021) 065

    2021

  40. [40]

    S. Iso, H. Umetsu and F. Wilczek, Hawking radiation from charged black holes via gauge and gravitational anomalies, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 151302

    2006

  41. [41]

    S. P. Robinson and F. Wilczek, Relationship between Hawking radiation and grav- itational anomalies, Phys. Rev. Lett.95(2005) 011303

    2005

  42. [42]

    Agullo, A

    I. Agullo, A. J. Brady, A. Delhom and D. Kranas, Entanglement from rotating black holes in thermal baths, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 025021

    2024

  43. [43]

    P. S. Cust´ odio and J. E. Horvath, The generalized uncertainty principle, entropy bounds and black-hole (non-)evaporation in a thermal bath, Class. Quant. Grav. 20(2003) L197

    2003

  44. [44]

    Saida, Black hole evaporation in a heat bath as a nonequilibrium process and its final fate, Class

    H. Saida, Black hole evaporation in a heat bath as a nonequilibrium process and its final fate, Class. Quant. Grav.24(2007) 691

    2007

  45. [45]

    Chatterjee, J

    A. Chatterjee, J. Kalita and D. Maity, Evaporation of primordial black holes in a thermal universe: A thermofield dynamics approach, arXiv: 2512.07284v1

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

    M¨ akel¨ a, Black hole in a heat bath, Int

    J. M¨ akel¨ a, Black hole in a heat bath, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D31(2022) 2250082

    2022

  47. [47]

    Schumacher, Kerr black hole in equilibrium with a rotating heat bath, Phys

    B. Schumacher, Kerr black hole in equilibrium with a rotating heat bath, Phys. Rev. D46(1992) 1416

    1992

  48. [48]

    Kawai and Y

    H. Kawai and Y. Yokokura, Interior metric of slowly formed black holes in a heat bath, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 045017. 40

    2022

  49. [49]

    Kotopoulis and C

    D. Kotopoulis and C. Anastopoulos, Thermodynamics and phase transitions of black holes in contact with a gravitating heat bath, Class. Quant. Grav.38(2021) 195026

    2021

  50. [50]

    Kalita, D

    J. Kalita, D. Maity and A. Chatterjee, Black holes in thermal bath live shorter: implications for primordial black holes, arXiv:2501.11925

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [51]

    H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The theory of open quantum systems, Oxford University Press, New York (2002)

    2002

  52. [52]

    Parker and D

    L. Parker and D. Toms, Quantum field theory in curved spacetime, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)

    2009

  53. [53]

    Wang and J

    H. Wang and J. Wang, Quantum cosmology of the flat universe via closed real-time path integral, Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 1172

    2022

  54. [54]

    Wang and J

    H. Wang and J. Wang, Quantum master equation for the vacuum decay dynamics, JHEP09(2023) 113

    2023

  55. [55]

    Banerjee, S

    S. Banerjee, S. Choudhury, S. Chowdhury, J. Knaute, S. Panda and K. Shirish, Thermalization in quenched open quantum cosmology, Nucl. Phys. B996(2023) 116368

    2023

  56. [56]

    Caldeira and A

    A. Caldeira and A. Leggett, Quantum tunneling in a dissipative system, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 149 (1983) 374

    1983

  57. [57]

    Ama-Tul-Mughani, W

    Q. Ama-Tul-Mughani, W. Salam and R. Saleem, Greybody factor for regular Bardeen black hole surrounded by PFDM, Astropart. Phys.132(2021) 102623

    2021

  58. [58]

    S. S. Gubserv and I. R. Klebanov, Four-Dimensional Greybody Factors and the Effective String, Phys. Rev. Lett.77(1996) 4491

    1996

  59. [59]

    H. J. Carmichael, Statistical methods in quantum optics, Springer Verlag (1999)

    1999

  60. [60]

    Rammer, Quantum Field Theory of Non-equilibrium States, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge (2011)

    J. Rammer, Quantum Field Theory of Non-equilibrium States, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge (2011). 41

    2011

  61. [61]

    Kamenev, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2011)

    A. Kamenev, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2011)

    2011

  62. [62]

    R. P. Feynman and F. L. Vernon, The theory of a general quantum system inter- acting with a linear dissipative system, Ann. Phys.24(1963) 118

    1963

  63. [63]

    Makri, D

    N. Makri, D. E. Makarov, Tensor propagator for iterative quantum time evolution of reduced density matrices. I. Theory. J. Chem. Phys.102(1995) 4600

    1995

  64. [64]

    B. L. Hu, J. P. Paz and Y. Zhang, Quantum Brownian motion in a general environ- ment: Exact master equation with nonlocal dissipation and colored noise, Phys. Rev. D45(1992) 2843

    1992

  65. [65]

    X. Chen, Y. Wang and Z.-Z. Xianyu, Schwinger-Keldysh Diagrammatics for Pri- mordial Perturbations, JCAP12(2017) 006

    2017

  66. [66]

    Calzetta and B

    E. Calzetta and B. L. Hu, Closed-time-path functional formalism in curved space- time: Application to cosmological back-reaction problems, Phys. Rev. D35(1987) 495

    1987

  67. [67]

    Poisson, A

    E. Poisson, A. Pound and I. Vega, The motion of point particles in curved space- time, Living Rev. Relativity14(2011) 7

    2011

  68. [68]

    L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold and S. Diehl, Keldysh field theory for driven open quantum systems, Rep. Prog. Phys.79(2016) 096001

    2016

  69. [69]

    N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)

    1982

  70. [70]

    M. J. Pfenning and E. Poisson, Scalar, electromagnetic, and gravitational self- forces in weakly curved spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 084001

    2002

  71. [71]

    Y. Z. Chu, K. Pasmatsiou and G. D. Starkman, Finite-size effects on the self-force, Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 104020. 42

    2020

  72. [72]

    G. B. Arfken and H. J. Weber, Mathematical methods for physicists, 4th ed. Academic Press, (2013)

    2013

  73. [73]

    T. Y. Wu and T. Ohmura, Quantum Theory of Scattering, Prentice-Hall, Engle- wood Cliffs, N.J. (1962)

    1962

  74. [74]

    S. J. Ran, E. Tirrito, C. Peng, X. Chen, L. Tagliacozzo, G. Su and M. Lewenstein, Tensor Network Contractions: Methods and Applications to Quantum Many-body Systems. Lecture Notes in Physics, Springer, New York, (2020)

    2020

  75. [75]

    Kilgour, B

    M. Kilgour, B. K. Agarwalla and D. Segal, Path-integral methodology and simu- lations of quantum thermal transport: full counting statistic approach. J. Chem. Phys.150(2019) 084111. 43

    2019