Holographic Relations in Loop Quantum Gravity Arxiv:1608.02932V1 [Hep-Th

Holographic relations in loop quantum gravity

Lee Smolin∗

Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, 31 Caroline Street North, Waterloo, Ontario N2J 2Y5, Canada August 10, 2016

Abstract

It is shown that a relation between entropy and minimal area holds in loop quantum gravity, reminiscent of the Ryu-Takayanagi relation.

Contents

1 Introduction 2

2 The basic assumptions of loop quantum gravity 3 2.1 Extension to quantum group representations ...... 6

3 Categorical holography. 6

4 The simplicity constraint expresses the ﬁrst law of thermodynamics 8 arXiv:1608.02932v1 [hep-th] 9 Aug 2016 5 Analogues of the Ryu-Takayanagi relation 9

6 The derivation 12

7 A conjecture 16

8 Conclusions 16

∗[email protected]

1 1 Introduction

The Ryu-Takayanagi relation[1] is one of the deeper expressions of holography in CFT and condensed matter theory. It relates the entanglement entropy across a boundary γ in a conformal field theory to the minimal area of a surface, σ that has boundary γ but suspends into a bulk of one higher dimension. It has stimulated very fruitful develop- ments concerning the relationship between space-time geometry and entanglement[2]. It suggests a new way to understand entanglement entropy[3] as well as the older results relating thermodynamics, spacetime and the quantum[4]-[10]. The Ryu-Takayanagi relation is expressed in terms of a diffeomorphism invariant ob- servable in the bulk-an extremal area, which raises the natural question of whether it can be formulated, or has an analogue, in diffeomorphism invariant approaches to quantum gravity. In this paper, I show one such partial analogue, in the context of loop quantum gravity, and conjecture another, closer analogue. Loop quantum gravity provides a natural setting for a bulk/boundary correspondence, which was pointed out in [11] and has been developed in many papers since[14, 15, 12, 13]. This arises from the fact that general relativity has a close connection to a topological field theory[16, 17]. Specifically, as we review in the next section, general relativity arises from the topological BF theory by the imposition of certain constraints, called the simplicity constraints[18, 19, 20, 21]. Further, there is a natural ladder of dimensions[22] which relates BF theory on a four dimensional manifold M to Chern-Simons theory on its boundary, B = ∂M. The combination of these circumstances gives a boundary theory related to Chern-Simons theory for classical and quantum general relativity[11]. This bulk/boundary relation has been central to the description of black hole and cosmological horizons in loop quantum gravity, where the space of states on the horizon is related to Chern-Simons theory[11, 14, 15]. However the full importance and meaning of this relation remains to be elucidated. The relation is particularly simple in the cases of non-vanishing cosmological constant, Λ, and this suggests these structures may enable a background independent realization of an AdS/CF T correspondence, or even lead to a general notion of holography. This was suggested in [11] but the exact sense in which this provides a realization of holography[23, 24], or might be related to the AdS/CF T correspondence[25], remains obscure. Happily, a new piece of the puzzle has recently come to light. This is the realization that the simplicity constraints express the first law of thermodynamics[26, 28, 29, 27], and are hence closely related to black hole thermodynamics[28, 29]. Through this they are related to a key relation that holds on the corners of causal diamonds, called by some the first law of spacetime dynamics[31, 32, 34, 35, 28, 29]. This has yielded insights into black hole entropy[28, 29],as well as enabling a realization of Jacobson’s argument that the Einstein equations reflect the thermodynamics of an underlying pre-geometric physics[36, 37, 38], within loop quantum gravity[35]. Here we show that this additional insight, when com- bined with the older results, enables us to derive an analogue of the Ryu-Takayanagi

2 relation within the framework of loop quantum gravity. In the next section we review the basics of loop quantum gravity, emphasizing the ideas and results needed for the present paper; this hopefully makes the paper accessible for a wide audience. In section 3 we introduce the topic of categorical holography which provides a natural setting for bullk/boundary relationships in loop quantum gravity, while in section 4 we review the recently understood relationship between the dynamics of quantum gravity and thermodynamics. This allows us to express an analogue of the Ryu-Takkayanagi relation in section 5, and derive it in section 6. We follow that with a statement of a conjecture of another form of the relation in section 7, after which the concluding section closes the paper.

2 The basic assumptions of loop quantum gravity

Loop quantum gravity is based on a few simple physical ideas. 1. The dynamical coordinate of general relativity is a connection: the Ashtekar connection[39, 40]. This means that general relativity is a diffeomorphism invariant gauge theory. 2. The degrees of freedom of a quantum gauge theory are quanta of electric flux, which can be represented as holonomies and interpreted as loops or strings. This is also called the dual superconductor picture. It leads to the loop representation[41, 42]. 1 and 2 together impy together that area and volume have discrete spectra[42]. 3. General relativity is a constrained topological field theory[18, 19, 20]. This means that general relativity arises from a topological field theory by the imposition of constraints. These are called the simplicity constraints[18, 19, 20]. They are as simple as possible, in that they are quadratic, non-derivative local equations. These break two degrees of freedom per point of the gauge invariance, leading to the emergence of the two physical degrees of freedom per point of general relativity. The particular T QF T general relativity is derived from is BF theory. The action on a four manifold M = Σ × R is[17] Z Z i Λ i k S = B ∧ Fi − B ∧ Bi − φijBi ∧ Bj − YCS(A) (1) M 2 4π ∂M Here F i is the curvature of an SU(2) connection, Ai and Bi is a triad of two forms1. The boundary action is the Chern-Simons invariant of the pull back of the connec- 2 tion to the boundary ∂M = S × R. Note that without the term in φij, which is a traceless symmetric tensor in ij, this would be topological BF theory. The φij are Lagrange multipliers whose equations of motion lead to the simplicity constraints.

i i 1 ij k B ∧ B − δ B ∧ Bk = 0 (2) 3 1How the equations of general relativity follow from this action is reviewed in [43].

3 The solutions of this is that Bi is the self-dual two form of some metric; and that metric satisﬁes the Einstein equations, by virtue of the Ai and Bi ﬁeld equations. For our purposes we focus on the boundary conditions required for the action to be functionally differentiable, as these are central for the bulk-boundary relation. The variational principle imposes boundary conditions which are given by[11]

i Λ i (F − B )|∂M = 0 (3) 2π These are called the self-dual boundary conditions because they impose that the pull back of the ﬁeld strength into the boundary is proportional to the self-dual two form, also pulled back. Note that were that relation imposed on all six components of the ﬁeld strength it would imply that the spacetime was deSitter or anti-deSitter, depending on the sign of Λ. So this can be seen as a topological form of an asymp- totic deSitter or anti-deSitter boundary condition.

4. The cosmological constant is implemented by means quantum deformation of the representation theory used for the spin network labels. In the Euclidean case this involves q at a root of unity, where the level is given by[11, 44] 6π k = (4) G~Λ For the Lorentzian case we describe here, q must be real so we have instead[45, 46] 6π − ık = ln(q) = (5) G~Λ

This implies that quantum general relativity is quantum BF theory with defects[11, 47]. These are punctures on the two dimensional spatial boundary, B and spin networks in the three dimensional bulk, Σ. The self-dual boundary conditions force the free ends of the spin networks to be attached to punctures in the boundary, with the same labels.

5. Topological ﬁeld theories in adjacent dimensions are related by a ladder of dimensions[22],

BF3+1 → CS2+1 → WZW1+1 (6)

The different dimensions are tied together by the self-dual boundary conditions(3)

6. The simplicity constraints that turn BF theory into general relativity have a simple geometrical interpretation. The simplicity constraint can be expressed as a constraint on the representation theory used to label spin networks and spin foams. We ﬁrst review this structure for the classical case and then describe its extension to

4 quantum spin networks, labeled by representations of quantum groups. The representations employed in the bulk are a subset of the representations of SL(2,C), which satisfy the following simplicity constraint, ˆ ˆ < S >=< (Kz − γLz) >= 0 (7)

2 ˆ ˆ where γ is the Immirzi parameter , and Kz and Lz are the generators in the representation of boosts and rotations. These require that the SL(2,C) representations are images of SU(2) representations under the map (8)

Yγ : Vj → Vj,r=γ(j+1). (8)

The simplicity constraints also have a compelling physical interpretation in terms of thermodynamics, which complements their elegant mathematical interpretation, and is the subject of section 3, below.

Figure 1: Ladder of dimensions

2An analogue of the θ parameter in QCD, that also measures the area gap.

5 Figure 2: The quantum ladder of dimensions reveals quantum general relativity as a T QF T with defects.

2.1 Extension to quantum group representations

So far we followed [29] in deﬁning the simplicity map Yγ, (8) for the ordinary groups, SU(2) and S0(3, 1). But the connection to Chern-Simons theory as well as the form of the bulk-boundary map requires that the representations be quantum deformed. Hence we take the boundary states to be labeled by the representation theory of SUq(2) and the bulk spin networks to be labeled by the inﬁnite dimensional unitary representations of SLq(2,C). As in the classical case, the former are labeled by an half integer, j while the latter are labeled by a pair (j, r) where r is a real number [45, 46]. The latter exist in the case of q real, which means we must take for the level 6π ln(q) = (9) G~Λ the simplicity map is now, q q q Yγ : Vj → Vj,r=γ(j+1). (10)

3 Categorical holography.

These mathematical structures reveal a beautiful bulk-boundary correspondence, which provides a non-perturbative realization of holography. This might be called categorical holography and was ﬁrst described by Louis Crane[22].

• To every punctured 2-surface, B, with labels, ji we associate a Hilbert space, HBji as shown in Figure 3.

6 Figure 3: To every punctured 2-surface, B, with labels, ji we associate a Hilbert space,

HBji

This is the Hilbert space of Chern-Simons theory at level k on the punctured surface B, with punctured labeled in the representations of SUq(2). It is spanned by quantum SUq(2) spin networks on B with ends attached to the punctures.

• H† To the surface with reversed orientation we associate the dual Hilbert space, Bji . • Consider a three dimensional manifold Σ, whose boundary is B. On it we deﬁne for

each set of labeled punctures on B a bulk Hilbert space, HΣ,ji , spanned by a basis of quantum SLq(2,C) spin networks with ends on the punctures. We identify the puncture labels from SUq(2) with the puncture labels for simple representations of q SLq(2,C) with the map Yγ , (10). • A bulk boundary correspondence is gotten by taking a quantum spin network in the boundary and suspending it into the bulk from the punctures. This suspension is well deﬁned because quantum spin networks in the two dimensional boundary q distinguish over-crossings from under-crossings. We then use the map Yγ to trans- form the SUq(2) spin network labels to those of simple SLq(2,C) representations. This gives a holographic map

q Tγ : HBji → HΣ,ji (11)

7 Figure 4: The holographic map from the boundary into the bulk Hilbert space.

• To each operator on the boundary Hilbert space we associate a cobordism, ie a cylinder of one higher dimension.

• Trace is represented by closing the cylinder.

4 The simplicity constraint expresses the ﬁrst law of thermodynamics

We will next need the thermodynamic interpretation of the simplicity constraints, (7). This is presented in [26, 28, 29, 27]. Note that the boost Hamiltonian acts within the SL(2,C) representations as, ˆ ˆ Hb = ~Kz (12) while the boost temperature has dimensions of ~ because the boost is dimensionless, and has the universal value 2π β = . (13) ~ 8 Recall also that the area operator is related to a rotation generator by ˆ ˆ A = 8πγG~|Lz| (14)

Combining these and taking the expectation value yields the ﬁrst law of thermodynamics ˆ ˆ < A > β < Hb >= ST = , (15) 4G~ Note that the ~’s and γ’s cancel, so we get a classical expression for the expectation values, which expresses what has been called the ﬁrst law of spacetime dynamics[31, 32, 33, 34, 35]. A Hb = (16) 8πG This is also called the Carlip-Teitelbiom relationc[31, 32, 33, 34, 35]. We may note that from it the positivity of Hb follows from that of the area; this is possibly related to [48].

5 Analogues of the Ryu-Takayanagi relation

We next proceed by dividing the punctured boundary B into two regions, A and its com- plement B = ¬A, separated by a circle γ in B. A contains nA punctures with labels jI while B contains nB punctures with labels kI ”. We assume no punctures lie on γ. Consider a quantum spin network in B. This will have p edges crossing γ with representations l1, . . . , lp. There is a Hilbert space HA,{l} in region A spanned by spin networks that end at the nA punctures and at the p edges that cross γ, and similarly for B. We then may decompose the original Hilbert space as

∞ X X HB{j}{k} = HA,{j}{l} ⊗ HB,{k}{l} (17) p=0 {l}

Figure 5: Dividing the boundary theory into two subsysetems.

We will also need corresponding the decomposition of density matrices. Note that this takes place in the cylinder B × I as indicated in ﬁgure 6.

9 Figure 6: Dividing the density matrix of the boundary theory into two subsysetems.

We now deﬁne an thermal density matrix in HB{j}{k}. This is deﬁned by an operator in HB{j}{k} which can be represented as a cobordism embedded in the cylinder A × R, as shown in Figure 6. The cylinder ends are a copy of the punctured surface A and its dual A˜

Figure 7: An example of an entangled density matrix.

This has the form of a product of spin network edges connecting punctures in A with the dual punctures in A˜. Inserted into each edge with spin j is a density operator[29] 1 −βHˆj ρj = e (18) Z This is illustrated in Figure 8. We now consider a class of entangled-thermal states, shown in Figure 8.

10 Figure 8: A general set of entangled thermal states.

A speciﬁc example is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: A more speciﬁc set of entangled thermal states.

We next deﬁne the thermal entropy of this entangled state as

ST = βT r(ρA+BHb) = β < Hb > (19)

Let us consider now surfaces, σ, in the cylinder, spanning the loops γ and its dual γ˜

∂σ = γ − γ˜ (20)

This will intersect various edges in the bulk. For each such surface there is an average area deﬁned by ˆ < A[σ] >= T rρA+BA[σ] (21)

We will show below that there is, up to topology, a minimal area surface σmin spanning a loop γ ∈ B and its image γ˜. One can deﬁne an operator ˆ ˆ Amin(γ) = A[σmin]∂σmin=γ−γ˜ (22) by deﬁning its action in the spin network basis.

11 Given this we will also show that ˆ < A[σmin] > ST = (23) 4G~ This is a form of the the Ryu-Takayanagi relation. One might object that ST is not an entanglement entropy, it is a thermal entropy. To get an entanglement entropy one sould subtract of the entropy of the subsystems. One way to do this for states of the form of Fig. (8) is to take the difference between ST and the entropy of the simple thermal product state of the two subsystems

SE2 = ST (ρA+B) − ST (ρA) − ST (ρB) (24)

This is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10: One form of the entanglement entropy.

It is clear that ST (ρA) and ST (ρB) do not depend on the area of any spanning surface. Hence we have ˆ < Amin(γ) > SE2 = + C (25) 4G~ where C is a constant that doesn’t depend on the area of the surface σ. This is an analogue of the Ryu-Takayanagi relation.

6 The derivation

We want to compute ST = βT r(ρA+BHb) (26) This is represented diagrammatically in Figure 11.

12 Figure 11: The entropy ST .

For the speciﬁc form 9, that gives

Next we use the decomposition of the boost generator

Hb = HA ⊗ I + I ⊗ HB (27)

To ﬁnd

We next use the fact that Hb generates a symmetry of the intertwiners,

which implies

13 This becomes

We use the simplicity constraint (7) to show that

There is one more step to the Ryu-Takayanagi relation which is to conﬁrm that the cut we used to deﬁne the entropy comes from a minimal area surface. We have to show that deforming the surface around a node as shown in Figure 12 increases the area.

14 Figure 12: Deformation of the surface σ.

We have to show that ˆ ˆ < A[σ1] >≤< A[σ2] > (28) where σ1 and σ2 are deﬁned by

This follows from the triangle inequality j ≤ k + l, which expresses Gauss’s law. This implies that the area eigenvalues satisfy. A(j) =≤ A(k) + A(l) (29) ˆ ˆ So let us deﬁne the operator Amin[σ] to return on eigenstates of A[σ] the minimal area of a surface spanning the same boundary ∂σ = γ − γ˜. We then have shown ˆ < Amin(γ) > ST = (30) 4G~

15 7 A conjecture

We may instead deﬁne the entanglement entropy as the difference between the reduced and von Neumann entropies. SE = Sred − SvonN (31) where red red Sred = −T rρA ln ρA (32) and SvonN = −T rρA+B ln ρA+B (33) We conjecture that ˆ < Amin(γ) > SE = + C (34) 4G~ 8 Conclusions

We have found an analogue of the Ryu-Takayanagi relation for loop quantum gravity, and conjectured another form of the result. Let us recall the inputs to the derivation.

• The result is built on the basic pillars of loop quantum gravity: the recognition of gravity as a diffeomorphism invariant gauge theory, the duality of quantized gauge fields with extended objects, and in particular the identification of area with electric flux, the close relationship with topological BF theory, and the resulting categorical holographic structure based on the ladder of dimensions, with a natural Chern- Simons boundary theory. • We impose a non-perturbative version of asymptotically AdS boundary conditions, expressed as the condition that the curvature pulled back to the boundary be self- dual • We represent the density matrix by spin-network in the bulk, following the framework of categorical holography. • We assume an entangled thermal-boosted state. • We use invariance of intertwiners to move symmetry generators around. • We use the simplicity constraint to relate the boost hamiltonian to area and hence to entropy, thus incorporating the first law of thermodynamimcs.

In the near future we hope to continue to deepen our understanding of the relationship between gravity, thermodynamics and the quantum, in the search for a deeper expression of the holographic principle. One important step would be to understand the relationship between the emergence of the Einstein equations from thermodynamics[36, 38, 27]

16 and the kind of holographic identities derived here. Related to this would be to ﬁnd a quantum gravity setting to express the positivity of the boost hamiltonian to that of entropy[48], given that the former is a consequence of the Carlip-Teitelbiom relation[31, 32, 33, 34, 35].

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is a pleasure to thank Bianca Dittrich, Laurent Freidel, Marc Geiler, Aldo Riello, Carlo Rovelli and Wolfgang Wieland for comments and discussion. This research was supported in part by Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics. Re- search at Perimeter Institute is supported by the Government of Canada through Industry Canada and by the Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Research and Innovation. This research was also partly supported by grants from NSERC, FQXi and the John Tem- pleton Foundation.

References

[1] .Shinsei Ryu, Tadashi Takayanagi, Holographic Derivation of Entanglement Entropy from AdS/CFT, arXiv:hep-th/060300, Phys.Rev.Lett.96:181602,2006.

[2] N. Lashkari, M. B. McDermott and M. Van Raamsdonk, Gravitational dynamics from entanglement ’thermodynamics’,’ JHEP 1404, 195 (2014) [arXiv:1308.3716 [hep-th]]; T. Faulkner, M. Guica, T. Hartman, R. C. Myers and M. Van Raamsdonk, Gravita- tion from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs, JHEP 1403, 051 (2014), [arXiv:1312.7856 [hep-th]]; B. Swingle and M. Van Raamsdonk, Universality of Gravity from Entangle- ment, arXiv:1405.2933 [hep-th].

[3] R. D. Sorkin, On the Entropy of the Vacuum Outside a Horizon, General Relativity and Gravitation 1 (1983) 734; L. Bombelli, R. K. Koul, J. Lee, and R. D. Sorkin, Quantum source of entropy for black holes, Phys. Rev. D 34 (1986) 373?383; M. Srednicki, Entropy and Area, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 666?669, arXiv:hep-th/9303048.

[4] Jacob Bekenstein, ”Black holes and entropy”. Physical Review D 7 (8): 2333?2346 (April 1973).

[5] J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, and S. W. Hawking, The four laws of black hole mechanics, Comm. Math. Phys. Volume 31, Number 2 (1973), 161-170.

[6] S. W. Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes, Comm. Math. Phys. 43, 199-220 (1975).

[7] P.C.W. Davies, Scalar particle production in Schwarzschild and Rindler metrics , Aug 1974, J.Phys. A8 (1975) 609-616

17 [8] Stephen A. Fulling, Nonuniqueness of canonical ﬁeld quantization in Riemannian spacetime, Nov 1972, Phys.Rev. D7 (1973) 2850-2862; P.C.W. Davies, S.A. Fulling, Ra- diation from a moving mirror in two-dimensional space-time conformal anomaly, 1976, Proc.Roy.Soc.Lond. A348 (1976) 393-414.

[9] W.G. Unruh, Notes on black hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. D14, 870 (1976).

[10] P. Candelas and D.W. Sciama, Irreversible thermodynamics of black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1372 (1977): D.W. Sciama, Black holes and ﬂuctuations of quantum particles: an Einstein synthesis, in Relativity, Quanta, and Cosmology in the Development of the Scientiﬁc Thought of Albert Einstein, vol. II, M. Pantaleo, dir. and F. De Finis, ed. (Giunti Barb‘era, Firenze, 1979).

[11] Lee Smolin, Linking Topological Quantum Field Theory and Nonperturbative Quantum Gravity, arXiv:gr-qc/9505028, J.Math.Phys.36:6417-6455,1995.

[12] Hal M. Haggard, Muxin Han, Wojciech Kami?ski, Aldo Riello, Four-dimensional Quantum Gravity with a Cosmological Constant from Three-dimensional Holomorphic Blocks, arXiv:1509.00458; Muxin Han, 4d Quantum Geometry from 3d Supersymmetric Gauge Theory and Holomorphic Block, arXiv:1509.00466.

[13] J. Fernando Barbero G., Alejandro Perez, Quantum Geometry and Black Holes, arXiv:1501.02963, Contribution to the World Scientiﬁc series ”100 Years of General Relativity” edited by A. Ashtekar and J. Pullin; Jonathan Engle, Karim Noui, Alejan- dro Perez, Daniele Pranzetti, The SU(2) Black Hole entropy revisited, arXiv:1103.2723, JHEP 1105 (2011) 016.

[14] Kirill V. Krasnov, Counting surface states in the loop quantum gravity, Published in Phys.Rev. D55 (1997) 3505-3513, gr-qc/9603025; On Quantum statistical mechanics of Schwarzschild black hole, Gen.Rel.Grav. 30 (1998) 53-68, gr-qc/9605047.

[15] Ashtekar, Abhay; Baez, John; Corichi, Alejandro; Krasnov, Kirill (1998). ”Quan- tum Geometry and Black Hole Entropy”. Physical Review Letters 80 (5): 904?907. arXiv:gr-qc/9710007.

[16] Plebanski, Jerzy F. On the separation of Einsteinian substructures. Journal of Mathemat- ical Physics 18.12 (1977): 2511-2520.

[17] Capovilla, R., Dell, J., Jacobson, T., & Mason, L. (1991). Self-dual 2-forms and gravity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 8(1), 41; Capovilla, R., Dell, J., & Jacobson, T. (1991). A pure spin-connection formulation of gravity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 8(1), 59.

[18] J. Barrett and L. Crane. Relativistic spin-networks and quantum gravity. J. Math. Phys. 39 3296

18 [19] Laurent Freidel, Kirill Krasnov, A New Spin Foam Model for 4d Grav- ity, Class.Quant.Grav. 25 (2008) 125018, DOI: 10.1088/0264-9381/25/12/125018, arXiv:0708.1595

[20] Jonathan Engle; Roberto Pereira; Carlo Rovelli; Etera Livine (2008). ”LQG vertex with ﬁnite Immirzi parameter”. arXiv:0711.0146, Nucl.Phys.B799:136-149,2008.

[21] For recent reviews of spin foam models please see Alejandro Perez, The Spin Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity, arXiv:1205.2019, Living Reviews in Relativity; Carlo Rovelli, Zakopane lectures on loop gravity , arXiv:1102.3660.

[22] Louis Crane, Categorical physics. arXiv preprint hep-th/9301061 (1993), in Knot theory and quantum gravity ed. J. Baez, —(Oxford University Press); Topological ﬁeld theory as the key to quantum gravity, arXiv preprint hep-th/9308126 (1993).Clock and category: Is quantum gravity algebraic?. Journal of Mathematical Physics 36.11 (1995): 6180-6193. Categorical Physics.

[23] G. ’tHooft, Dimensional reduction in quantum gravity Utrecht preprint THU-93/26; gr- qc/9310006.

[24] L. Susskind, The world as a hologram, hep-th/9409089, to appear in a special issue of JMP on quantum geometry; Strings, black holes and lorentz contractions hep- th/9308139; L. Susskind and P. Grifﬁn Partons and black holes UFIFT-HEP-94-13 hep-ph/9410306

[25] J. Maldacena, The large N limit of superconformal ﬁeld theories and supergravity, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]; E.Witten, Anti-de Sitter space and holography, Adv. Theor.Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253 [hep-th/9802150]; S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory, Phys. Lett. B 428 (1998) 105 [hep-th/9802109].

[26] Goffredo Chirco, Hal M. Haggard, Aldo Riello, Carlo Rovelli, Spacetime thermodynamics without hidden degrees of freedom, arXiv:1401.5262, Phys. Rev. D 90, 044044 (2014)

[27] Lee Smolin, The thermodynamics of quantum spacetime histories, arXiv:1510.03858.

[28] Ernesto Frodden, Amit Ghosh and Alejandro Perez, A local ﬁrst law for black hole thermodynamics, arXiv:1110.4055; Amit Ghosh, Karim Noui, Alejandro Perez, Statis- tics, holography, and black hole entropy in loop quantum gravity, arXiv:1309.4563; Amit Ghosh, Alejandro Perez, Black hole entropy and isolated horizons thermodynamics, arXiv:1107.1320.

[29] Eugenio Bianchi, Entropy of non-extremal black holes from loop gravity, arXiv:1204.5122.

19 [30] J. Fernando Barbero G., Alejandro Perez, Quantum Geometry and Black Holes, arXiv:1501.02963, to appear in the World Scientiﬁc series ”100 Years of General Rela- tivity” edited by A. Ashtekar and J. Pullin

[31] S. Carlip and C. Teitelboim, The off-shell black hole, Class. Quant. Grav. 12,1699 (1995).

[32] S. Massar and R. Parentani, How the change in horizon area drives black hole evaporation, Nucl.Phys. B575, 333 (2000); gr-qc/9903027.

[33] Ted Jacobson, Renaud Parentani, Horizon Entropy, arXiv:gr-qc/0302099v1, Found.Phys. 33 (2003) 323-348.

[34] Eugenio Bianchi and Wolfgang Wieland, Horizon energy as the boost boundary term in general relativity and loop gravity.

[35] Lee Smolin, General relativity as the equation of state of spin foam, arXiv:1205.5529, Clas- sical and Quantum Gravity.

[36] Ted Jacobson, Thermodynamics of space-time: the Einstein equation of state, Phys.Rev.Lett. 75 (1995) 1260-1263 e-Print: gr-qc/9504004.

[37] T. Padmanabhan, Thermodynamical Aspects of Gravity: New insights, arXiv:0911.5004, Rep. Prog. Phys. 73 (2010) 046901; Entropy of Static Spacetimes and Microscopic Density of States, arXiv:gr-qc/0308070, Class.Quant.Grav.21:4485-4494,2004; Equipartition of energy in the horizon degrees of freedom and the emergence of gravity, arXiv:0912.3165, Mod.Phys.Lett.A25:1129-1136,2010.

[38] Ted Jacobson, Entanglement equilibrium and the Einstein equation arXiv:1505.04753.

[39] Abhay Ashtekar, New variables for classical and quantum gravity,? Phys. Rev. Lett. 57(18), 2244-2247 (1986).

[40] A. Ashtekar, New perspectives in canonical gravity (Bibliopolis, Naples, 1988); Lec- tures on non-perturbative canonical gravity, Advanced Series in Astrophysics and Cosmology-Vol. 6 (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1991); R. Gambini and J. Pullin, Loops, knots, gauge theories and quantum gravity Cam- bridge University Press, 1996; C. Rovelli, Quantum Gravity, Cambridge University Press, 2004; ThomasThiemann,?IntroductiontoModernCanonicalQuantumGeneralRelativity? gr-qc/0110034, Cambridge University Press; Carlo Rovelli and Francesca Vidotto, Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity An Elementary Introduction to Quantum Gravity and Spinfoam Theory, Cambridge University Press, 2014.

[41] Carlo Rovelli and Lee Smolin, Loop representation of quantum general relativity, Nuclear Physics B331 (1990) 80-152.

20 [42] Carlo Rovelli and Lee Smolin,Discreteness of area and volume in quantum gravity, Nuclear Physics B 442 (1995) 593, gr-qc/9411005.(erratum Nucl Phys B 456 (1995) 753-4).

[43] Lee Smolin, Quantum gravity with a positive cosmological constant, hep-th/0209079.

[44] Roumen Borissov, Seth Major and Lee Smolin, The geometry of quantum spin networks, Classical and quantum gravity, 13 (1996) 3183-3196. gr-qc/9512043; Seth Ma- jor and Lee Smolin, Quantum deformation of quantum gravity, Nuclear Physics B 473 (1996) 267, arXiv:gr-qc/9512020.

[45] B.Aneva, A realization of the quantum Lorentz group, Phys.Lett. B340 (1994) 155-161 DOI: 10.1016/0370-2693(94)01316-0,arXiv:0804.1529.

[46] Winston J. Fairbairn, Catherine Meusburger, Quantum deformation of two four- dimensional spin foam models, Journal reference: J. Math. Phys. 53 (2012) 022501, DOI: 10.1063/1.3675898, arXiv:1012.4784; Karim Noui, Philippe Roche, Cosmological De- formation of Lorentzian Spin Foam Models, Class.Quant.Grav.20:3175-3214,2003, DOI: 10.1088/0264-9381/20/14/318, arXiv:gr-qc/0211109.

[47] Bianca Dittrich, Marc Geiller, Quantum gravity kinematics from extended TQFTs, arXiv:1604.05195.

[48] Nima Lashkari, Jennifer Lin, Hirosi Ooguri, Bogdan Stoica, Mark Van Raamsdonk, Gravitational Positive Energy Theorems from Information Inequalities , arXiv:1605.01075