arXiv:2106.03715v2 [hep-th] 17 Jun 2021 h nlsaei uttemlHwigrdainthat entropy radiation Neumann Hawking von thermal a have just to is appears state final the oelssms oeadmr ail n ildisappear will timescale and a rapidly on there- more completely hole and black more mass A loses temperature mass. fore a their at to radiation proportional that inversely thermal showed Hawking produce holes 3]. black [2, radiation, Hawking of cause ever. com- as for has remain material then hole infalling will for sink the black a to The rise disappeared. observers, gave pletely the external that of from material view disappear of the and point singu- interior the spacetime From hole the spacetime. black at the arrive What in inevitably larity hole. will no black it can more, the horizon is outside event anything the through influence passed longer has it once ter, charge osdrbakhlsi naypoial a spacetime. flat asymptotically only an and four in dimension holes restrict of black will as spacetime consider We a mechanics to concerned. quantum discussion are the of observers external rules black as usual the relativity,far with the paradox general the obeying of of hole resolution quantization a for the allows that on based required. posal, is me- physics quantum new some either or So down breaks von constant. chanics the mechanics, is In quantum entropy state. by Neumann incoming required the evolution of unitary nature the of independent emnfml.Tebakhl scmltl charac- completely is mass, hole its Kerr- black by the of The terised member a family. to down Newman settle will collapse tional elsewhere. published complete more be much will A treatment paradox. information the resolve [1]. mechanics, quantum black transcend sight, first to At appear system. holes physical control any should of mechanics evolution is the quantum It that physics. believed fundamental widely in problems puzzling most the 1 ovninis convention euentrluiswith units natural use We nqatmmcais h iuto sdffrn be- different is situation the mechanics, quantum In h eane fti ae rsnsacnrt pro- concrete a presents paper this of remainder The ncasclpyis lc oefre ygravita- by formed hole black a to physics, way classical possible In a of outline brief a is follows What of one presently is paradox information hole black The colo hsc n srnm,QenMr nvriyo Lo of University Mary Queen Astronomy, and Physics of School Q n t otguecharges. gauge soft its and onaycniinisd h lc oeta losfrqua for allows that classi hole the process. si black evaporation to classical the the close inside a gets condition to one examina boundary rise as an vanishes give on wavefunction based that tional resolution circumstances a under propose then We paradox. the ∇ h lc oeifrainprdxhsbe ihu o oet some for us with been has paradox information hole black The a ∇ b V c M = R nua momentum angular , abcd G τ = ∼ V c d M . ¯ = 3 h h iclyi that is difficulty The . = k .Tecurvature The 1. = 1 oFtr nBakHoles Black in Future No naln mat- Infalling ∼ M J electric , Dtd ue1,2021) 18, June (Dated: 2 acl .Perry J. Malcolm n is and oen nntsmlcagsi h tt fastationary that a mechanics of hole state hole. Hawk- black the black and in of changes law Carter infinitesimal first Bardeen, governs the proved hole. [8] black ing the of gravity where h pctm nietebl fmte spr fa of part is sufficiently. matter contracted of ball has the ball inside The spacetime the The is metric. once forms static the horizon the body, by collapsing pressure- precisely the of given ball Outside symmetric matter. spherically free at a looked of They collapse [6]. the Snyder, and Oppenheimer by spacetime. studied of region a boundary is the there is that that sin- mean curvature is to infinite taken of spacetime usually the is that and guarantees gular [5] theorem rose’s eino size of region mass a when form lc oei ie by given is hole black singularity. the future-directed reach all to The lines expect null singularity. we or the that timelike of being sections point null essential although possibly col- case Schwarzschild generic are the to for there similar diagram the be Penrose to compo- the lapse null, assume that We or shown recently spacelike, nents. have have [7] singularities Luk behind un- generically and perturbatively are be Dafermos They to known stable. collapse. is which realistic horizon that in inner believed an form is not It so- do Kerr-Newman they singularities. to the timelike collapse involve hole, spherical lutions black Unlike ev- Schwarzschild the a substantial. lacking, form is is conjecture it this for of idence proof that a black the Whilst conjecture outside hole. the observers from is hidden is censorship singularity any cosmic Weak metric. collapsing fashion. the spacelike outside a famil- stretches in the it in matter as as How- same universe diverges. the FLRW quite ball iar not the is of of singularity future the density the ever, the to when forms horizon singularity the The universe. FLRW h pca aeo peial ymti olpewas collapse symmetric spherically of case special The h opcnetr 4 set htabakhl will hole black a that asserts [4] conjecture hoop The akn 2 ]soe httetmeaueo the of temperature the that showed 3] [2, Hawking sym- spherically not is collapse gravitational Realistic ∗ M dn ieEdRa,Lno 14S UK 4NS, E1 London Road, End Mile ndon, a iglrt.Ti eut nafuture a in results This singularity. cal glrt.W hwta h gravita- the that show We ngularity. tmifraint ercvrdin recovered be to information ntum stems ftebakhole, black the of mass the is ino h rpriso quantum of properties the of tion ∼ dM m.W uln h aueof nature the outline We ime. m nea vn oio om,Pen- forms, horizon event an Once . m = slclsdit ucetysmall sufficiently a into localised is κdA T 8 H π = Φ + κ/ 2 dQ π where Ω + dJ κ A stesurface the is h raof area the † k 1 = (1) 2 the , Φ the electrostatic potential of the whether γ(1) is to the past or future of γ(2). If however (i) hole and Ω its angular velocity. Since TH = κ/2π, we the surfaces on which γ are defined stretch out to infin- readily infer the black hole has entropy A/4. It should ity, then a time can be associated with each such surface. be noted that S M 2 is an entropy that is vastly greater A second possibility is that there is a single component than typical systems∼ in equilibrium for which the entropy to the boundary. Z is then the probability amplitude of scales with mass more slowly. Following Boltzmann, it finding a particular geometry γ, [12]. In the case of a is presumed that eS is the density of states of the black single boundary component, Z is usually referred to as hole. the wavefunction of the universe, Ψ[γ]. Again, there is This idea is formalised in a collection of ideas that no reference to an arrow of time for a closed system. In- have become known as the “central dogma”of black hole side an evaporating black hole, if one has a surface close physics [9]. For external observers, the black hole behaves to the singularity, it does not seem to be legitimate to like any other quantum system; it has a density of states extend such a surface out to infinity as the interior is eS and its evolution is unitary. Outside the black hole, causally disjoint from the asymptotic region. one expects the conventional ideas of general relativity Canonical methods allow for another approach to de- to be valid; namely that spacetime can be treated by termining Ψ[γ]. Take the metric and rewrite it in ADM classical geometry and that fields (including gravitons) form [13, 14] as can be treated by effective field theory. ds2 = N 2dt2 + γ (dxi + N idt)(dxj + N j dt). (4) If these ideas were to hold inside a black hole we would − ij be in trouble. Suppose we study the wave equation inside N is referred to as the lapse and N i as the shift. γ is the Schwarzschild black hole, we find that its solutions ij a purely spacelike metric. Using this decomposition, the typically blow up at the singularity and induce a cor- Einstein action becomes responding divergence in the probability current there. Quantum information is thereby taken out of the space- I[g]= d3x dt √γN K Kij K2 + (3)R(γ) (5) time. In the absence of cloning, information would be ij − lost. Z   It is to quantum gravity that we must turn our atten- where (3)R(γ) is the Ricci scalar of the three-metric γ tion. The path integral for gravity is and Kij is the second fundamental form of the t = const surfaces. Explicitly iI[g] Z g e (2) 1 ∼ D K = D N + D N γ˙ (6) Z ij 2N i j j i − ij where I[g] is the Einstein action for a metric gab on a  where Di is the covariant derivative based on the 3-metric manifold and boundary ∂ with induced metric γij , M M γij and a dot denotes the time derivative. Using Hamil- tonian techniques, one finds that in the Gaussian gauge 1 4 1 3 I[g]= R √ g d x K √ γ d x. (3) N =1,N i = 0 the system is described entirely in terms 16π M − ± 8π M ± Z Z∂ of two constraints: the diffeomorphism constraint

R is the Ricci scalar of the metric gab. K is the trace χj D πij = 0 (7) of the second fundamental form of the boundary and ≡ i the sign is chosen depending on whether the boundary is and the Hamiltonian constraint spacelike or timelike. There may be many disconnected components of the boundary. The integral is taken over −1/2 ij 1 i j (3) γ π πij 2 πi πj Rγ =0. (8) all Lorentzian metrics gab modulo diffeomorphisms with H≡ − − ij  induced metric γij on the boundary. π is the momentum conjugate to γij and can be written It is not clear what, if any, precise conditions are to as be imposed on the metric. If we are interested only in a semi-classical evaluation of Z, the path integral can be πij = γ1/2(Kij γij K). (9) − − approximated using Picard-Lefshetz theory [10] in which ij One quantizes the system by replacing π by iδ/δγij. case it seems to be necessary to deform gab into the com- − plex. The use of the path integral is limited by the failure The Hamiltonian constraint then becomes the Wheeler- of renormalizability of the Einstein theory. The physical DeWitt equation [15, 16] meaning of Z is that is gives the probability amplitude of δ δ 1/2(3) finding a configuration with metric γij on the boundary, Gijkl γ R Ψ[γ]=0. (10) δγij δγkl − or boundaries, of . As an example, Z might be the   M (1) transition amplitude for having a metric γ on one sur- Gijkl is the DeWitt co-metric face and γ(2) on another, [11]. In quantum gravity, when describing a closed system, there is no way of determining G = 1 γ−1/2 γ γ + γ γ γ γ . (11) ijkl 2 ik jl il jk − ij kl  3

Ψ[γ] here is the same object as that defined by the path collapse, one would be wrong. Belinsky, Khalatnikov and integral and is a functional on superspace, the space of E.M.Lifshitz (BKL) [24] showed that collapse is generally all spatial metrics modulo diffeomorphisms. 2 chaotic. We illustrate this for the case of pure gravity but When one studies systems that are far from equilib- the extension to include other fields is straightforward.. rium, it is convenient to suppose the initial state is spec- Classically, as we approach a spacelike singularity, space ified by a density matrix ρ(i) rather than a pure state starts to break up into individual regions that do not in- with some specific geometry γ. The usual path integral is teract with each other. Each of these regions behaves a then generalised by a method of Schwinger [17], Keldysh bit like a Kasner spacetime. The Kasner spacetime has [18], and Kadanoff and Baym [19]. The path integral metric (f) defines the probability P [γ ,ρi] of finding a final state 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 (f) (i) ds = dt + a (t)dx + b (t)dy + c (t)dz (14) geometry γ given the initial density matrix ρ . − p1 p2 p3 − with a(t) = (t t0) ,b(t) = (t t0) and c(t) = (t t0) . (f) (+) (−) iI[g(+)] (i) −iI[g( )] − − − P [γ ,ρi]= Tr g g e ρ e . The singularity is reached at t = t0. The exponents pi N D D 2 2 2 Z (12) obey p1 + p2 + p3 = p1 + p2 + p3 = 1 so that one of (i) (i) ′ ′ the pi is negative and two are positive. Two dimensions ρ = ρ ′ γ γ where γ and γ refer to some geome- γγ of space are contracting as one moves towards the sin- tries. The forward| ih | part of the path integral is over space- gularity and one is expanding. Any object approaching time metrics g(+) with boundary γ(f) in the future and the singularity will therefore undergo spaghettification. γ in the past. The time-reversed path integral is over − ′ Note that the volume of space is decreasing as one gets g( ) with γ(f) in the future and γ in the past. is a close to the singularity. BKL showed that a region under- normalization constant. N goes Kasner behavior for a period but is then interrupted Aharonov, Bergmann and Lebowitz [20] observed that by two different types of process. The first is that the since the laws of physics are invariant under time reversal, Kasner exponents are not fixed but experience a rapid it might be possible under certain circumstances to im- change at certain intervals. The second is that the prin- pose the condition that there is particular density matrix cipal directions of expansion and contraction x, y and z ρ in the future. In the case of gravity, where distinguish- f undergo rotation from time to time. The complicated be- ing between the past and future is not straightforward, havior found by BKL can be succinctly summarised in a the impetus to do so is greater. They suggested the mod- way first found by Damour, Henneaux and Nicolai, [25]. ification Close to the singularity, the Einstein equations amount − (+) (−) (f) iI[g(+)] (i) −iI[g( )] to null geodesic motion in a space with metric P [ρf ,ρi]= Tr g g ρ e ρ e . N D D 2 2 Z (13) 2 2 2 du + dv dσ = dρ + ρ 2 . (15) where the two path integrals are over spacetime metrics − v   that have spatial metrics reproducing the density ma- The z = u+iv plane is a space of constant negative curva- trices ρ(i)) and ρ(f) in the past and future respectively. ture. Motion is however restricted to the domain F in the Setting ρ(f) to the identity reproduces the usual formu- z plane bounded by the unit circle centered on the origin lation of quantum mechanics and has been termed by and the lines u =0,v > 1 and u = 1/2,v > √3/2. This Gell-Mann and Hartle [21] as the principle of indifference. is precisely half of the more familiar fundamental region Specifying a non-trivial ρf is termed post-selection. for SL(2, Z). When a null geodesic meets the boundary Some time ago, Horowitz and Maldacena [22] sug- of F , it bounces off it by specular reflection. Approach gested this type of boundary condition in the future to the singularity corresponds to ρ . In this picture, might be able to resolve the information paradox. In the Hamiltonian constraint takes the→ ∞form fact, it seems that in order to prevent information leak- 2 ing out of the spacetime through the singularity, setting 1 2 v 2 2 = πρ + 2 (πu + πv ) . (16) a boundary condition there is a necessity. Setting bound- H 2 − ρ ! ary conditions in the future risks unusual behavior such as apparent violations of no-cloning, unitarity and causal- Here πρ, πu and πv are the momenta conjugate to ρ,u ity, [23]. and v. Treating as the Hamiltonian, together with the constraint =H 0 and the reflective conditions at the If we thought that the approach to singularity was H smooth, as seems to be the case for Oppenheimer-Snyder boundary of F , reproduces the solution to the Einstein equations close to the singularity. This system is quantized by replacing πρ, πu and πv by i∂/∂ρ, i∂/∂u and i∂/∂v respectively. The Hamil- − − − 2 The equivalence however is rather formal as there are ambiguities tonian constraint then turns into the Wheeler-DeWitt in the path integral measure, operator ordering and issues over equation on a minisuperspace. There is an operator or- what domain the fields are defined. dering ambiguity in carrying this out, so we have adopted 4 an ordering such that the Wheeler-DeWitt equation is only for geometries close to being singular because it is the Laplacian for the metric in (15), only there that the BKL walls become exactly reflective [24, 25]. 2 2 ∂ ∂ We have seen how to set a future boundary condition ρ 2 2ρ ∆F Ψ=0 (17) − ∂ρ − ∂ρ − for the singularity, namely that ρ = 0. Outside the black   f hole, we assume that the principle of indifference holds. ∆F is the Laplacian on the domain F and is given by Such behavior gives a way of resolving the information ∂2 ∂2 paradox. ∆ = v2 + . (18) F − ∂u2 ∂v2 The singularity is required to reflect anything incident   on it. One can think of particles getting close to the sin- Since the walls are classically reflective, the boundary gularity as being annihilated by their antiparticles which condition on Ψ is that it vanishes on the boundary of F . travel backwards in time and once they get outside the The eigenfunctions fn of ∆F obey horizon scatter again and become outgoing Hawking ra- diation. In some sense what happens close to the sin- ∆ f = s (1 s )f . (19) F n n − n n gularity is the time reverse of the Hawking pair creation process in which particle-antiparticle pairs are created The fn are the odd Maass waveforms of SL(2, Z) with 1 outside the horizon. The interior of the black hole is sn = itn,tn real and come in complex conjugate pairs. 2 ± therefore a strange place where ones classical notions of The spectrum of ∆F has two distinct components; a dis- crete set of eigenfunctions that are the odd cusp forms causality and unitarity are violated. This does not mat- of SL(2, Z) and a continuum of the odd non-holomorphic ter as long as outside the black hole such pathologies do Eisenstein series (NHES), [26]. The cusp forms are square not bother us. Lloyd [27] has found that classical infor- integrable in F whereas the NHES are not. Despite this, mation completely escapes from the black hole and that square integrable solutions of (19) can be written as a quantum information mostly does. He estimated that at most half a qubit of information would be lost as the linear combination of the fn, [26]. Each fn provides a −sn black hole disappears. Subsequently Lloyd and Preskill solution of (17), ψn = ρ fn. Hence a general solution [28] showed that it was likely that both causality vio- of (17) is a linear combination ψn. The wavefunctions are not square integrable in minisuperspace even if they lation and unitarity could occur outside the black hole, are square integrable in F . However, the natural inner but in practice it was most probably unobservable. We product on functions in superspace is an analog of the therefore conjecture that there is a quantum cosmic cen- Klein-Gordon norm [16]. On minisuperspace, the inner sor that forbids strange behavior outside the black hole. product of two wavefunctions is A slightly weaker form of this conjecture would be one that forbids the observation of strange behavior outside ∂Ψ ∂Ψ ρ2 the black hole. One should also note that the condi- (Ψ , Ψ )= i Ψ⋆ b Ψ⋆ a du dv (20) a b a ∂ρ − b ∂ρ v2 tions under which the firewall paradox was derived, do ZΣ  not hold for systems with post-selection, [29]. We should with Σ being a “spacelike” surface of ρ =constant in the also note an intriguing connection with number theory minisuperspace. By virtue of the Wheeler-DeWitt equa- based on the nature of the wavefunctions in F . tion, this is independent of ρ. Using this norm, any wave- I would like to thank the UK STFC for financial sup- function that is integrable in F descends to one with finite port under grant ST/L000415/1. I have enjoyed stimu- norm. As one approaches the singularity where ρ , −1/2 → ∞ lating discussions with David Berman, Sam Braunstein, the wavefunction behaves like ρ . The wavefunction Jeremy Butterfield, Mihalis Dafermos, David Garfinkle, therefore vanishes at the singularity, a condition that was Gary Gibbons, Hadi Godazgar, Mahdi Godazgar, David proposed by DeWitt, [16] as necessary for singularities Gross, , Frans Pretorius, Maria Ro- to make sense quantum mechanically. (Ψ, Ψ) is in some driguez, Edward Witten and Anna Zytkow˙ sense the probability flux for gravitational information flowing through Σ. If one chooses perfectly reflecting boundary conditions at the singularity, the information falling into the singularity is perfectly reflected, Ψ is real and (Ψ, Ψ) = 0. This is a boundary condition that spec- ∗ [email protected] † ifies ρf = 0. Under these circumstances, information Also at Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Wilberforce is not lost from the spacetime and opens the possibil- Road, Cambridge, CB3 0WA, UK; and Trinity College, ity of rescuing unitary time evolution for black holes. Cambridge, CB2 1TQ, UK. [1] S. W. Hawking, Breakdown of Predictability in Gravita- As spatial geometries approach the singularity one con- tional Collapse, Phys. Rev. D 14, 2460 (1976). cludes that the probability of finding them is going to [2] S. W. Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes, zero because of the perfectly reflecting boundary condi- Commun. Math. Phys. 43, 199 (1975), [Erratum: Com- tions there. The approximation used will be accurate mun.Math.Phys. 46, 206 (1976)]. 5

[3] S. W. Hawking, Black hole explosions, (W. A. Benjamin, New York, NY, 1968) pp. 242–307. Nature 248, 30 (1974). [16] B. S. DeWitt, Quantum Theory of Gravity. 1. The [4] K. S. Thorne, Nonspherical , in Canonical Theory, Phys. Rev. 160, 1113 (1967). Magic without Magic, edited by J. R. Klauder (W. H. [17] J. S. Schwinger, Brownian motion of a quantum oscilla- Freeman, 1972) pp. 231–258. tor, J. Math. Phys. 2, 407 (1961). [5] R. Penrose, Gravitational collapse and space-time singu- [18] L. V. Keldysh, Diagram technique for nonequilibrium larities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 57 (1965). processes, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 47, 1515 (1964). [6] J. R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder, On Continued gravi- [19] L. Kadanoff and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Mechan- tational contraction, Phys. Rev. 56, 455 (1939). ics (W. A. Benjamin, 1962). [7] M. Dafermos and J. Luk, The interior of dynamical vac- [20] Y. Aharonov, P. G. Bergmann, and J. L. Lebowitz, Time uum black holes I: The C0-stability of the Kerr Cauchy symmetry in the quantum process of measurement, Phys. horizon, arXiv:1710.01722 [gr-qc] (2017). Rev. 134, B1410 (1964). [8] J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, and S. W. Hawk- [21] M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, Time symmetry and ing, The Four laws of black hole mechanics, asymmetry in quantum mechanics and quantum cosmol- Commun. Math. Phys. 31, 161 (1973). ogy (1991) arXiv:gr-qc/9304023. [9] A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghou- [22] G. T. Horowitz and J. M. Maldacena, The Black hole lian, and A. Tajdini, The entropy of , final state, JHEP 02, 008, arXiv:hep-th/0310281. arXiv:2006.06872 [hep-th] (2020). [23] D. Gottesman and J. Preskill, Comment on ‘The Black [10] E. Witten, Analytic Continuation Of Chern-Simons hole final state’, JHEP 03, 026, arXiv:hep-th/0311269. Theory, AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math. 50, 347 (2011), [24] V. A. Belinsky, I. M. Khalatnikov, and E. M. Lifshitz, A arXiv:1001.2933 [hep-th]. General Solution of the Einstein Equations with a Time [11] S. W. Hawking, The Path Integral Approach to Quan- Singularity, Adv. Phys. 31, 639 (1982). tum Gravity, in General Relativity: An Einstein Cen- [25] T. Damour, M. Henneaux, and H. Nicolai, Cosmo- tenary Survey, edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel logical billiards, Class. Quant. Grav. 20, R145 (2003), (Cambridge University Press, 1979) pp. 746–789. arXiv:hep-th/0212256. [12] J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, Wave Function of the [26] A. Terras, Harmonic Analysis on Symmetric Spaces and Universe, Phys. Rev. D 28, 2960 (1983). Applications I (Springer-Verlag, 1985). [13] R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, The Dynam- [27] S. Lloyd, Almost certain escape from black ics of general relativity, Gen. Rel. Grav. 40, 1997 (2008), holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 061302 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0405109. arXiv:quant-ph/0406205. [14] P. A. M. Dirac, The Theory of gravitation in Hamiltonian [28] S. Lloyd and J. Preskill, Unitarity of black hole evap- form, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 246, 333 (1958). oration in final-state projection models, JHEP 08, 126, [15] J. A. Wheeler, Superspace and the nature of quantum arXiv:1308.4209 [hep-th]. geometrodynamics, in Battelle rencontres - 1967 lectures [29] A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski, and J. Sully, Black in mathematics and physics: Seattle, WA, USA, 16 - 31 Holes: Complementarity or Firewalls?, JHEP 02, 062, July 1967, edited by C. M. DeWitt and J. A. Wheeler arXiv:1207.3123 [hep-th].