Research PapersNo Access

Hidden messenger from quantum geometry: Towards information conservation in quantum gravity

Xiao-Kan Guo

Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430071, P. R. China

University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, P. R. China

E-mail Address: kankuohsiao@whu.edu.cn

Corresponding author

Search for more papers by this author

and

Qing-Yu Cai

Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430071, P. R. China

Department of Physics, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, CP 204 Miami, FL 33199, USA

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732318501031Cited by:4 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

The back reactions of Hawking radiation allow nontrivial correlations between consecutive Hawking quanta, which gives a possible way of resolving the paradox of black hole information loss known as the hidden messenger method. In a recent work of Ma et al. [arXiv:1711.10704], this method is enhanced by a general derivation using small deviations of the states of Hawking quanta off canonical typicality. In this paper, we use this typicality argument to study the effects of generic back reactions on the quantum geometries described by spin network states, and discuss the viability of entropy conservation in loop quantum gravity. We find that such back reactions lead to small area deformations of quantum geometries including those of quantum black holes. This shows that the hidden-messenger method is still viable in loop quantum gravity, which is a first step towards resolving the paradox of black hole information loss in quantum gravity.

Keywords:

PACS: 04.60.Pp, 05.30.Ch, 04.70.Dy

References

1. S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D 14, 2460 (1976). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
2. V. Balasubramanian and B. Czech, Class. Quantum Grav. 28, 163001 (2011); S. Chakraborty and K. Lochan, Universe 3, 55 (2017). Google Scholar
3. L. Susskind, L. Thorlacius and J. Uglum, Phys. Rev. D 48, 3743 (1994). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
4. A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski and J. Sully, Black holes: Complementarity or firewalls?, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2013) 062; A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski, D. Stanford and J. Sully, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 018. Google Scholar
5. D. Harlow, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 015002 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
6. B.-C. Zhang, Q.-Y. Cai, L. You and M.-S. Zhan, Phys. Lett. B 675, 98 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
7. M. K. Parikh and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5042 (2000); M. Angheben, M. Nadalini, L. Vanzo and S. Zerbini, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2005) 014. Google Scholar
8. I. Sakalli, M. Halilsoy and H. Pasaoglu, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50, 3212 (2011); I. Sakalli and A. Ovgun, EPL 110, 10008 (2015). Google Scholar
9. D.-S. He and Q.-Y. Cai, Sci. China Ser. G 60, 040011 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. Y.-H. Ma, Q.-Y. Cai, H. Dong and C.-P. Sun, arXiv:1711.10704v3. Google Scholar
11. F. Anza and G. Chirco, Phys. Rev. D 94, 084047 (2016); Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 231301 (2017). Google Scholar
12. H. Dong, Q.-Y. Cai, X.-F. Liu and C.-P. Sun, Commun. Theor. Phys. 61, 289 (2014); X.-K. Guo and Q.-Y. Cai, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 53, 2980 (2014). Google Scholar
13. C. Corda, Class. Quantum Grav. 32, 195007 (2015); Ann. Phys. 353, 71 (2015); Adv. High Energy Phys. Article ID 867601 (2015). Google Scholar
14. K. Lochan and S. Chakraborty, Phys. Lett. B 755, 37 (2016); arXiv:1711.10660. Google Scholar
15. S. Massar and R. Parentani, Nucl. Phys. B 575, 333 (2000); R. Zhao, L.-C. Zhang and S.-Q. Hu, Acta Phys. Sin. 55, 3898 (2006); Y.-P. Zhang, Q. Dai and W.-B. Liu, Commun. Theor. Phys. 49, 379 (2008). Google Scholar
16. B.-C. Zhang, Q.-Y. Cai, M.-S. Zhan and L. You, Gen. Relat. Gravit. 43, 797 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
17. H. Kawai, Y. Mastuo and Y. Yokokura, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 28, 1350050 (2013); V. Baccetti, R. B. Mann and D. R. Terno, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 26, 743008 (2017). Google Scholar
18. S. Goldstein, J. Leibowitz, R. Tumulka and N. Zanghi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 050403 (2006); S. Popescu, A. J. Short and A. Winter, Nat. Phys. 2, 754 (2006). Google Scholar
19. T. Thiemann, Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007); C. Rovelli and F. Vidotto, Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014). Google Scholar
20. F. Girelli and E. R. Livine, Class. Quantum Grav. 22, 3295 (2005); L. Freidel and E. R. Livine, J. Math. Phys. 51, 082502 (2010). Google Scholar
21. E. R. Livine and D. R. Terno, Nucl. Phys. B 741, 131 (2006). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
22. D.-Z. Xu, S.-W. Li, X.-F. Liu and C.-P. Sun, Phys. Rev. E 90, 062125 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
23. E. R. Livine, Class. Quantum Grav. 31, 075004 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
24. E. R. Livine, Phys. Rev. D 97, 026009 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
25. D. Pranzetti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 011301 (2012); Class. Quantum Grav. 30, 165004 (2013). Google Scholar
26. A. Feller and E. R. Livine, Phys. Rev. D 95, 124038 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
27. Y.-H. Ma, J.-F. Chen and C.-P. Sun, Nucl. Phys. B 931, 418 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
28. S. Carlip, Phys. Rev. D 51, 632 (1995). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar