Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Black Hole Waterfall: a unitary phenomenological model for black hole evaporation with Page curve

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A 'waterfall' of re-emitting interior Hawking partners makes black hole evaporation unitary and produces a Page curve.

desk verdict A genuine extension of the author's One Shot model with a cascading idler-pump 'waterfall' and explicit D>1 probabilities, but the advertised late-time Page decay and zero-energy final state rest on an uncontrolled approximation in Eq (41) that the paper itself shows is doing the work. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.00948 v2 pith:NTBQE65S submitted 2025-01-01 gr-qc hep-thquant-ph

Paul M. Alsing This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-thquant-ph
keywords blackholeevaporationPagecurveunitarityspontaneousparametricdownconversionsqueezedvacuumHawkingradiationinformationparadoxsofthair
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to show that black hole evaporation can be modeled as a fully unitary process that reproduces the Page curve without invoking replica wormholes. The model is built from the quantum-optical Hamiltonian of spontaneous parametric down conversion, with the black hole as a depleting pump and each emitted Hawking pair as signal and idler modes. The new ingredient is a cascade: each interior idler particle acts as a pump for a lower-energy pair, so energy moves outward step by step. In the deep-cascade limit the black hole ends in vacuum, the external Hawking radiation carries the total initial mass, and the interior partners left behind have vanishing total energy, echoing soft hair.

What carries the argument

The engine is the trilinear SPDC Hamiltonian $H = i r\left(a_p a_i^\dagger a_s^\dagger - a_p^\dagger a_i a_s\right)$, with $p$ the black-hole pump and $(i,s)$ the interior/exterior Hawking pair, iterated through a One Shot Trotterization in time slices. The distinctive mechanism is to let each idler mode act as a pump for the next depth, so the state acquires nested sums over emission numbers $k_d$ with probabilities $P_{k_d}^{(k_{d-1})} = \tilde{P}_{k_d}^{(k_{d-1})} / \sum \tilde{P}_{k_d'}^{(k_{d-1})}$ and $\tilde{P}_{k_d}^{(k_{d-1})} = (1-z)^N z^{k_d}(1-z^{k_{d-1}-k_d+1})^{N-d} \binom{k_d+N-1}{k_d}$. These probabilities, with denominators approximated by their largest term, are what make the entropy turn over and return to zero. The binomial factors encode the many ways emitted particles can distribute over $N$ time slots.

What would settle it

Take a moderate case such as $n_{p0}=25$, $D=3$, and $N$ up to 500, and compute the entropy $S(\rho_R)$ from the exact nested sums of Eq. (22) without the dominant-denominator replacement that leads to Eq. (41). If the late-time entropy does not decrease to zero, the paper's central claim is refuted; a cascaded optical parametric amplifier with a depleted pump could also be used to look for the same turnover in the lab.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Black Hole Waterfall model, an extension of the author's earlier One Shot model, yields a Page curve from an explicitly pure, unitarily evolving state. For early times the entropies of the black hole and the Hawking radiation rise; at the Page time they reach a maximum; afterward they fall to zero as the hole completely evaporates. The final state has the pump in vacuum, all exterior signal modes occupied, and only the deepest interior idler mode populated with $n_{p0}$ particles of energy $(1/2)^D\,\omega_p$, which vanishes as $D\to\infty$. The exterior radiation then carries $(1-2^{-D})$ of the initial mass, approaching the full mass in the infinite-depth limit. Along the way the model produces a Page information that stays flat longer for larger $D$ and a temperature spike at the Page time.

Load-bearing premise

The Page curve and zero-energy final state rest on the approximation in Eq. (41) that replaces the denominators of the nested emission sums by their largest term; if that uncontrolled approximation fails, the entropy need not return to zero at late times.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the model is right, unitary black hole evaporation does not require geometry-modifying replica wormholes; a sequence of squeezing interactions with a depleting pump is sufficient to reproduce the Page curve.
  • The final state contains $n_{p0}$ interior idler particles of vanishing total energy for large depth, so information can be stored behind the horizon without a massive remnant, in the spirit of soft hair.
  • The black-hole reduced density matrix, and hence $S(\rho_{BH})$, is independent of the waterfall depth $D$, while the Hawking radiation entropy depends strongly on $D$.
  • The model predicts a temperature spike at the Page time, defined through $dE = T\,dS$, even though the model contains no spacetime geometry.
  • Because the composite state is pure throughout, every entropy curve computed from a reduced density matrix has a partner: $S(\rho_{BH}) = S(\rho_{I,S})$, while $S(\rho_{BH}) \neq S(\rho_R)$ for $D>1$.
  • Beyond the paper: the cascade is essentially a chain of parametric amplifiers, so a table-top experiment with depleted pumps and nested down-conversion stages could test whether the entropy turnover survives in real optics.
  • Beyond the paper: if the uncontrolled denominator approximation in Eq. (41) is replaced by exact summation for small $n_{p0}$, the late-time entropy may fail to return to zero; checking this numerically would directly probe the model's core result.
  • Beyond the paper: the same construction could be adapted to non-degenerate SPDC and to time-dependent rapidity $z(N)$, which the paper notes as future work; such variants would show how robust the Page curve is to parameter choices.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a unitary phenomenological toy model for black-hole evaporation, the "Black Hole Waterfall," built from a cascade of trilinear SPDC Hamiltonians (Eq. 35) with the pump treated as the evaporating black hole and each interior idler acting as a further pump for lower-energy pairs. The One Shot Trotterization of the earlier model is applied, yielding the approximate wavefunction of Eq. (42) and the explicit probabilities of Eq. (41). From these the author computes the black-hole and radiation density matrices (Eqs. (43)-(44)), their von Neumann entropies, energies, temperatures, and Page information, and obtains entropy curves that rise, turn over around the Page time, and decay to zero, with the radiation energy asymptoting to (1-2^{-D})n_{p0}\omega_p and a final state containing n_{p0} nearly zero-energy interior idlers for large D. The abstract claims that this produces a Page curve, complete evaporation, and a pure unitary evolution with a soft-hair-like final interior state.

Significance. If the central claim were fully established, the model would be a useful explicit and unitary toy model for black-hole evaporation, providing closed-form probability formulas and concrete entropy curves without invoking replica wormholes or an island geometry. The paper's strengths are that the full composite state is written explicitly, the evolution is unitary by construction, and the connection between SPDC squeezing and Hawking-pair generation is clearly motivated. However, the model's claims are conditional on an uncontrolled approximation in Eq. (41) and on an unexamined large-N limit, and the paper itself flags unexplained structure in the radiation entropy. The significance is therefore moderate and conditional: the construction is a legitimate phenomenological framework, but the advertised Page curve and complete-evaporation endpoint are not yet rigorously established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2, Eq. (41), Appendix A, Fig. 4] The late-time turnover and decay of the entropy, which are the central claims of the paper, rest on the replacement of the nested-sum denominators by their largest contribution in Eq. (41). This approximation is not controlled: no error bound or comparison with the exact One Shot sum is provided, and the author's own Fig. 4 shows that without the extra factors (the imax=1 curve) the entropy does not return to zero within the plotted range. Since these factors are precisely what forces the late-time entropy down, the Page curve and the complete-evaporation endpoint are not established unless the approximation is justified or verified against an exact calculation for at least moderate parameter values.
  2. [Appendix A, footnote on the exponent N-d] The paper explicitly states that the exponent N-d in Eq. (41) is used even when N-d<0, and that this is done for numerical speed rather than derived from the probability structure. This is an ad hoc modification of the model's probabilities. Because the early-time probabilities and the flatness of the Page information in Figs. 8 and 9 are sensitive to the number and form of the denominator factors, the author should state the conditional rule (e.g., max(N-d,0) or N-1 for N-d<0) and quantify how the entropy and energy curves change when that rule is implemented exactly. As written, the numerical results include an undocumented step that could affect the Page time and the early-time thermal behavior.
  3. [Section 3.3 and Eq. (31)] The paper does not prove that the approximate weights in Eq. (41) actually concentrate on the evaporated state |\psi^{(evap)}_D\rangle of Eq. (37) as N grows. For the D=1 case, the factor (1-z^{n_{p0}-k+1})^{N-1} in Eq. (31) exponentially suppresses k near n_{p0}, while the unapproximated negative-binomial weight favors k near Nz/(1-z); the competition between these two effects is not analyzed. Without a large-N analysis showing that P^{(n_{p0})}_{k_1} concentrates at k_1=n_{p0} and that E_{BH}\to 0 while E_R\to (1-2^{-D}) n_{p0}\omega_p, the claim of complete evaporation and the zero-energy interior final state is not established. This gap affects the central physical narrative of the paper, not just a technical detail.
  4. [Fig. 9 and Section 3.3.2] The radiation entropy S(\rho_R) in Fig. 9 exhibits two peaks, around x\approx25 and x\approx173, with a long intermediate region where S_{BH}\approx S_R. The paper itself states that the origin of this double-peaking is "not well understood" and that the near-equality of the entropies is "curious." Since the abstract and introduction advertise a single peak "midway through the evolution" with subsequent decay, this unexplained double-peaked structure in the central object of the paper needs either a mechanistic explanation or a clear caveat that the model produces this structure. As it stands, the numerical evidence does not cleanly match the advertised qualitative Page-curve shape.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (45)] The expression for \bar{E}_{BH} as written sums the probabilities P^{(n_{p0})}_{k_1} and equals unity; it should be \sum_{k_1=0}^{n_{p0}} (n_{p0}-k_1) P^{(n_{p0})}_{k_1}, the expectation value of a^\dagger_p a_p. Please correct this formula and check that the plotted energies use the corrected expression.
  2. [Section 3.3.1, Eqs. (48)-(49)] The temperature fits in Eqs. (48) and (49) introduce additional fitted coefficients (1.35, 0.15, 4, and the exponent) beyond the model parameters z, n_{p0}, and D. The paper should state explicitly that these are phenomenological fits and discuss how the temperature spike at the Page time depends on the choice of z and on the One Shot approximation.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typographical and wording issues, including "in a addition new feature" (Section 1.4), "impetuous" for "impetus" (Section 2.1), and inconsistent spelling of "Renyi" and "Almeheiri" in the references. These should be corrected in a revision.
  4. [Figs. 4, 5, 8, 9] The figure captions state that entropies are computed with log(n_{p0}+1) for comparison, but the text around Fig. 8 refers to unnormalized entropy values. Please define the normalization convention explicitly in each caption and state whether the plotted S values are Shannon entropies in nats or normalized to unity.
  5. [Section 5] The discussion of the model's relation to the island effect and replica wormholes is appropriately cautious, but the sentence about the low-energy approximation of quantum gravity should be marked more clearly as speculation rather than a derivable consequence of the trilinear Hamiltonian.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Page curve is a stated design objective of an explicitly phenomenological model; the late-time tail's sensitivity to the Eq.(41) approximation is a correctness risk, not a definitional or self-citation circularity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the sense required for circularity analysis. The BH Waterfall model is presented as a phenomenological construction whose stated objectives (Section 1.4) explicitly include reproducing the Page curve and complete evaporation, so the appearance of a Page curve is a consistency check of the model, not a prediction extracted from an independent first-principles derivation. The approximate probabilities in Eq.(41) do contain the factor (1 - z^{k_{d-1}-k_d+1})^{N-d}, and the paper's Fig. 4 shows that this factor is responsible for bringing the entropy tail to zero; the Appendix A footnote also admits the exponent N-d is used even when N-d<0 for numerical speed. These are legitimate concerns about the validity and robustness of the approximation, and they should be weighed as correctness risk, but they do not make the derivation circular: Eq.(41) is not defined in terms of the Page curve, the factor is presented as a 'largest contribution' approximation to the nested sums rather than as a fit to the target curve, and the paper openly analyzes the factor's effect rather than disguising it as an output. The author's self-citations ([1], [2], and the [41] talk) supply the prior SPDC and One Shot framework and the waterfall idea, but the framework is rederived in Section 2 and the waterfall energy bookkeeping is elementary arithmetic; no load-bearing conclusion rests solely on an unverified self-citation. There is no imported uniqueness theorem and no ansatz smuggled in via citation. The central claims therefore retain independent model content, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model is a pure quantum-optics construction: it assumes the SPDC Hamiltonian is the relevant interaction, assumes each interior partner can re-pump, and chooses z, np0, and D by hand. The Page-curve turnover is produced through an approximation in the emission probabilities rather than emerging from a first-principles gravitational calculation.

free parameters (4)
  • z (SPDC rapidity per time step) = 0.1
    Chosen for all numerical runs; controls the early-time thermal behavior and the location of the Page time.
  • np0 (initial BH particle number) = 50 in main figures; 20 in Fig 7
    Sets the total energy and effective microstate count; only a rough Zurek-Thorne physical estimate is given.
  • D (waterfall depth) = 1, 3, 4, 5
    Truncation depth that determines the fraction (1 - 2^{-D}) of the BH energy carried away by radiation.
  • Temperature fit coefficients = 1.35, 0.15, 4, exponent 1/8, 0.215
    Numbers in Eqs (48)-(49) are empirical fits to the computed T_BH curves, not derived predictions.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The trilinear SPDC Hamiltonian H = i r (a_p a_i^dagger a_s^dagger - a_p^dagger a_i a_s) models BH Hawking pair creation.
    Used in Eqs (3) and (35); justified by analogy to Unruh and Hawking squeezing, not derived from gravitational theory.
  • ad hoc to paper Each interior idler acts as a further SPDC pump with degenerate energy splitting omega_id = omega_sd = (1/2) omega_{id-1}.
    The cascade is the paper's central new mechanism (Section 3.1, Eq (35)); no independent physical evidence is offered for this process.
  • domain assumption The One Shot Trotterization with short time steps makes emitted signals escape and prevents back-reaction.
    Adopted from Bradler and Adami [29] and used in Section 2.2; essential for monotonic BH evaporation.
  • ad hoc to paper Nested-sum denominators in emission probabilities can be replaced by their largest contribution, yielding Eq (41).
    This uncontrolled approximation is what makes the late-time entropy go to zero; see Fig 4 and Appendix A.
  • domain assumption The initial BH state is a bosonic Fock state |np0> with no seed matter.
    Chosen for simplicity and computability (Section 2.1); the authors note extension to arbitrary states is straightforward.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Black Hole Waterfall: a unitary phenomenological model for black hole evaporation with Page curve." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NTBQE65S

@misc{pith2026250100948,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Black Hole Waterfall: a unitary phenomenological model for black hole evaporation with Page curve},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NTBQE65S}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.00948}
}
abstract

We present a unitary phenomenological model for black hole evaporation based on the analogy of the laboratory process of spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) when the black hole (pump) is allowed to deplete to zero mass. The model incorporates an additional new feature that allows for the interior Hawking partner-particles (idlers) behind the horizon to further generate new Hawking particle pairs of lower energy, one of which remains behind the horizon, and the other that adds to the externally emitted Hawking radiation (signals) outside the horizon. This model produces a Page curve for the evolution of the reduced density matrices for the evaporating black hole internal degrees of freedom entangled with the generated Hawking radiation pairs entangled across the horizon. The Page curve yields an entropy that rises at early times during the evaporation process as Hawking pairs are generated, reaches a peak midway through the evolution, and then decays to zero upon complete evaporation of the black hole. The entire system remains in a pure state at all times undergoing unitary (squeezed state) evolution, with the initial state of the black hole modeled as a bosonic Fock state of large, but finite number $n_{p0}$ of particles. For the final state of the system, the black hole reaches the vacuum state of zero mass, while the external Hawking radiation carries away the total energy of the initial black hole. Inside the horizon there remains $n_{p0}$ Hawking partner-particles of vanishingly small total energy, reminiscent of the "soft-hair" (zero energy) qubit model of Hotta, Nambu and Yamaguchi, but now from a Hamiltonian for squeezed state generation perspective. The model presented here can be readily extended to encompass arbitrary initial pure states for the black hole, and in falling matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.00948 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Page Curve. If unitarity is maintained, and hence information is not lost during the BH evaporation process, the evolution of the entropy of the black hole and the external Hawking radiation should follow the curved lower red-black curve. black solid straight lines of entropy in Fig.(1) computed by Hawking’s calculation, and that given by the Bekenstein-Hawking theromodynamic entropy, respectively are merely represe… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (left) Penrose diagram for an evaporating BH, showing entangled particle pairs (matching colored arrows), the island (shaded green area inside the horizon) and the quantum extremal surface (QES, black dot). (right) Cartoon illustrating the concept that interior Hawking partner particles (blue dots) in the island behind the horizon are “transferred” to the exterior Hawking radiation (red dots) by a growing network of… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (left) Evolution of the average number or particles in the pump/BH n¯p(τ ) (black dashed line), and the signal/Hawking radiation ¯ns(τ ) (black solid) for the BH in an initial coherent state with ¯np(0) = 35, and the signal/idlers in the vacuum state. d ef f p def = 1 + ∆¯np (gray dashed) and d ef f s def = 1 + ∆¯ns (gray solid) are the effective dimensions of the pump/BH and signal/Hawking radiation in terms of the… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Entropies with the extra term (1 − z np0−k+1)min(N−1,imax−1) in Eq.(31) with various values of imax for (left) np0 = 10, (right) np0 = 25. Entropies are computed with lognp0+1 for the purpose of comparison. The effect of the extra factor (1 − z np0−k+1) N−1 in P (N) k …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Plots of entropy S (black, solid), effective Sthermal (gray, solid), Page Information I (black, dashed) and the fraction of emitted Hawking particles in signal/idler modes ¯ns,i/np0 vs time N for (left) np0 = 25, and (right) np0 = 100, with z = 0.1, (Nzmax = 104 , imax…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A visual representation of the subsequent signal/idler states generated by the idler pumps from a state of a signal idler pair |2⟩ii1 |2⟩si1 (created by the pump from the component |np0−2⟩p appearing at time step i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , N} for D = (1, 2, 3). The solid black…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Direct numerical integration of Eq.(34) for the case of D = 3, np0 = 20, z = 0.1 (without the One Shot mechanism). Entropy (solid) curves S(ρ) are plot using the left ordinate axis, mean energy (dashed) curves E¯ are plotted using the right ordinate axis. See the text …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (left) Black hole entropy (black solid), effective thermal entropy (red solid) and Page Information (gray solid) for D = 1, np0 = 50, z = 0.1. Black hole energy (black dashed), Hawking radiation energy (red dashed), and black hole temperature (gray dashed) TBH ≡ dEBH/d…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Black hole entropy (black solid), Hawking radiation entropy (red solid), effective Hawking radiation thermal entropy (magenta solid), (Hawking radiation) Page Information plots (gray dot-dashed) black hole energy (black dashed), Hawking radiation energy (red dashed) fo…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Parametric down conversion with a depleted pump as a model for classical information transmission capacity of quantum black holes

    Alsing P M 2015 Class. Quantum Grav. 32 075010 (arxiv:1408.4491)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Spontaneous parametric down conversion with a depleted pump as an analogue for black hole evaporation/particle production

    Alsing P M and Fanto M L 2016 Class. Quantum Grav. 33 0150005 (arxiv:1507.00429)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    Hotta M, Nambu Y and Yamaguchi K 2018 Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 181301 ∗ Formally we should use the power N − d if it is non-negative, and use, say N − 1 if N − d <0, since the (discrete) time steps are N ≥ 1. However, since z <<1 we have found that numerically there is not much effect in the early time steps if we just continue to use the power N − d. A condi...

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Agarwal G S 2013 Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

    Gerry C C and Knight P L 2023 Introductory Quantum Optics, 2nd Ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Hawking S W 1975 Commun. Math. Phys. 43 199

    work page 1975

  7. [7]

    High Energy Phys

    Almheiri A, Hartman T, Maldacena J, Shaghoulian E and Tajdini A 2020 J. High Energy Phys. 05 013 (arxiv:1911.12333)

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Almheiri A, Hartman T, Maldacena J, Shaghoulian E and Tajdini A 2021 Rev. Mod. Phys. 93(12) 035002 (arxiv:2006.06872v1)

    arXiv 2021

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Nielsen M A and Chuang I L 2000 Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK)

    2000

  2. [10]

    (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK)

    Wilde M M 2017 Quantum Information Theory, 2nd Ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK)

    2017

  3. [11]

    Page D 1993 Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 1291 (arxiv:gr–qc:9305007v2)

    1993

  4. [12]

    Page D 1993 Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 3743 (arxiv:gr–qc:9306083v2)

    1993

  5. [13]

    Hartle J B 2003 Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein ’s General Relativity (Addison Wesley, San Francisco, CA)

    2003

  6. [14]

    Harlow D 2016 Rev. Mod. Phys. 88 015002 (arxiv:14091231v5)

    2016

  7. [15]

    Cox B and Forshaw J 2022 Black Holes (Harper Collins, NY)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Susskind L 1995 J. Math. Phys. 36 6377

    1995

  9. [17]

    Natsuume M 2012 AdS/CFT Duality User Guide (Springer, Japan) lecture Notes in Physics 903

    2012

  10. [18]

    Nastase H 2015 Introduction to the AdS/CFT Correspondence (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

    2015

  11. [19]

    Nastase H 2017 String Theory Methods for Condensed Matter Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

    2017

  12. [20]

    Ammon M and Erdmenger J 2017 Gauge/Gravity Duality (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

    2017

  13. [21]

    High Energy Phys

    Ryu S and Takayanagi T 2006 J. High Energy Phys. 08 45 (hep–th/0605073)

    2006

  14. [22]

    High Energy Phys

    Hubney V E, Rangamani M and Takayanagi T 2007J. High Energy Phys. 0707 62 (arxiv:0705.0016 [hep–th])

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    High Energy Phys

    Penington G 2020 J. High Energy Phys. 2020(9) (arxiv:1905:08255)

    2020

  16. [24]

    High Energy Phys

    Almheiri A, Engelhardt N, Marolf D and Maxfield H 2019 J. High Energy Phys. 2019 063(arxiv:1905:08762)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Maldacena J and Susskind L 2013 Fortsch. Phys. 61 781

    2013

  18. [26]

    High Energy Phys

    Penington G, Shenker S H, Stanford D and Yang Z 2022 J. High Energy Phys. 2022(205) (arxiv:1911.11977 [hep–th])

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Hartman T 2021/2015 Phys 7661: Black Holes and Quantum Information URL https://www.hartmanhep.net/topics2021;http://www.hartmanhep.net/topics2015/

    2021

  20. [28]

    Quantum Grav

    Adami C and Steeg G V 2014 Class. Quantum Grav. 31 075015 (arxiv:gr–qc/0407090v8)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Br´ adler K and Adami C 2016Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 101301 (arXiv:1505.0284)

  22. [30]

    Nation P D and Blencowe M P 2010 New J. Phys. 12 095013 (arxiv:1004.0522)

    2010 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Unruh W G 1976 Phys. Rev. D 14 870

    1976

  24. [32]

    Alsing P M and Milonni P W 2004 Am. J. Phys. 72 1524 (quant–ph/0401170)

    2004

  25. [33]

    Rindler W 1964 Am. J. Phys. 34 1174

    1964

  26. [34]

    Rindler W 1969 Essential Relativity (Van Nostrand, NY)

    1969

  27. [35]

    Birrell N D and Davies P C W 1982 Quantum fields in curved space (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

    1982

  28. [36]

    Alsing P M, Dowling J P and Milburn G J 2005 Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 220401

    2005

  29. [37]

    Zurek W H and Thorne K S 1985 Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 2171

    1985

  30. [38]

    Carroll S M 2004 Spacetime and Geometry (Addison Wesley, San Francisco)

    2004

  31. [39]

    Birrittella R, Alsing P M and Gerry C C 2020 Phys. Rev. A 101 013813

    2020

  32. [40]

    Bandilla A, Drobnˇ zy G and Jex I 2000 J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 2 265 Black Hole Waterfall: a unitary phenomenological model for black hole evaporation 37

    2000

  33. [41]

    Alsing P M 2019 Invited talk: Unitary Black Hole Evaporation, Relativistic Quantum Information International Conference (RQIN), Taiwan

    2019

  34. [42]

    thesis University of Ottawa: Max Planck-uOttawa Centre for Extreme and Quantum Photonics

    Guti´ errez J F 2022 Optical Parametric Amplification: from Nonlinear Interferometry to Black Holes Ph.D. thesis University of Ottawa: Max Planck-uOttawa Centre for Extreme and Quantum Photonics

    2022

  35. [43]

    Page D N 2005 New J. Phys. 7 203

    2005

  36. [44]

    High Energy Phys

    Hayden P and Preskill J 2007 J. High Energy Phys. 2007(9) 120

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.