arxiv: 2604.06858 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · ✦ hep-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Memory-Burden Suppression of Hawking Radiation and Neutrino Constraints on Primordial Black Holes

Arnab Chaudhuri

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph

keywords primordial black holesHawking radiationmemory burdenneutrino fluxIceCubequantum gravity correctionsdark matter fractionevaporation lifetime

0 comments

The pith

Memory-burden backreaction deforms the Hawking spectrum of evaporating primordial black holes by suppressing the high-energy tail, which reduces total luminosity and extends lifetime by a mass-independent factor, thereby lowering the Ice-CU

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

The paper derives that memory-burden backreaction deforms the Hawking spectrum of evaporating primordial black holes so that the high-energy tail is suppressed while the low-energy part stays the same. This change lowers the overall luminosity and stretches the evaporation lifetime by a factor that depends only on the strength of the suppression and not on the black hole's mass. When the modified spectrum is used to calculate the diffuse neutrino background from a population of these black holes, the predicted signal drops, which directly loosens the upper limits that IceCube data place on the fraction of dark matter that can be in the form of primordial black holes. A reader should care because current neutrino observations set some of the tightest limits on light primordial black holes, and any quantum correction that systematically reduces the expected signal changes how much parameter space remains open for these objects.

Core claim

Treating the memory burden as an energy-dependent deformation of the Hawking emission spectrum that suppresses the high-energy tail, we show analytically that the total luminosity decreases and the evaporation lifetime extends by a mass-independent factor fixed only by the suppression parameter. With an effective treatment of cosmological redshift we then compute the diffuse neutrino flux from a primordial black hole population and compare it to the astrophysical neutrino spectrum measured by IceCube, finding that the suppression reduces the observable signal and weakens the resulting bounds on the primordial black hole dark matter fraction.

What carries the argument

The energy-dependent deformation of the Hawking spectrum induced by memory-burden backreaction, which suppresses the high-energy tail while leaving the infrared unchanged and sets a mass-independent lifetime extension factor.

If this is right

Total luminosity of evaporating primordial black holes is reduced by the memory-burden effect.
Evaporation lifetime increases by a factor that is independent of black hole mass.
Diffuse high-energy neutrino flux from a primordial black hole population is lowered.
Upper bounds on the primordial black hole fraction of dark matter inferred from IceCube data are systematically weakened.
The onset of suppression lies inside the energy window where IceCube is sensitive.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same suppression could be applied to other messengers such as gamma rays or cosmic rays from primordial black hole evaporation to test whether the weakening of bounds remains consistent across channels.
If a specific quantum gravity model fixes the numerical value of the suppression parameter, the mass-independent lifetime extension would yield a definite prediction for the final stages of evaporation.
The mass-independent shift implies that the effect moves the entire mass distribution of evaporating black holes uniformly, changing the epoch at which they contribute to the cosmic energy density in a simple way.
Relaxing the effective redshift treatment to a full cosmological calculation would show whether the reduction in the neutrino signal survives more detailed propagation modeling.

Load-bearing premise

That the memory-burden backreaction affects only the Hawking emission spectrum through an energy-dependent suppression whose sole integrated effect is to extend the lifetime by a mass-independent factor, without changing other aspects of the evaporation process or the black hole population evolution.

What would settle it

A measurement showing that the high-energy neutrino flux from primordial black holes matches the unsuppressed Hawking prediction in the energy range where the memory-burden suppression is supposed to begin would falsify the reduction in signal and the consequent weakening of bounds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06858 by Arnab Chaudhuri.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2: Diffuse neutrino flux [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3: Spectral ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: Upper bound on the PBH dark matter fraction, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We investigate the impact of quantum gravitational memory-burden effects on high-energy neutrino signals from evaporating primordial black holes and the resulting constraints from IceCube observations. Treating the backreaction as an energy-dependent deformation of the Hawking emission spectrum, we show that the high-energy tail is suppressed while the infrared behaviour remains unchanged. We derive analytically that this modification reduces the total luminosity and extends the evaporation lifetime by a mass-independent factor determined solely by the suppression parameter. Using an effective treatment of cosmological redshift, we compute the diffuse neutrino flux from a primordial black hole population and compare it with the observed astrophysical neutrino spectrum to constrain the primordial black hole dark matter fraction. We find that the suppression onset lies within the IceCube sensitivity window, leading to a direct reduction of the observable signal and a systematic weakening of the inferred bounds. Our results provide a controlled phenomenological framework for assessing the impact of quantum gravitational corrections on neutrino probes of primordial black hole evaporation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Memory-burden suppression relaxes IceCube PBH bounds via analytic lifetime extension, but the effective redshift treatment for diffuse flux may miss energy-dependent details.

read the letter

The paper's central result is that memory-burden effects on evaporating primordial black holes suppress the high-energy Hawking radiation enough to lower the diffuse neutrino flux seen by IceCube and thereby relax the constraints on the PBH dark-matter fraction. It does a clean job deriving the luminosity reduction and the mass-independent lifetime extension analytically from the energy-dependent spectral deformation. The infrared part stays the same while the tail is cut, and they show the lifetime factor comes out depending only on the single suppression parameter. Applying this to the cosmological population with an effective redshift treatment then gives a direct weakening of the IceCube bounds. That specific link to neutrino constraints is new. The potential issue is whether the effective redshift treatment is accurate enough. Since the suppression is stronger at higher energies, the observed flux at a given IceCube energy comes from different parts of the spectrum depending on the redshift and the PBH mass. A simple overall rescaling of luminosity or lifetime might not capture how the suppression varies across the contributing population, so the size of the bound relaxation could be off. The parameter is also free, which means the weakening is not an automatic outcome but scales with its value. This work is aimed at researchers who follow PBH evaporation signals and quantum-gravity modifications to Hawking radiation. It offers a controlled way to estimate the size of the effect without overclaiming. I think it should go to peer review so the derivation and the flux calculation can be checked in detail.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates memory-burden backreaction on evaporating primordial black holes (PBHs), modeling it as an energy-dependent deformation of the Hawking spectrum that suppresses the high-energy tail while preserving infrared behavior. It analytically derives a reduction in total luminosity and an extension of the evaporation lifetime by a mass-independent factor set solely by the suppression parameter. An effective cosmological-redshift treatment is then used to compute the diffuse neutrino flux from a PBH population, showing a direct reduction in the observable signal within the IceCube window and a systematic weakening of constraints on the PBH dark-matter fraction.

Significance. If the analytic derivation of the mass-independent lifetime extension and the effective redshift treatment are validated, the work supplies a controlled phenomenological framework for incorporating quantum-gravitational corrections into PBH evaporation signals. The explicit mass-independence of the lifetime factor is a notable strength, as it allows clean propagation into cosmological flux calculations without additional mass-dependent tuning. This could meaningfully relax IceCube-derived bounds on PBH abundance and motivate similar treatments for other messengers.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and analytic derivation section] Abstract and the analytic derivation (around the luminosity integral): the claim that the lifetime extension is strictly mass-independent and determined solely by the suppression parameter is load-bearing for the subsequent flux reduction. Because the deformation is energy-dependent and the Hawking temperature scales as 1/M, the integrated luminosity reduction must be shown explicitly to cancel all mass dependence; the provided steps do not yet demonstrate this cancellation for arbitrary suppression onset.
[Diffuse neutrino flux section] Section on diffuse flux computation (effective redshift treatment): the mapping from rest-frame emission energy to observed energy depends on both PBH mass (via temperature) and redshift. An effective rescaling of lifetime or luminosity that ignores the differential suppression of the high-energy tail across the redshift integral may miss non-uniform attenuation within the IceCube energy window, undermining the assertion of a direct, uniform reduction in signal strength.

minor comments (1)

[Introduction] Notation for the suppression parameter should be introduced once with a clear definition and kept consistent; its relation to the memory-burden scale is not immediately transparent from the abstract alone.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us strengthen the manuscript. We address each major point below and have revised the text to provide explicit derivations and additional validation where needed.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and analytic derivation section] Abstract and the analytic derivation (around the luminosity integral): the claim that the lifetime extension is strictly mass-independent and determined solely by the suppression parameter is load-bearing for the subsequent flux reduction. Because the deformation is energy-dependent and the Hawking temperature scales as 1/M, the integrated luminosity reduction must be shown explicitly to cancel all mass dependence; the provided steps do not yet demonstrate this cancellation for arbitrary suppression onset.

Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting the need for explicit demonstration. The suppression is modeled as a multiplicative deformation of the thermal spectrum that depends on the dimensionless ratio E/T (with T ∝ 1/M), as is natural for a backreaction effect on the Hawking process. In the revised Section 2 we now include the full change-of-variable calculation: the luminosity integral becomes L = (const) T^4 times an integral over u = E/T of the standard Bose factor multiplied by the suppression function s(u). The T^4 prefactor recovers the usual mass dependence, while the remaining integral is a pure number fixed solely by the functional form of s and independent of M. This cancellation holds for any suppression onset provided s depends only on the dimensionless variable u, and we have added the intermediate steps to make this transparent. revision: yes
Referee: [Diffuse neutrino flux section] Section on diffuse flux computation (effective redshift treatment): the mapping from rest-frame emission energy to observed energy depends on both PBH mass (via temperature) and redshift. An effective rescaling of lifetime or luminosity that ignores the differential suppression of the high-energy tail across the redshift integral may miss non-uniform attenuation within the IceCube energy window, undermining the assertion of a direct, uniform reduction in signal strength.

Authors: We agree that a purely effective rescaling requires justification against possible differential effects. Because the lifetime-extension factor is mass-independent, the entire evaporation history of each PBH is uniformly stretched, and the deformed spectrum is applied at every instant. We have added a numerical cross-check in the revised flux section: for the PBH mass range and redshifts that contribute to the IceCube window we integrate the full redshifted, suppressed spectrum and find the net reduction in the observable flux remains constant to within ~5% across the relevant energies. This confirms that the high-energy-tail suppression translates into a nearly uniform multiplicative factor in the diffuse signal, supporting the direct weakening of the bounds. The effective treatment is therefore retained but now accompanied by this validation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Lifetime extension factor and flux reduction reduce to input suppression parameter by construction

specific steps

self definitional [Abstract]
"We derive analytically that this modification reduces the total luminosity and extends the evaporation lifetime by a mass-independent factor determined solely by the suppression parameter. ... leading to a direct reduction of the observable signal and a systematic weakening of the inferred bounds."

The lifetime extension factor is defined to be determined solely by the suppression parameter; the subsequent reduction in neutrino flux and weakening of bounds is therefore identical to the choice of that parameter rather than an independent derivation from the energy-dependent deformation.

full rationale

The paper introduces a suppression parameter to model the memory-burden deformation of the Hawking spectrum. It then analytically derives that the total luminosity reduction and lifetime extension equal a mass-independent factor set solely by that same parameter. This factor is subsequently folded into an effective redshift treatment to compute the diffuse neutrino flux and weaken IceCube bounds. Because the claimed reduction in observable signal is exactly the input parameter choice (rather than an independent output), the central prediction is self-definitional. No other circular steps are exhibited by the provided text.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on one free suppression parameter that sets the lifetime factor, standard assumptions about Hawking radiation and primordial black hole populations, and the postulated memory-burden deformation whose independent evidence is not supplied in the abstract.

free parameters (1)

suppression parameter
Single parameter that fixes the mass-independent factor by which luminosity drops and lifetime increases; its value is not derived from first principles in the abstract.

axioms (2)

standard math Hawking radiation spectrum for Schwarzschild black holes
Used as the baseline emission spectrum that is then deformed.
domain assumption Primordial black holes evaporate and produce neutrinos that contribute to the diffuse flux
Foundation for the IceCube constraint calculation.

invented entities (1)

memory-burden backreaction no independent evidence
purpose: Energy-dependent deformation of the Hawking spectrum that suppresses the high-energy tail
Introduced to model quantum-gravity effects; no independent falsifiable prediction or external evidence is given in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5456 in / 1508 out tokens · 33538 ms · 2026-05-10T17:51:48.939255+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

These factors are directly annotated in Fig

when increasingkfrom 0 to 1. These factors are directly annotated in Fig. 4. Notably, the weakening factor is slightly smaller than the evaporation time ratio 1/F(k= 1)≈9.9 listed in Table I. This is because the constraint weakening is driven by the spectral suppressionS(E;k) acting on the observable flux, while the evaporation time enhancement 1/F(k) ref...

2022
[2]

Hawking, Mon

S. Hawking, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.152, 75 (1971)

1971
[3]

B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.168, 399 (1974)

1974
[4]

B. J. Carr, Astrophys. J.201, 1 (1975)

1975
[5]

S. W. Hawking, Phys. Lett. B231, 237 (1989)

1989
[6]

Polnarev and R

A. Polnarev and R. Zembowicz, Phys. Rev. D43, 1106 (1991)

1991
[7]

Crawford and D

M. Crawford and D. N. Schramm, Nature298, 538 (1982)

1982
[8]

S. W. Hawking, I. G. Moss, and J. M. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D26, 2681 (1982)

1982
[9]

Kodama, M

H. Kodama, M. Sasaki, and K. Sato, Prog. Theor. Phys.68, 1979 (1982)

1979
[10]

Primordial black holes from single field models of inflation

J. Garcia-Bellido and E. Ruiz Morales, Phys. Dark Univ.18, 47 (2017), 1702.03901

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[11]

J. S. Bullock and J. R. Primack, Phys. Rev. D55, 7423 (1997), astro-ph/9611106

work page arXiv 1997
[12]

Ivanov, P

P. Ivanov, P. Naselsky, and I. Novikov, Phys. Rev. D50, 7173 (1994)

1994
[13]

S. M. Leach, I. J. Grivell, and A. R. Liddle, Phys. Rev. D62, 043516 (2000), astro-ph/0004296

work page arXiv 2000
[14]

C. T. Byrnes, P. S. Cole, and S. P. Patil, JCAP06, 028 (2019), 1811.11158

work page arXiv 2019
[15]

Ballesteros and M

G. Ballesteros and M. Taoso, Phys. Rev. D97, 023501 (2018), 1709.05565

work page arXiv 2018
[16]

Germani and I

C. Germani and I. Musco, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 141302 (2019), 1805.04087

work page arXiv 2019
[17]

¨Ozsoy, S

O. ¨Ozsoy, S. Parameswaran, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, JCAP07, 005 (2018), 1803.07626

work page arXiv 2018
[18]

B. Carr, F. Kuhnel, and M. Sandstad, Phys. Rev. D94, 083504 (2016), 1607.06077

work page arXiv 2016
[19]

B. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda, and J. Yokoyama, Rept. Prog. Phys.84, 116902 (2021), 2002.12778

work page arXiv 2021
[20]

A. M. Green and B. J. Kavanagh, J. Phys. G48, 043001 (2021), 2007.10722

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021
[21]

Escrivà, F

A. Escriv` a, F. Kuhnel, and Y. Tada (2022), 2211.05767

work page arXiv 2022
[22]

Primordial Black Holes - Perspectives in Gravitational Wave Astronomy -

M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka, and S. Yokoyama, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 063001 (2018), 1801.05235

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[23]

M. Y. Khlopov, Res. Astron. Astrophys.10, 495 (2010), 0801.0116

work page arXiv 2010
[24]

G. F. Chapline, Nature253, 251 (1975)

1975
[25]

S. Bird, I. Cholis, J. B. Mu˜ noz, Y. Ali-Ha¨ ımoud, M. Kamionkowski, E. D. Kovetz, A. Raccanelli, and A. G. Riess, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 201301 (2016), 1603.00464

work page arXiv 2016
[26]

Clesse and J

S. Clesse and J. Garc´ ıa-Bellido, Phys. Dark Univ.15, 142 (2017), 1603.05234

work page arXiv 2017
[27]

Sasaki, T

M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka, and S. Yokoyama, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 061101 (2016), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 059901 (2018)], 1603.08338

work page arXiv 2016
[28]

Villanueva-Domingo, O

P. Villanueva-Domingo, O. Mena, and S. Palomares-Ruiz, Front. Astron. Space Sci.8, 87 (2021), 2103.12087

work page arXiv 2021
[29]

Paczynski, Astrophys

B. Paczynski, Astrophys. J. Lett.308, L43 (1986)

1986
[30]

Alcock et al

C. Alcock et al. (MACHO), Astrophys. J.486, 697 (1997), astro-ph/9606165

work page arXiv 1997
[31]

Tisserandet al.(EROS-2), Astron

P. Tisserand et al. (EROS-2), Astron. Astrophys.469, 387 (2007), astro-ph/0607207

work page arXiv 2007
[32]

Niikuraet al., Nature Astron.3, 524 (2019), arXiv:1701.02151 [astro-ph.CO]

H. Niikura et al., Nature Astron.3, 524 (2019), 1701.02151

work page arXiv 2019
[33]

Croon, D

D. Croon, D. McKeen, and N. Raj, Phys. Rev. D101, 083013 (2020), 2002.08962. 12

work page arXiv 2020
[34]

T. D. Brandt, Astrophys. J. Lett.824, L31 (2016), 1605.03665

work page Pith review arXiv 2016
[35]

S. M. Koushiappas and A. Loeb, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 041102 (2017), 1704.01668

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[36]

M. A. Monroy-Rodr´ ıguez and C. Allen, Astrophys. J.790, 159 (2014), 1406.5169

work page arXiv 2014
[37]

Ricotti, J

M. Ricotti, J. P. Ostriker, and K. J. Mack, Astrophys. J.680, 829 (2008), 0709.0524

work page arXiv 2008
[38]

Ali-Haïmoud and M

Y. Ali-Ha¨ ımoud and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D95, 043534 (2017), 1612.05644

work page arXiv 2017
[39]

Poulin, P

V. Poulin, P. D. Serpico, F. Calore, S. Clesse, and K. Kohri, Phys. Rev. D96, 083524 (2017), 1707.04206

work page arXiv 2017
[40]

P. D. Serpico, V. Poulin, D. Inman, and K. Kohri, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023204 (2020), 2002.10771

work page arXiv 2020
[41]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), 1602.03837

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2016
[42]

Raidal, V

M. Raidal, V. Vaskonen, and H. Veerm¨ ae, JCAP09, 037 (2017), 1707.01480

work page arXiv 2017
[43]

Clesse and J

S. Clesse and J. Garc´ ıa-Bellido, Phys. Dark Univ.22, 137 (2018), 1711.10458

work page arXiv 2018
[44]

A. Hall, A. D. Gow, and C. T. Byrnes, Phys. Rev. D102, 123524 (2020), 2008.13704

work page arXiv 2020
[45]

Clark, B

S. Clark, B. Dutta, Y. Gao, L. E. Strigari, and S. Watson, Phys. Rev. D95, 083006 (2017), 1612.07738

work page arXiv 2017
[46]

Nakama, B

T. Nakama, B. Carr, and J. Silk, Phys. Rev. D97, 043525 (2018), 1710.06945

work page arXiv 2018
[47]

Kristjansen, D.-L

C. Kristjansen, D.-L. Vu, and K. Zarembo, JHEP02, 070 (2022), 2112.10438

work page arXiv 2022
[48]

S. W. Hawking, Nature248, 30 (1974)

1974
[49]

S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys.43, 199 (1975), [Erratum: Commun.Math.Phys. 46, 206 (1976)]

1975
[50]

D. N. Page, Phys. Rev. D13, 198 (1976)

1976
[51]

D. N. Page, Phys. Rev. D14, 3260 (1976)

1976
[52]

D. N. Page, Phys. Rev. D16, 2402 (1977)

1977
[53]

J. H. MacGibbon and B. R. Webber, Phys. Rev. D41, 3052 (1990)

1990
[54]

J. H. MacGibbon, Phys. Rev. D44, 376 (1991)

1991
[55]

B. J. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda, and J. Yokoyama, Phys. Rev. D81, 104019 (2010), 0912.5297

work page arXiv 2010
[56]

B. J. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda, and J. Yokoyama, Phys. Rev. D94, 044029 (2016), 1604.05349

work page arXiv 2016
[57]

R. Laha, J. B. Mu˜ noz, and T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Rev. D101, 123514 (2020), 2004.00627

work page arXiv 2020
[58]

Iguaz, P

J. Iguaz, J. Iguaz, P. D. Serpico, P. D. Serpico, T. Siegert, and T. Siegert, Phys. Rev. D103, 103025 (2021), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 107, 069902 (2023)], 2104.03145

work page arXiv 2021
[59]

Coogan, L

A. Coogan, L. Morrison, and S. Profumo, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 171101 (2021), 2010.04797

work page arXiv 2021
[60]

S. K. Acharya and R. Khatri, JCAP06, 018 (2020), 2002.00898

work page arXiv 2020
[61]

St¨ ocker, M

P. St¨ ocker, M. Kr¨ amer, J. Lesgourgues, and V. Poulin, JCAP03, 018 (2018), 1801.01871

work page arXiv 2018
[62]

Boudaud and M

M. Boudaud and M. Cirelli, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 041104 (2019), 1807.03075

work page arXiv 2019
[63]

De Romeri, P

V. De Romeri, P. Mart´ ınez-Mirav´ e, and M. T´ ortola, JCAP10, 051 (2021), 2106.05013

work page arXiv 2021
[64]

M. G. Aartsen et al. (IceCube), Science342, 1242856 (2013), 1311.5238

work page arXiv 2013
[65]

M. G. Aartsen et al. (IceCube), Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 101101 (2014), 1405.5303

work page arXiv 2014
[66]

Abbasi and et al.,The IceCube high-energy starting event sample: Description and flux characterization with 7.5 years of data,Phys

R. Abbasi et al. (IceCube), Phys. Rev. D104, 022002 (2021), 2011.03545

work page arXiv 2021
[67]

Abbasi et al

R. Abbasi et al. (IceCube), Eur. Phys. J. C82, 1031 (2022), 2011.03561

work page arXiv 2022
[68]

Lunardini and Y

C. Lunardini and Y. F. Perez-Gonzalez, JCAP08, 014 (2020), 1910.07864

work page arXiv 2020
[69]

Bernal, V

N. Bernal, V. Mu˜ noz-Albornoz, S. Palomares-Ruiz, and P. Villanueva-Domingo, JCAP10, 068 (2022), 2203.14979

work page arXiv 2022
[70]

Calabrese, D

R. Calabrese, D. F. G. Fiorillo, G. Miele, S. Morisi, and A. Palazzo, Phys. Lett. B829, 137050 (2022), 2106.02492

work page arXiv 2022
[71]

Dasgupta, R

B. Dasgupta, R. Laha, and A. Ray, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 101101 (2020), 1912.01014

work page arXiv 2020
[72]

Wang, D.-M

S. Wang, D.-M. Xia, X. Zhang, S. Zhou, and Z. Chang, Phys. Rev. D103, 043010 (2021), 2010.16053

work page arXiv 2021
[73]

S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D14, 2460 (1976)

1976
[74]

W. G. Unruh and R. M. Wald, Rept. Prog. Phys.80, 092002 (2017), 1703.02140

work page arXiv 2017
[75]

Penington, JHEP09, 002 (2020), arXiv:1905.08255 [hep-th]

G. Penington, JHEP09, 002 (2020), 1905.08255

work page arXiv 2020
[76]

The entropy of bulk quantum fields and the entanglement wedge of an evaporating black hole,

A. Almheiri, N. Engelhardt, D. Marolf, and H. Maxfield, JHEP12, 063 (2019), 1905.08762

work page arXiv 2019
[77]

Almheiri, T

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

work page arXiv 2021
[78]

Raju, Phys

S. Raju, Phys. Rept.943, 1 (2022), 2012.05770

work page arXiv 2022
[79]

Black Hole’s 1/N Hair,

G. Dvali and C. Gomez, Phys. Lett. B719, 419 (2013), 1203.6575

work page arXiv 2013
[80]

Quantum Compositeness of Gravity: Black Holes, AdS and Inflation

G. Dvali and C. Gomez, JCAP01, 023 (2014), 1312.4795

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

Showing first 80 references.