Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

This paper claims that the black hole horizon's membrane current is a real electric current carried by lowest-Landau-level partons, turning the fictitious classical membrane into a physical quantum surface that reflects light with calculabl

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 00:49 UTC pith:H5YOKHWW

load-bearing objection Chu has a coherent, auditable quantum membrane construction from a matrix model; the 1/4π Ohmic anchor is still conjectural, but the paper deserves a serious referee. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.10561 v2 pith:H5YOKHWW submitted 2026-07-12 hep-th cond-mat.othergr-qchep-ph

Quantum Horizon and Quantum Membrane Paradigm from Black Hole Quantum Mechanics

Chong-Sun Chu This is my paper
classification hep-th cond-mat.othergr-qchep-ph PACS 04.70.Dy
keywords quantum membrane paradigmblack hole horizonfuzzy sphereBerry monopolelowest Landau levelmatrix quantum mechanicshorizon echoesOhmic-Hall transport
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper tries to show that the membrane current of black hole physics — usually a bookkeeping device that rewrites the infalling boundary condition — is actually a physical electric current carried by microscopic horizon partons. Starting from a matrix quantum mechanics in which a black hole is a fuzzy sphere with a half-filled Fermi sea, the author derives that the fuzzy sphere carries an intrinsic Berry monopole, and that the partons form lowest-Landau-level states whose guiding-center motion produces Ohmic, Hall, and polarization currents. A condensation of off-diagonal link matrices locks the horizon gauge field to the boundary value of the exterior Maxwell field, so the parton current becomes a genuine boundary source. The result is a generalized quantum membrane law whose classical perfectly-absorbing limit is only a special case, with frequency- and helicity-dependent reflection and horizon echoes. A sympathetic reader would care because it ties horizon transport to microscopic quantum structure and offers a concrete, calculable window onto quantum gravity.

Core claim

The central claim is that the horizon of a quantum black hole is a physical quantum membrane: the previously fictitious Ohmic current of the membrane paradigm is carried by lowest-Landau-level partons on a fuzzy sphere, and it sources the exterior Maxwell field after off-diagonal link modes condense and lock the worldvolume gauge field to the bulk gauge field. The derived boundary condition is the generalized membrane law ∂_{r*} a_A − 4π σ_AB ∂_t a_B = 0 with admittance σ_AB = (σ_xx + iωD)δ_AB + σ_H ε_AB, where σ_xx is thermal dissipation (conjectured to reproduce the classical 1/4π), σ_H = qQ/(2πN) is the Berry-monopole Hall response, and D is a polarization coefficient. In the limit D = σ_

What carries the argument

The central object is the fuzzy-sphere Berry monopole: the SU(2) coherent-state phase freedom on the fuzzy sphere produces a monopole connection of charge (N−1)/2 that is invisible to adjoint fields but couples to the fundamental fermion partons, forcing them into lowest-Landau-level (LLL) states with quenched kinetic energy. The argument is carried by two mechanisms: the LLL guiding-center dynamics, which turns an applied electric field into Hall and (with thermal friction) Ohmic currents, and the link-condensation locking mechanism, in which off-diagonal matrix link modes become tachyonic near the fuzzy sphere, condense, and Higgs the difference b_A − a_A of the horizon and bulk gauge fiel

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the assumption that horizon partons experience the rest of the horizon as a true thermal bath, so a simple Langevin friction term with an undetermined coefficient c_T controls their Ohmic response; the paper explicitly notes that correlator decay alone does not prove exact thermality, and the KMS condition and fluctuation-dissipation relation remain unverified.

What would settle it

A first-principles computation of the parton friction coefficient from the matrix-model Hamiltonian (via the Kubo formula) that does not yield c_T = 1/(2q²) — or, more basically, a demonstration that the parton correlator violates the KMS condition — would destroy the quantitative match to the 1/4π Ohm's law and leave the Ohmic channel uncontrolled. A second, cleaner falsifier: a direct numerical test of the locking mechanism showing that the link condensate does not form (the quadratic eigenvalue k_−(ξ) never goes negative) would remove the boundary-source conversion and collapse the quantum

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The classical membrane paradigm's 1/4π Ohmic conductivity is recovered as the dissipation-only limit of the quantum membrane, provided the conjectured value of the friction coefficient (c_T = 1/(2q²)) holds.
  • A quantum horizon is not perfectly absorbing: the derived reflection coefficient R_± = −iD_±/(1+iD_±) predicts frequency-dependent and helicity-dependent partial reflection.
  • A charged black hole acquires a Hall conductivity σ_H = qQ/(2πN), giving a horizon-induced Kerr rotation of reflected linear polarization by angle approximately −2πσ_H.
  • The horizon polarization current gives the stretched horizon a negative electric susceptibility — a reactive quantum surface, not an ordinary dielectric.
  • Black-hole echoes, often introduced phenomenologically, are tied in this model to the transport coefficients of the quantum horizon, reducing the freedom of phenomenological fits.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Since σ_H scales as Q/N, the predicted Kerr rotation is Planck-suppressed for macroscopic black holes; the effect is largest for near-extremal small black holes, where echoes from the quantum horizon might become observable.
  • The locking mechanism suggests a general principle: boundary conditions in emergent gravity come from condensation of bi-fundamental link fields, a tachyon-condensation story that may extend to gravitational boundary conditions and to multi-block interiors.
  • The LLL parton system has exactly the kinematics of a fractional quantum Hall system; if interactions scramble the degenerate LLL states, the model could provide a microscopic realization of horizon quantum chaos and fuzzball-like absorption.
  • A direct test would be computing the parton retarded correlator in the matrix model: the Kubo formula for the friction coefficient either confirms c_T = 1/(2q²) and the 1/4π conductivity, or falsifies the quantitative match to the classical membrane paradigm.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a microscopic realization of the black-hole membrane paradigm within the matrix quantum mechanics of Chu. It argues that fundamental fermions on a fuzzy-sphere horizon experience an intrinsic Berry monopole, so they occupy Lowest-Landau-Level states rather than propagating freely. Their guiding-center dynamics produces Hall, Ohmic, and polarization currents. A two-block matrix configuration, with off-diagonal link fields that condense in a Planck-thin layer outside the fuzzy sphere, is used to lock the horizon U(1) gauge field to the boundary value of an external Maxwell field. The resulting generalized membrane law ∂_{r*}a_A − 4πσ_AB ∂_t a_B = 0 contains Ohmic, Hall, and polarization conductivities, and yields a frequency- and helicity-dependent reflection coefficient R_± = −iD_±/(1+iD_±). The paper claims to replace the fictitious membrane of the classical paradigm with a physical quantum membrane of microscopic LLL partons.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is a substantial step: it would give a concrete microscopic origin for the membrane paradigm and turn the horizon surface current into a real current of partons, with potentially observable consequences for black-hole echoes and Kerr rotation. The paper is largely self-consistent; I checked that the condensate value |w|²=J+1 follows from (6.40)-(6.43), the Chern number c1=N−1 from (C.4), and the reflection-coefficient algebra from (6.76)-(6.83). The Berry-monopole and LLL derivations are careful and the locking mechanism is explicit. However, the flagship quantitative result — that the Ohmic conductivity equals 1/4π — is not actually derived; it rests on an unverified Langevin/thermality assumption and a conjectured constant. The paper is transparent about this gap, but the gap directly affects whether the classical perfectly absorbing horizon is recovered, so the significance is conditional rather than established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 4.5, Eqs. (4.64), (4.73), (6.68)] The Ohmic conductivity is the load-bearing quantitative anchor of the paper, but it is not derived. The first-order Langevin equation (4.64) is assumed, the friction coefficient η∼T² is estimated dimensionally, and the value σ_xx=1/4π in (6.68) depends entirely on the conjecture c_T=1/(2q²) stated in Sec. 4.5. The paper also explicitly defers the required KMS/fluctuation-dissipation analysis. If this premise fails, the classical limit D=σ_H=0 does not yield perfect absorption: the boundary condition (6.76) would give a residual reflection amplitude (1−4πσ_xx)/(1+4πσ_xx). Since the abstract and Sec. 6 claim a derivation of the membrane Ohm's law and the recovery of 1/4π, the central claim is conditional. The authors should either supply a microscopic derivation of c_T (e.g., from a Kubo formula in the matrix model) or, if that is beyond the present scope, clearly present σ_xx=1/4π as an i
  2. [Sec. 4.1 and Sec. 5.2] The identification Q=q(r−s) of the horizon parton asymmetry with the black-hole electric charge is central to the Hall conductivity σ_H=qQ/(2πN) in (6.68), but the Gauss-law derivation is not fully spelled out. Section 4.1 refers to a nonexistent 'Section 5.3'; the actual discussion is in Sec. 5.2. There, Eq. (5.36) sets the flux through S²_R equal to Tr ΨΨ† without giving the normal-ordering and low-excitation assumptions that justify dropping ψ_E and the off-diagonal fermionic links. The cancellation of link charges via (5.32) is stated, but the steps from the matrix Gauss law (5.27) to the continuum constraint (5.33) and then to (5.36) involve several truncations that should be made explicit. Without this, the physical interpretation of the parton charge asymmetry as the observed black-hole charge — and hence the Hall term — is not fully established.
  3. [Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (3.26)-(3.30)] The environmental Maxwell action is obtained by choosing L=N′l_P/N and the regularized volume V3=24R²L. The value ν3=24 in (3.30) is an input chosen to match the Gauss-unit normalization of the bulk Maxwell action, and the membrane current (6.61) inherits the corresponding 1/4π normalization. Thus part of the 'membrane-paradigm value 1/4π' is fixed by this volume-normalization choice rather than by the parton dynamics. This is not necessarily wrong, but it should be acknowledged that the 1/4π in the final boundary condition depends on this model-building choice, in addition to the conjectural c_T.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 4.1] The text refers to 'Section 5.3' for the Gauss-law analysis, but the actual section is 5.2. Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [Sec. 6.1] Typo: 'diagonzlization' should be 'diagonalization'. There are similar typos in Sec. 7 ('Combing', 'cosomological') and Sec. 4.1 ('endorsed' presumably should be 'endowed').
  3. [Sec. 6.1] Table 6.1 appears to be introduced with 'as described in the table 6.1' but is rendered as plain text. Please ensure the table actually appears and is formatted.
  4. [Sec. 6.3, Eqs. (6.83)-(6.84)] The symbol R_± is used both for the reflection coefficient in (6.83) and for its magnitude in (6.84). This is potentially confusing; use e.g. |R_±| in (6.84).
  5. [References] Reference [5] is incomplete as printed ('3, 2026'). Please supply full publication data or arXiv identifier.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

The Ohmic conductivity 1/4π is set by conjecturing c_T, so the claimed recovery of the classical membrane paradigm reduces to that input choice; the Hall/polarization and locking derivations are self-contained.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 4.5, eqs. (4.72)-(4.75); used in Sec. 6.2, eqs. (6.66)-(6.68), (6.76)]
    "Note that the precise value of c_T is phenomenological in this Langevin treatment, however the large-N scaling is robust. So we get an Ohm's law for black hole with a Ohmic conductivity that is independent of black hole. Microscopically, the frictional coefficient can be computed from the retarded correlator of the frictional force via a Kubo formula. We conjecture that this results in c_T = 1/(2q^2) and so the membrane-paradigm value of 1/4π is recovered."

    The Ohmic conductivity is the coefficient that turns the generalized membrane law (6.66)/(6.76) into the classical perfectly absorbing boundary condition when D=σ_H=0. Eq. (4.75) leaves σ_xx = q^2 c_T/(2π) with c_T an undetermined 'phenomenological' constant. The numerical value 1/4π is then obtained only by conjecturing c_T=1/(2q^2); no independent matrix-model computation fixes c_T. Hence the statement in (6.68) that σ_xx=1/4π, and the later claim that the classical membrane Ohm's law is 'recovered', are equivalent to the chosen input. The paper itself concedes the underlying thermality/KMS assumption is unverified, so the Langevin equation is an assumed dissipation model, not a derived result.

full rationale

The Berry-monopole/LLL derivation, the Hall conductivity (4.61)-(4.63), the polarization term, and the link-condensation locking mechanism (Sections 4-6.1) are self-contained given the proposed matrix model and do not reduce to their targets. However, the central quantitative anchor of the quantum membrane paradigm—the Ohmic conductivity σ_xx=1/4π that recovers the classical membrane Ohm's law—is not derived. It is obtained by postulating a first-order Langevin equation with a 'phenomenological' constant c_T and then conjecturing c_T=1/(2q^2) precisely so that the membrane-paradigm value 1/4π is reproduced. This makes the claimed recovery of the classical perfectly absorbing boundary condition an input-output identity rather than a prediction. The paper's own admission that the Kubo-Martin-Schwinger/thermality check is left for future work confirms that the dissipative channel rests on an unverified premise, not on a derived result. Self-citations to [1,4,5] supply the model and calibrate parameters such as a0=π/3 and R=Nl_P; these are legitimate model inputs for a paper developing consequences, and do not by themselves constitute circularity. Thus the circularity is partial but real and concentrated in the Ohmic channel, warranting a score of 6.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 7 axioms · 3 invented entities

The central claim rests on five non-standard inputs the reader does not pay for in this paper: (1) the matrix model (1.1) and its interpretation as a quantum black hole, taken from the author's prior, unverified works [1,4,5]; (2) the Schwarzschild exterior metric, explicitly assumed (§6.3) rather than derived; (3) a thermal-bath Langevin treatment of horizon partons with friction η~T² and an undetermined constant c_T (§4.5); (4) the proposed two-block interaction Lagrangian (5.8), whose negative link mass-squared is the sole source of the locking condensate; and (5) the identification Q=q(r−s) of parton occupation asymmetry with electromagnetic charge. Only the coherent-state/LLL/Berry-monopole mathematics (Apps B, C) is standard and self-contained. Free parameters: a0 (matched to black hole decay rate in [5]), q (unfixed Yukawa combination), c_T (undetermined; conjectured to hit 1/4π). No invented entity carries independent external evidence; the Berry monopole, the LLL partons and the link condensate are all model-internal objects.

free parameters (3)
  • c_T (Langevin friction constant) = undetermined; conjectured c_T = 1/(2q²)
    Proportionality constant in γ_T = c_T/N characterizing thermal friction on horizon partons (Sec 4.5). The paper says 'the precise value of c_T is phenomenological in this Langevin treatment'. It controls the Ohmic conductivity σ_xx = q²c_T(ν_u+ν_d)/(2π); the membrane-paradigm value 1/4π is recovered only by conjecturing c_T = 1/(2q²).
  • q (parton charge) = q = a2/(2a0); a0 = π/3 fixed, a2 unfixed
    Charge of individual u/d partons, entering via Q = q(r−s). The Yukawa coefficient a2 is a free parameter of the model Lagrangian (1.1); q is 'universal' but its numerical value is undetermined and appears in σ_H = qQ/(2πN) and in the transport coefficients.
  • a0 (matrix-model normalization) = π/3
    Model parameter fixed in prior work [5] by matching the semi-classical black hole decay rate (also matched to Kerr angular momentum in [4]). It is an input to the present paper, entering the FIDO time, the polarization coefficient D, and the locking stiffness K.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption The matrix quantum mechanics (1.1) describes a quantum black hole with horizon = fuzzy sphere + half-filled Fermi sea.
    Foundation of the entire paper, taken from prior self-authored works [1,4,5]; not derived or independently verified here. Invoked throughout, especially Secs 4.1 and 6.
  • domain assumption Schwarzschild metric background for the exterior spacetime.
    Sec 6.3: 'Although we have not derived the spacetime Schwarzschild metric from our model... For now, let us assume that we do have a Schwarzschild metric.' Needed for the FIDO time relation (3.14)-(3.17), the stretched-horizon location, and the reflection-coefficient computation.
  • domain assumption Horizon behaves as a thermal bath with friction η~T² (Langevin treatment).
    Sec 4.5: 'A simple thermal estimate gives η~T²'; the paper admits 'the decay of the correlator alone does not prove exact thermality. A rigorous analysis would require verifying the Kubo–Martin–Schwinger condition... We leave such an analysis for future work.' The entire Ohmic channel rests on this.
  • domain assumption Charge identification Q = q(r−s) with parton occupation asymmetry.
    Secs 4.1 and 5.2: the Gauss-law argument identifies parton asymmetry with the EM charge, assuming the environmental fermions and fermionic links are unexcited at low energy (5.36)-(5.37).
  • ad hoc to paper Two-block interacting Lagrangian (5.8) with projector-weighted couplings.
    The interaction between black-hole block and environment is proposed ('We propose the interacting model to be given by...', Sec 5.1). The tachyonic mass sign and quartic potential that produce the locking condensate are properties of this proposed action; no derivation from a more fundamental principle is given.
  • domain assumption Stretched horizon at proper distance ℓ~l_P, giving f_sh~1/N² and FIDO time τ = 2a0 M_P l_P t/N.
    Sec 3.1, eqs. (3.14)-(3.17). The relation τ~t/N fixes the frequency scalings in the final boundary condition and reflection coefficient; changing the O(1) coefficient is claimed not to affect results.
  • standard math Standard coherent-state / Berry-phase / LLL mathematics.
    Spin-J coherent states, Berry connection A = J(1−cosθ)dϕ with c1 = 2J, LLL holomorphic sections of degree ≤ N−1 (Appendices B, C). These are established results and the only fully independent component of the derivation.
invented entities (3)
  • Berry monopole on the fuzzy sphere no independent evidence
    purpose: Microscopic origin of the monopole in the tunneling picture [5]; quenches parton kinetic energy into LLL guiding-center dynamics; generates Hall response.
    Mathematically a consequence of coherent-state phase holonomy for fundamental fuzzy-sphere states, but its physical reality is asserted within the model. Its observable consequences (Hall conductivity, helicity-dependent reflection) are model-dependent, so there is no falsifiable handle outside the model.
  • Horizon partons (u, d LLL fermions) no independent evidence
    purpose: Microscopic carriers of entropy, charge, and the membrane currents.
    From the author's model [1]; identified with Susskind's conjectured partons [7]; no independent evidence outside the model.
  • Tachyonic link condensate |w|² = (N+1)/2 in a Planck-thin layer outside the horizon no independent evidence
    purpose: Locks the horizon gauge field b_A to the exterior Maxwell field a_A, converting parton currents into a physical boundary source.
    A consequence of the proposed two-block action (5.8); an entity introduced for the locking mechanism to work, with no external falsifiable handle.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 34192 in / 32942 out tokens · 282423 ms · 2026-08-03T00:49:01.588844+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We develop a microscopic quantum membrane paradigm from the matrix quantum mechanics of black holes [1]. It was proposed that a quantum black hole is described by a fuzzy sphere together with a half-filled Fermi sea of horizon partons. We show that the topology of the fuzzy sphere induces a Berry monopole, providing a microscopic origin for the monopole appearing in the tunneling description of the decay of quantum black hole. Because the partons couple to the fuzzy sphere as fundamental degrees of freedom, they are sensitive to this monopole and form Lowest-Landau-Level (LLL) states rather than ordinary propagating two-dimensional fermions. Their guiding-center dynamics generates Ohmic, Hall, and polarization currents on the horizon. To couple these currents to an external electromagnetic field, we introduce a two-block matrix configuration comprising black-hole, environmental, and bifundamental link sectors. Off-diagonal link modes become tachyonic near the fuzzy sphere and condense, dynamically locking the horizon gauge field to the boundary value of the external Maxwell field. The parton current thereby becomes a physical boundary source for the exterior field. Our construction replaces the fictitious membrane of the classical paradigm with a dynamical quantum membrane populated by microscopic LLL degrees of freedom. The resulting boundary condition generalizes the classical ingoing membrane condition and yields explicit quantum, frequency-dependent, and helicity-dependent corrections, offering a possible probe of the microscopic quantum structure of the horizon.

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. From Horizon Microstates to the Black Hole Membrane

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    A matrix model of black hole microstates is claimed to explain the membrane paradigm: horizon fermions form Landau levels and a condensed interface transfers their current to the exterior Maxwell field.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 36 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Matrix model proposal for quantum gravity and the quantum mechanics of black holes,

    C.-S. Chu, “Matrix model proposal for quantum gravity and the quantum mechanics of black holes,”Phys. Rev. D112no. 6, (2025) 066001,arXiv:2406.01466 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    M theory as a matrix model: A Conjecture,

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, S. H. Shenker, and L. Susskind, “M theory as a matrix model: A Conjecture,”Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 5112–5128,arXiv:hep-th/9610043

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  3. [3]

    A Large N reduced model as superstring,

    N. Ishibashi, H. Kawai, Y. Kitazawa, and A. Tsuchiya, “A Large N reduced model as superstring,”Nucl. Phys. B498(1997) 467–491,arXiv:hep-th/9612115. 50

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  4. [4]

    Quantum Kerr black hole from matrix theory of quantum gravity,

    C.-S. Chu, “Quantum Kerr black hole from matrix theory of quantum gravity,”Phys. Rev. D 112no. 4, (2025) 046014,arXiv:2406.12704 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Hawking Radiation from Tunneling in Black Hole Quantum Mechanics,

    C.-S. Chu, “Hawking Radiation from Tunneling in Black Hole Quantum Mechanics,” 3, 2026

    2026

  6. [6]

    Particle Emission Rates from a Black Hole: Massless Particles from an Uncharged, Nonrotating Hole,

    D. N. Page, “Particle Emission Rates from a Black Hole: Massless Particles from an Uncharged, Nonrotating Hole,”Phys. Rev. D13(1976) 198–206

    1976

  7. [7]

    Some speculations about black hole entropy in string theory,

    L. Susskind, “Some speculations about black hole entropy in string theory,” arXiv:hep-th/9309145

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [8]

    M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory,

    W. Taylor, “M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory,”Rev. Mod. Phys.73(2001) 419–462,arXiv:hep-th/0101126

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  9. [9]

    D-brane field theory on compact spaces,

    W. Taylor, “D-brane field theory on compact spaces,”Phys. Lett. B394(1997) 283–287, arXiv:hep-th/9611042

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  10. [10]

    Black Hole Eddy Currents,

    T. Damour, “Black Hole Eddy Currents,”Phys. Rev. D18(1978) 3598–3604

    1978

  11. [11]

    Black-hole electrodynamics - an absolute-space/universal-time formulation,

    D. MacDonald and K. S. Thorne, “Black-hole electrodynamics - an absolute-space/universal-time formulation,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.198(1982) 345–383

    1982

  12. [12]

    Membrane Viewpoint on Black Holes: Properties and Evolution of the Stretched Horizon,

    R. H. Price and K. S. Thorne, “Membrane Viewpoint on Black Holes: Properties and Evolution of the Stretched Horizon,”Phys. Rev. D33(1986) 915–941

    1986

  13. [13]

    K. S. Thorne, R. H. Price, and D. A. Macdonald, eds.,BLACK HOLES: THE MEMBRANE PARADIGM. Yale University Press, 1986

    1986

  14. [14]

    An Action for black hole membranes,

    M. Parikh and F. Wilczek, “An Action for black hole membranes,”Phys. Rev. D58(1998) 064011,arXiv:gr-qc/9712077

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  15. [15]

    Anti de Sitter space and holography,

    E. Witten, “Anti de Sitter space and holography,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 253–291, arXiv:hep-th/9802150

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  16. [16]

    Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,

    S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov, and A. M. Polyakov, “Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,”Phys. Lett. B428(1998) 105–114,arXiv:hep-th/9802109

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  17. [17]

    The World as a hologram,

    L. Susskind, “The World as a hologram,”J. Math. Phys.36(1995) 6377–6396, arXiv:hep-th/9409089

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  18. [18]

    Noncommutative open string and D-brane,

    C.-S. Chu and P.-M. Ho, “Noncommutative open string and D-brane,”Nucl. Phys. B550 (1999) 151–168,arXiv:hep-th/9812219

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  19. [19]

    To gauge or not to gauge?,

    J. Maldacena and A. Milekhin, “To gauge or not to gauge?,”JHEP04(2018) 084, arXiv:1802.00428 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  20. [20]

    Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment,

    E. Bertiet al., “Black hole spectroscopy: from theory to experiment,”Class. Quant. Grav.43 no. 12, (2026) 123001,arXiv:2505.23895 [gr-qc]. 51

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    Is the gravitational-wave ringdown a probe of the event horizon?,

    V. Cardoso, E. Franzin, and P. Pani, “Is the gravitational-wave ringdown a probe of the event horizon?,”Phys. Rev. Lett.116no. 17, (2016) 171101,arXiv:1602.07309 [gr-qc]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 117, 089902 (2016)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  22. [22]

    Testing the black hole ‘no-hair’ hypothesis,

    V. Cardoso and L. Gualtieri, “Testing the black hole ‘no-hair’ hypothesis,”Class. Quant. Grav.33no. 17, (2016) 174001,arXiv:1607.03133 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  23. [23]

    Echoes from the Abyss: Tentative evidence for Planck-scale structure at black hole horizons,

    J. Abedi, H. Dykaar, and N. Afshordi, “Echoes from the Abyss: Tentative evidence for Planck-scale structure at black hole horizons,”Phys. Rev. D96no. 8, (2017) 082004, arXiv:1612.00266 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  24. [24]

    Tests for the existence of black holes through gravitational wave echoes,

    V. Cardoso and P. Pani, “Tests for the existence of black holes through gravitational wave echoes,”Nature Astron.1no. 9, (2017) 586–591,arXiv:1709.01525 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  25. [25]

    Testing black hole candidates with electromagnetic radiation,

    C. Bambi, “Testing black hole candidates with electromagnetic radiation,”Rev. Mod. Phys. 89no. 2, (2017) 025001,arXiv:1509.03884 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    Gravitational wave echoes through new windows,

    R. S. Conklin, B. Holdom, and J. Ren, “Gravitational wave echoes through new windows,” Phys. Rev. D98no. 4, (2018) 044021,arXiv:1712.06517 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [27]

    Echoes from Quantum Black Holes,

    Q. Wang, N. Oshita, and N. Afshordi, “Echoes from Quantum Black Holes,”Phys. Rev. D 101no. 2, (2020) 024031,arXiv:1905.00446 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  28. [28]

    Comments on:

    G. Ashton, O. Birnholtz, M. Cabero, C. Capano, T. Dent, B. Krishnan, G. D. Meadors, A. B. Nielsen, A. Nitz, and J. Westerweck, “Comments on: ”Echoes from the abyss: Evidence for Planck-scale structure at black hole horizons”,”arXiv:1612.05625 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [29]

    Low significance of evidence for black hole echoes in gravitational wave data,

    J. Westerweck, A. Nielsen, O. Fischer-Birnholtz, M. Cabero, C. Capano, T. Dent, B. Krishnan, G. Meadors, and A. H. Nitz, “Low significance of evidence for black hole echoes in gravitational wave data,”Phys. Rev. D97no. 12, (2018) 124037,arXiv:1712.09966 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  30. [30]

    Fuzzy Black Holes from Mass Generation in Matrix Compactification,

    D. Laurenzano and J. F. Wheater, “Fuzzy Black Holes from Mass Generation in Matrix Compactification,”arXiv:2511.10430 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [31]

    General Relativity in IIB matrix model,

    P.-M. Ho, H. Kawai, and H. C. Steinacker, “General Relativity in IIB matrix model,”JHEP 02(2026) 070,arXiv:2509.06646 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    The Fuzzball proposal for black holes: An Elementary review,

    S. D. Mathur, “The Fuzzball proposal for black holes: An Elementary review,”Fortsch. Phys. 53(2005) 793–827,arXiv:hep-th/0502050

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  33. [33]

    Charge currents, rare decays, and black holes,

    E. J. Martinec, “Charge currents, rare decays, and black holes,”arXiv:2303.17139 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  34. [34]

    Hawking radiation as tunneling,

    M. K. Parikh and F. Wilczek, “Hawking radiation as tunneling,”Phys. Rev. Lett.85(2000) 5042–5045,arXiv:hep-th/9907001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  35. [35]

    Computational Complexity and Black Hole Horizons,

    L. Susskind, “Computational Complexity and Black Hole Horizons,”Fortsch. Phys.64(2016) 24–43,arXiv:1403.5695 [hep-th]. [Addendum: Fortsch.Phys. 64, 44–48 (2016)]. 52

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  36. [36]

    Black holes and the butterfly effect,

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, “Black holes and the butterfly effect,”JHEP03(2014) 067, arXiv:1306.0622 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  37. [37]

    A bound on chaos,

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, “A bound on chaos,”JHEP08(2016) 106, arXiv:1503.01409 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  38. [38]

    Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,

    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford, “Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,”Phys. Rev. D94 no. 10, (2016) 106002,arXiv:1604.07818 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    Dynamics and level statistics of interacting fermions in the lowest landau level,

    M. Fremling, C. Repellin, J.-M. Stéphan, N. Moran, J. K. Slingerland, and M. Haque, “Dynamics and level statistics of interacting fermions in the lowest landau level,”New Journal of Physics20no. 10, (2018) 103036

    2018

  40. [40]

    Cosmological horizons as new examples of membrane paradigm,

    T. Wang, “Cosmological horizons as new examples of membrane paradigm,”Class. Quant. Grav.32no. 19, (2015) 195006,arXiv:1411.6445 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  41. [41]

    Cosmological Collider Physics,

    N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena, “Cosmological Collider Physics,”arXiv:1503.08043 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    The Construction on noncommutative manifolds using coherent states,

    H. Grosse and P. Presnajder, “The Construction on noncommutative manifolds using coherent states,”Lett. Math. Phys.28(1993) 239–250

    1993

  43. [43]

    The Origin of chiral anomaly and the noncommutative geometry,

    P. Presnajder, “The Origin of chiral anomaly and the noncommutative geometry,”J. Math. Phys.41(2000) 2789–2804,arXiv:hep-th/9912050

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  44. [44]

    Towards finite quantum field theory in noncommutative geometry,

    H. Grosse, C. Klimcik, and P. Presnajder, “Towards finite quantum field theory in noncommutative geometry,”Int. J. Theor. Phys.35(1996) 231–244,arXiv:hep-th/9505175

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  45. [45]

    Scaling limits of the fuzzy sphere at one loop,

    C.-S. Chu, J. Madore, and H. Steinacker, “Scaling limits of the fuzzy sphere at one loop,” JHEP08(2001) 038,arXiv:hep-th/0106205. 53

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001