Monday, May 26, 2008

Paris conference on black hole information

Gravitational Scattering, Black Holes and the Information Paradox, May 26 - 28, 2008.

Web page here. My slides (pdf).

This is quite a good meeting so far. The atmosphere is informal, with about 50 participants.

Today there were two sessions. The conveners arranged brief talks to stimulate discussion, but the format was mostly open. In the early session the scheduled speakers were Giddings, Hawking, Andy Strominger and me. Hawking ended up not speaking, although he was in attendance. In the second session we had Gary Horowitz, Erik Verlinde and Strominger again.

10h 00 - 13h
What is the BH information paradox/problem/puzzle/question?
convener: T. Jacobson

14h 30 - 18h
Is string theory providing a statistical-mechanics interpretation of BH thermodynamics?
convener: J. Maldacena

I thought my talk went well, but I evidently did not convince either Giddings or Strominger that information loss to baby universes is a viable solution to the information problem :-(

There were a number of interesting exchanges. One in particular between 'tHooft, Maldacena, Englert, Giddings and Hawking lasted for some time. The issue was whether gravitational interactions between infalling particles and pre-Hawking radiation states are strong. 'tHooft maintained steadfastly that they are, with support from Englert. I couldn't quite tell what Hawking's opinion was, and all the others were opposed.

The remaining schedule is as follows.

Tuesday 27/05

10h 00 - 13h
Do quantum BH microstates have something to do with a classical geometry?
convener: D. Amati

14h 30 - 18h
Can the AdS/CFT correspondence teach us how to solve the information paradox?
convener: J. Polchinski

Wednesday 28/05

10h 00 - 13h
What can we learn from the study of transplanckian-energy collisions?
convener: G. Veneziano

14h 30 - 18h
BH and workshop evaporation: did we gain any new information?
convener: TBA


JTankers said...

We are told not to worry about the Large Hadron Collider possibly creating micro black holes at a rate of possibly one per second, because Dr. Steven Hawking theorized more than 30 years ago that (paraphrase) "Einstien was doubly wrong... black holes evaporate, that's why we have not found any..."

Actually black holes do exist as we all now know, and the black holes we know of actually grow at rapid rates, and the following PHDs and Professors of Math and Physics argue that micro black holes might only grow also:

* Dr. Adam D. Helfer: Do black holes radiate? “this prediction rests on two dubious assumptions…“
* “no compelling theoretical case for or against radiation by black holes“

* Dr. William G. Unruh and Prof. Ralf Sch├╝tzhold: On the Universality of the Hawking Effect “Therefore, whether real black holes emit Hawking radiation or not remains an open question“

* Prof. V.A. Belinski: On the existence of quantum evaporation of a black hole “quote” “…the effect [Hawking Radiation] does not exist.“

* Dr. Adam D. Helfer: QUANTUM NATURE OF BLACK HOLES “…the correct picture of a black hole is very different“
* “…completely alters the picture drawn by Hawking“

Learn more at

Anonymous said...

I'm going to throw this in here because it's more of a technical question than anything else.

I'm ruminating on some stuff [how's that for concise], and the ambling-read-through the literature is making me wonder. Are mean-field-theory and renormalization related?

I have another question that I may ask you if you have some time to field it. I should probably [use my first grade] LaTex [skills to write] it up.

Blog Archive