2008/09/30 by Sungwook E. Hong, Dong-il Hwang, Dong-han Yeom +1 · 18 citations
Mathematics · Physics and Astronomy · #Black Holes and Theoretical Physics #Black hole (networking) #Black hole complementarity #Classical mechanics #Complementarity (molecular biology) #Computer science #Cosmology and Gravitation Theories #Event horizon #Hawking radiation #Horizon #Mathematical analysis #Mathematical economics #Mathematics #Micro black hole #Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories #Physics #Singularity #Theoretical physics #gr-qc
paper · pdf · doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/12/080
published in Journal of High Energy Physics 2008(12), 080 (Springer Nature) · 22 pages, 11 figures
openalex publication_date 2008/12/18 · arxiv created 2008/12/19 · arxiv updated 2009/12/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
To implement the consistent black hole complementarity principle, we need two assumptions: first, there exists a singularity near the center, and second, global horizons are the same as local horizons. However, these assumptions are not true in general. In this paper, the authors study a charged black hole in which the second assumption may not hold. From the previous simulations, we have argued that the event horizon is quite close to the outer horizon, and it seems not harmful to black hole complementarity; however, the Cauchy horizon can be different from the inner horizon, and a violation of complementarity will be possible. To maintain complementarity, we need to assume a selection principle between the singularity and the Hawking radiation generating surface; we suggest that Horowitz-Maldacena's proposal can be useful for this purpose. Finally, we discussed some conditions under which the selection principle may not work.