Wednesday, April 01, 2015 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

ER=EPR derived from PR state dependence

It's a special day of the year. You may expect some pranks from some people; on the contrary, other people who are wrong 364 days a year may happen to be right today.

Concerning the first category, Adam Falkowski has calculated which muppets are identical to which physics bloggers. TRF readers may be interested in the identity of your humble correspondent; well, you must first divide your humble correspondent to his or its even-day and odd-day portions.

Armchair physicist Matt Leifer should send this appropriate T-shirt to his fellow anti-quantum zealots including Gerard 't Hooft plus 87 other Gentlemen whose list I can provide him with.

Concerning the second category, Matt Leifer has finally realized that I am right when it comes to the foundations of quantum mechanics (as well as other things). But to be sure, he has still used the relevant T-shirt that he deserved until yesterday. This armchair physicist is an anti-quantum zealot, indeed.

Because I am very generous, I will postpone suing him – "anti-quantum zealot" is my registered trademark. I hope that Stephen Hawking® who has registered his name as a brand (somewhat distastefully emulating a TV pseudoscientist named Brian Cox) will be equally generous.

But I like the April Fools Day prank by Joseph Polchinski. He wrote a satirical article

Black Hole “Firewalls” Could Change Physics Forever
for Scientific American. It is a hilarious piece – the title is far from being the only hysterical claim celebrating his wrong papers that will make you laugh out loud. It's good that he is able to make fun out of his embarrassing errors.

You will be asked to pay to Scientific American for Joe's April Fools Day article and unless you are a billionaire, you don't want to do that. But you may get this 32-minute video supplement for free. Before you revolutionize physics and prove the firewalls, you have to know what a black hole is. I exploded in laughter when Polchinski made this comment.

(A YouTube commenter says that Joe Polchinski is Kermit the Frog, a Muppet identified with Matt Strassler by Adam Falkowski.)

Around 3:16 in the video, Joe Polchinski makes the bold claim that for 3 years, "no one has found a mistake" in their firewall arguments. Come on, Joe, this is bullshit. The literature is full of papers that show your mistake – and really also your newly found stupidity – in quite some detail. Using the climate alarmists' jargon and philosophy, there is at least "consensus" that your paper is probably wrong, and even you have said that you don't really believe that the firewalls exist.

BTW Clara Moskowitz mostly asks soft questions but she manages to present a cool new simple proof why there aren't any firewalls when she asks, at 24:00, whether the cosmic horizons that follow the big bang singularity (analogous one to the black hole singularity) should also be replaced by firewalls. If this were right, and it should be right by the equivalence principle, we couldn't exist because we're on the wrong (in the BH case, it would be called "interior") side of the firewall! ;-)

Meanwhile, two physicists who still prefer formulae and rational arguments over pranks, hype in popular magazines, and the idea that the revolution in physics is one step away from the complete stupidity have published a 136-page paper
Comments on the Necessity and Implications of State-Dependence in the Black Hole Interior
elaborating on their solution to the paradoxes mentioned in the context of the black hole information puzzle. Papadodimas and Raju have shown that their state dependence of the operators describing the black hole interior is a necessary condition to avoid firewalls. This state dependence is consistent, necessary for other things, and much of the AdS/CFT literature is formulated in a way that allows one to assume that the operators are state-dependent, anyway.

Believe me, lots of arguments may be summarized on 136 pages, and PR's arguments sound very clear and sort of "complete" to me.

One particularly cool byproduct of their detailed reanalysis of the issues is their derivation of the ER=EPR correspondence. I've been convinced that ER=EPR may be directly and explicitly deduced from PR at least since October 2013
...But I believe that even though it hasn't been written in the literature yet, the Papadodimas-Raju way of thinking implies a rather simple way to prove that the ER-EPR correspondence is true. How do we prove it? Well, we just prove that if we have the Hilbert space of states...
Now, they may also "calculate" that systems entangled in "chaotic ways" (or entangled with a small number of qubits) don't produce smooth geometric throats.

Also, parts of Kyriakos' and Suvrat's new paper use the observation that entropy and temperature are not linear operators on the Hilbert space (December 2012) even though quantum gravity links them to areas and accelerations, geometric observables (in the bulk), so the latter can't be state-independent operators, either. They applied it to the entanglement entropy in the Ryu-Takayanagi formula which makes the proof of the state-dependence particularly comprehensible.

I have only fully read about 1/6 of the new paper and quick-read 1/2 of it so far but I hope to eventually increase both numbers...

The authors have particularly recommended me Section 7.6 and Appendix A about the fat tails of coherent states' overlaps and the semiclassical description of the ideas. You may want to focus there, too.

According to a study in Nature, global warming has resuscitated the dragons. The article contains a picture of the beasts that are arising from kittens when the temperature increases by 1.5 °C, the new threshold of a tipping point.

It's OK but look at this 1984 BBC show about lirpa loof, a new animal in London's zoo that mimics everything you do. David Bellamy, a botanist and a well-known climate skeptic, starred as the zoologist here.

Bonus: Interview (by ALICE@CERN) with Savas Dimopoulos, a top particle phenomenologist at Stanford, is about experiment and theory, truth and enjoying oneself, Higgs and SUSY, and related stuff.

Tech world: Microsoft has introduced MS-DOS Mobile. This changes everything! ;-) I couldn'tactually download this new OS but Google did something simply clever that works: open Google Maps now. There will be an icon of Pac-Man in the lower left corner and when you click it, you may actually eat the dots in the streets of your favorite city.

And yes, Google also offers you a new version of the physical mailbox that brings the usual e-mail services to the unelectronic edition of the mailbox.

To compete with OneDrive and DropBox, Google introduced a new cloud service, The Actual Cloud Platform which moves your data to the troposphere.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (27) :

reader Liam said...

Phew - for a minute I thought the April Fool's was going to be that ER=EPR was not in fact derived from PR state dependance, and that you were just teasing us... :D

More great work from team awesome! It's so great to have a public blog by an expert (I mean TRF) that's so accessibly written and that has it's finger on the pulse of these exciting research issues.

I also loved Liefer's Anti-Quantum Zealot T-Shirt, I hope he's really going to wear it at his speaking engagements like he promised! His bullet points 1-3 look pretty reasonable to me, so I'm not sure I got the joke though.. ;-)

reader Souvik Banerjee said...


reader Luboš Motl said...

:-) It would be natural if they were equal to EP or PE as well. But the European Parliament seems detached so far and I don't know how to calculate the price-to-earnings ratio from quantum gravity, either.

reader Luboš Motl said...

LOL. I am sure that if Matt Leifer took his T-shirt and visited rather mainstream particle or condensed matter physicists and explained them why he was awarded by the title on the T-shirt, he would be shocked how many of the best ones agree that the description is right on the money.

reader Liam said...

Ha ha, maybe you will collaborate with some "Quants" in the finance industry one day and discover how to calculate it from ADS/CFT or Matrix theory :P

(God knows the idiots currently running the Fed and ECB could use a clue or two...)

As you suggested a couple of years ago, the ER=EPR cases with smooth geometry can be seen as a good Ansatz for the more general considerations arising in PR..

reader RAF III said...


reader Uncle Al said...

They aren't black holes at all. They are fundamentalist Christian holes to a first approximation for being certain of a truth that contradicts all ratiocination. Annihilation then demands renormalization to an Islam state.

reader QsaTheory said...

This is no April fool joke.

electron g-factor=(4m_e/3he^2)*(2/(3*m_e*alpha) - 2*e^4 -1)


.. e^2=3(charge square),h actually h_bar=(e/alpha)^.5=20.2758.. m_e=.00054858

reader zeGogglesDoNossing said...

Different temperature states on Type I_{n} von neumann algebras (matrix algebras) are unitarily equivalent. Different temperature states on type III von neumann algebras are not

reader Uncle Al said...

That is wonderful! Calculate muon (g - 2) and the proton's magnetic moment. The Dirac equation majorly craps out for the latter, so you already have a big boost. Be Stern.

reader abv8 said...

This website looks alright if you lose the dark backgrounds and make the text normal.

reader Luboš Motl said...

I've tried it, one needs a few more color changes to fix various buggy colors around (white on nearly white, and so on), but I may try it tomorrow.

Obviously, all the images optimized with the hard #003322 background color will look silly - a sign of a historical discontinuity.

reader Gene Day said...

Matt Leifer’s capitulation re. quantum mechanics is appropriate but he is wrong about the exclusive position of high-energy physicists. He says,"People who work on high energy physics, and especially string theory, are the ultimate arbiters of truth about the nature of quantum theory. Only they have the background needed to make meaningful statements on the subject.”

This last sentence sells short many other physicists, especially condensed-matter physicists like me, who can certainly make meaningful statements about quantum mechanics. I have no doubt that Lubo’s understanding is deeper than mine but I really do get the basic idea, unlike the hordes who do not.

reader MangoLiger said...

Looks like LHC is starting up but the CMS status says "Destroyed." April fools joke?

reader Luboš Motl said...

You are absolutely right, and too modest. You probably understand these matters at least as well as I do, and so probably do numerous condensed matter and other "real stuff modern" physicists.

reader abv8 said...

I wouldn't worry about any of that.
It is much easier to read now and that is all that matters.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Well, I could read the white-on-darkgreen just as well, otherwise I would have changed it a long time ago.

This question whether "dark on light" or vice versa has been around for quite some time. The MS_DOS era taught many of us that "white on black" is natural for PC screens.

But many things have changed - like the power consumption of LCD panels etc.

reader Luboš Motl said...

No, it's real, but it's not a big deal that CMS is destroyed. That's why there are 2 big detectors. The reason is the same why men have 2 testicles. When someone shoots one of them, there is still one left.

reader john said...

I think Leifer is making fun of Lubos ?

reader john said...

I also think that current one is much better, Lubos. If there isn't any problem with advertisements I think you should stick with it.

reader QsaTheory said...

That was my impression too. No human admit their faults in a clear way without some lame excuse.

reader zeGogglesDoNossing said...

Took me a moment to remember who this Leiffer guy is. He gave a talk where he advocated using doubled hilbert spaces to represent mixed states - this was at the early onset of the resurgence of interest in Umezawa's old thermofield stuff, but it was clear to me then that he was leaving out an important peace of structure, namely that the action on the right hilbert space had to use the modular structure. If your GNS representation is faithful, this modular structure is unique. Two years later, Marolf gave his talk where he was allowing this modular structure to be non-unique and using this to make claims about superselection sectors. This was also the talk where the super nice, super smart faculty member raised his objection. A year later, Baez published his critique. I sometimes wonder if I could have saved everybody alot of time by raising my objections at that first Leiffer talk.

His bit about only high energy people having the requisite background is sort of a bitter reductio ad absurdum, but there certainly has been a disturbing trend in which even some high energy people (at least in the early goings) are using formalisms that work fine for the special example of ultracold Rydberg atoms yet miss crucial structure in field theories. I suspect super sophisticated condensed matter theorists like Volovik wouldn't make these same kind of mistakes.

reader Peter F. said...

Very glad to soon be able to install MS-DOS mobile. A great step forward in an alternative (opposite) direction Very fitting this great announcement was published via TRF! ;>>

reader Peter F. said...

Yesterday, the awesome Elsternwick Particle Twirler (a Dyson) was switched on and almost instantly revealed that all quantum fluctuations are counter-fluctuated in 3 of the most adjacent spatial dimensions, and that all things quantum cancel out (in principle only, of course)!
Only one of the consequences of this discovery is that anti-quantum zealots must now develop other outlets for their curiosity, creativity and early on incurred CURSES; E.g. one perfectly obvious option for them is to use any kind of loosely logical language to leak into and trying to explaining what the remaining 3 spatial dimensions are doing!

reader Luboš Motl said...

I think that there's no problem with the ads.

reader br said...

This story looks legit: . I think I saw a 6-part documentary about that, so it must be true.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear br, you can't be serious. How could an April 1st CERN story about "the Force" be "legit"? The article you linked to contains the disclaimer "did you enjoy our Aprill Fools Day story?" at the top which may be another hint.