Comment on the black hole firewall

Abstract

Recently, it has been argued that black hole complementarity is inconsistent by showing that, for an infalling observer, it would lead to the existence of a firewall near the black hole horizon, thereby violating the equivalence principle. If true, this would necessitate to give up on at least one of the postulates of black hole complementarity. In this comment I want to address an additional assumption that went into the conclusion, that the early outgoing Hawking radiation is entangled with the late radiation.

References in corpus (7)

• Complementarity Is Not Enough
• Non-extremal Black Hole Microstates: Fuzzballs of Fire or Fuzzballs of Fuzz ?
• The Transfer of Entanglement: The Case for Firewalls
• Singularities, Firewalls, and Complementarity
• Is Alice burning or fuzzing?
• Holographic Space-Time Does Not Predict Firewalls
• Firewall or smooth horizon?

Cited by in corpus (20)

• Time Dependence of Hawking Radiation Entropy
• State-Dependent Bulk-Boundary Maps and Black Hole Complementarity
• Comments on the Necessity and Implications of State-Dependence in the Black Hole Interior
• Physical observability of horizons
• Unitarity and fuzzball complementarity: "Alice fuzzes but may not even know it!"
• Excluding Black Hole Firewalls with Extreme Cosmic Censorship
• Black hole complementarity and firewall in two dimensions
• Thermality of the Hawking flux
• An Uneventful Horizon in Two Dimensions
• Holographic Space-time and Black Holes: Mirages As Alternate Reality
• Firewalls in AdS/CFT
• Smooth Causal Patches for AdS Black Holes
• Remarks on Black Hole Evolution a la Firewalls and Fuzzballs
• Status report: black hole complementarity controversy
• Disentangling the Black Hole Vacuum
• Origin of Hawking Radiation: Firewall or Atmosphere?
• Still No Rindler Firewalls
• The effective Tolman temperature in curved spacetimes
• The Firewall Paradox
• Note on Localized Objects as Constrained States of Holographic Variables