A Merging timelike and spacelike surfaces

codebpr
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
How to merge spacelike and timelike surfaces in the case of thermal AdS?
In the following paper, there is a statement which says:

We propose to determine the boundary length by merging smoothly the timelike and spacelike surfaces in such a way that they are homologous to the boundary and have a well-defined first derivative at the merging point.

Can this procedure be done in the case of thermal AdS, where the boundary is at infinity?


[1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01393
 
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
51
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top