This does not make sense, because Maldacena and Susskind proposed the ER=EPR idea together .Dennis Plews said:I heard recently that Dr. Maldecena recently commented to Dr. Susskind, regarding the black hole information paradox, that ER = EPR.
Thanks everyone!ImStein said:ER = EPR asserts the equivalence of entanglement to a wormhole, where ER refers to Einstein-Rosen bridge (i.e. a wormhole) and EPR refers to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox regarding entanglement.
Maldecena and Susskind first published a derivation in 2013.
“General relativity contains solutions in which two distant black holes are connected through the interior via a wormhole, or Einstein-Rosen bridge. These solutions can be interpreted as maximally entangled states of two black holes that form a complex EPR pair. We suggest that similar bridges might be present for more general entangled states.”
It was quickly confirmed by Jensen and Karch,
“We construct the holographic dual of two colored quasiparticles in maximally supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory entangled in a color singlet Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) pair. In the holographic dual, the entanglement is encoded in a geometry of a nontraversable wormhole on the world sheet of the flux tube connecting the pair. This gives a simple example supporting the recent claim by Maldacena and Susskind that EPR pairs and nontraversable wormholes are equivalent descriptions of the same physics.”
and by Sonner.
“We show that the recently proposed bulk dual of an entangled pair of a quark and an antiquark corresponds to the Lorentzian continuation of the tunneling instanton describing Schwinger pair creation in the dual field theory. This observation supports and further explains the claim by Jensen and Karch that the bulk dual of an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen pair is a string with a wormhole on its world sheet. We suggest that this constitutes a holographically dual realization of the creation of a Wheeler wormhole.”
The first general description however, was given three years prior, right here at PF! “Spinhole” seems apt as quantum spin is the most commonly described entangled property. “Slope zero” applies to the condition where the entangled particles share a simultaneity (i.e. inertial frame).
“The 'quantum non-local connection' of the EPR paradox seems to offer us a spinhole (spatial interconnecting wormhole), with slope zero to explain entanglement. So, it's not just outsiders who envision the utility of a "tiny wormholes" model. As I recall, John Wheeler's quantum foam is also filled with them.”
The information paradox and non-locality are two concepts in physics that are closely related. The information paradox refers to the idea that information can be lost in black holes, which goes against the principle of information conservation in physics. Non-locality, on the other hand, is a phenomenon in quantum mechanics where particles can influence each other instantaneously, even when they are separated by large distances.
ER = EPR is a theory proposed by physicists Leonard Susskind and Juan Maldacena, which suggests that entangled particles are connected by wormholes in space-time. This theory provides a possible solution to the information paradox by showing that the information of a particle falling into a black hole may be stored in the entangled particle outside the black hole through these wormholes.
ER = EPR also provides a possible explanation for non-locality. The theory suggests that the entangled particles are connected by wormholes, which allow for instantaneous communication between them. This would explain the phenomenon of non-locality, where particles can influence each other without any apparent physical connection.
ER = EPR is a theory that has generated a lot of interest in the physics community. It has the potential to solve two major problems in physics: the information paradox and non-locality. If proven to be true, it could revolutionize our understanding of space, time, and the fundamental laws of the universe.
Currently, there is no direct evidence to support ER = EPR. However, the theory is still being studied and tested by physicists through various experiments and observations. Some recent studies have shown promising results that support the theory, but more research is needed to fully validate it.