← Recent

AG-2024.08-284·gr-qc·cross-listed: hep-th

Black hole thermodynamics from an ensemble-averaged theory

Authors

  • Peng Cheng
  • Yu-Xiao Liu
  • Shao-Wen Wei

Abstract

The path integral approach to a quantum theory of gravity is widely regarded as an indispensable strategy. However, determining what additional elements, beyond black hole or AdS spacetime, should be incorporated into the path integral remains crucial yet perplexing. We argue that the spacetime with a conical singularity in its Euclidean counterpart should be the most important ingredient to append to the path integral. Therefore, physical quantities should be ensemble-averaged over all geometries since they are described by the same Lorentzian metric. When the ensemble average is introduced, the Hawking-Page transition for the Schwarzschild-AdS black hole and the small-large black hole transition for the Reissner-Nordström-AdS black hole naturally arise as semi-classical approximations, when the size of the black hole system is much larger than the Planck length. Away from the semi-classical limit, the system is a superposition of different geometries, and the averaged quantities would deviate from the black hole thermodynamics. Expanding around the classical saddles, the subleading order of the Newton constant contributions can be derived, which are half of the Hawking temperature both for the Schwarzschild and Reissner-Nordström black holes. The result may imply a universal structure. The subsubleading terms and more intriguing physics that diverge from black hole thermodynamics are revealed. The ensemble-averaged theory provides a new way of studying subleading effects and extending the traditional AdS/CFT correspondence.

Submitted

18 August 20241 year ago

Version

v1

License

CC-BY-4.0

DOI

10.48550/arXiv.2408.09500

Cite this preprint

Imports into BibLaTeX, Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote.

PDF

Open PDF

Opens in a new tab · v1.

Chat with this PDF

Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.

Community

Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.