<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A microscopic description of black hole evaporation via holography · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1603.03055/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1603.03055/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A microscopic description of black hole evaporation via holography — mentioned by evanb</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15715461</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1603.03055:15715461</guid><pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:03:28 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yeah, I went straight to the static solutions for simplicity of discussion. From the outside, though, is it even in principle possible to tell whether a BH is a stellar-collapse Bh or if it&amp;#x27;s an eternal Schwarschild vacuum BH? Now we&amp;#x27;re outside of my realm of expertise. Do I recall properly from my GR class that once stellar collapse begins the outer shell reaches the singularity in a finite time? In that case, I think it does come down to philosophy (if you&amp;#x27;re staying within GR) or some theory that resolves the singularity to say whether the BH is &amp;quot;made of matter&amp;quot; or not. &amp;gt; I&amp;#x27;ll assume you…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1603.03055/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>hep-th</category></item><item><title>A microscopic description of black hole evaporation via holography — mentioned by evanb</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11745219</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1603.03055:11745219</guid><pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2016 16:28:14 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The Gravity Research Foundation&amp;#x27;s essay contest is one of the most well-known and prestigious essay contests in physics, in which authors are encouraged to synthesize and simplify their technical work into a short, approachable-for-physicists-but-nonexperts work with few equations. A quick perusing of the previous winners http://www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/winners_year.html shows &amp;#x27;t Hooft, Krauss, Smoot, Steinhardt, Wald, Bekenstein, Brout, Englert, Penrose, Hawking, DeWitt. It&amp;#x27;s taken very seriously. So the chain was really (a bunch of real papers) --&amp;gt; (those authors summarizing what…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1603.03055/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>hep-th</category></item></channel></rss>
