Bibliographic record
Abstract
One consequence of the cosmic censorship conjecture is that any topological structure will ultimately collapse to within the horizons of a set of black holes, and as a result, an external classical observer will be unable to probe it. However a single two-level quantum system (UDW detector) that remains outside of the horizon has been shown to distinguish between a black hole and its associated geon counterpart via its different response rates. Here we extend this investigation of the quantum vacuum outside of an $\mathbb{RP}_2$ geon by considering the entanglement structure of the vacuum state of a quantum scalar field in this spacetime, and how this differs from its BTZ black hole counterpart. Employing the entanglement harvesting protocol, where field entanglement is swapped to a pair of UDW detectors, we find that the classically hidden topology of the geon can have an appreciable difference in the amount of entanglement harvested in the two spacetimes for sufficiently small mass. In this regime, we find that detectors with a small energy gap harvest more entanglement in the BTZ spacetime; however as the energy gap increases, the detectors harvest more entanglement in a geon spacetime. The energy gap at the crossover is dependent on the black hole mass, occurring at a lower values for lower masses. This also impacts the size of the entanglement shadow, the region near the horizon where the detectors cannot harvest entanglement. Small gap detectors experience a larger entanglement shadow in a geon spacetime, whereas for large gap detectors the shadow is larger in a BTZ spacetime.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".