Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Unruh-DeWitt Detector Differentiation of Black Holes and Exotic Compact Objects
arXiv
Authors: Bob Holdom, Robert B. Mann, Chen Zhang
Year
2020
Paper ID
19139
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
109
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We study the response of a static Unruh-DeWitt detector outside an exotic compact object (ECO) with a general reflective boundary condition in 3+1 dimensions. The horizonless ECO, whose boundary is extremely close to the would-be event horizon, acts as a black hole mimicker. We find that the response rate is notably distinct from the black hole case, even when the ECO boundary is perfectly absorbing. For a (partially) reflective ECO boundary, we find resonance structures in the response rate that depend on the different locations of the ECO boundary and those of the detector. We provide a detailed analysis in connection with the ECO's vacuum mode structure and transfer function.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Open Quantum Systems & Decoherence research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We study the response of a static Unruh-DeWitt detector outside an exotic compact object (ECO) with a general reflective boundary condition in 3+1 dimensions.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.