Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
A Strategy for Proving the Strong Eigenstate Thermalization Hypothesis : Chaotic Systems and Holography
arXiv
Authors: Taishi Kawamoto
Year
2024
Paper ID
36738
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
128
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The strong eigenstate thermalization hypothesis (ETH) provides a sufficient condition for thermalization and equilibration. Although it is expected to be hold in a wide class of highly chaotic theories, there are only a few analytic examples demonstrating the strong ETH in special cases, often through methods related to integrability. In this paper, we explore sufficient conditions for the strong ETH that may apply to a broad range of chaotic theories. These conditions are expressed as inequalities involving the long-time averages of real-time thermal correlators. Specifically, as an illustration, we consider simple toy examples which satisfy these conditions under certain technical assumptions. This toy models have same properties as holographic theories at least in the perturbation in large N. We give a few comments for more realistic holographic models.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The strong eigenstate thermalization hypothesis (ETH) provides a sufficient condition for thermalization and equilibration.
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.