- #1
- 24,775
- 792
A minor Immirzi scuffle (Corichi, Ghosh, DeBenedictis)
Andrew DeBenedictis and two friends just came out with a paper that will stir up Immirzi controversy.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0702036
Already there have been series of papers on the one hand by Corichi et al and on the other by Ghosh and Mitra both of which say that the Immirzi parameter should be 0.274...
that is, it should be the solution of a certain transcendental equation found by Ghosh. (possible pun---by guess and by Ghosh)
This came from studying black holes with SPHERICAL event horizon.
The DeBenedictis paper investigates something wholely (holely) different, a TOROIDAL black hole event horizon. And it counts states and computes entropy and compares with area, just like you are supposed to, and it GETS THE SAME IMMIRZI of 0.274... satisfying the same transcendental equation.
this is disturbing because it raises supicions that the figure of 0.274 might actually be right!
Andrew DeBenedictis and two friends just came out with a paper that will stir up Immirzi controversy.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0702036
Already there have been series of papers on the one hand by Corichi et al and on the other by Ghosh and Mitra both of which say that the Immirzi parameter should be 0.274...
that is, it should be the solution of a certain transcendental equation found by Ghosh. (possible pun---by guess and by Ghosh)
This came from studying black holes with SPHERICAL event horizon.
The DeBenedictis paper investigates something wholely (holely) different, a TOROIDAL black hole event horizon. And it counts states and computes entropy and compares with area, just like you are supposed to, and it GETS THE SAME IMMIRZI of 0.274... satisfying the same transcendental equation.
this is disturbing because it raises supicions that the figure of 0.274 might actually be right!
Last edited: