At the heart of both black hole physics and Wigner's friend scenarios lies the question of unitarity. In Wigner's friend setups, sealed-lab measurements are modeled unitarily, probing the measurement problem. In black hole physics, the unitarity problem concerns information preservation in evaporation. We extend a recent analogy between these two puzzles exposed by Hausmann and Renner [arXiv:2504.03835] by constructing new paradoxes that merge black hole physics with extensions of the Wigner's friend scenario into a unified argument. This unified construction allows us to sharpen the black hole cloning paradox, which leaves room for a theory to consistently describe the physics of black holes satisfying the assumptions of this paradox but without operational contradictions concerning quantum theory's predictions. We close this loophole, showing that no such theory exists, conditional on standard assumptions of black hole puzzles. We moreover show how the firewall argument can be used to derive a violation of no-signalling. We conclude by briefly highlighting important subtleties in assumptions commonly used in black hole puzzles, questioning the validity of these assumptions.
At the heart of both black hole physics and Wigner's friend scenarios lies the question of unitarity. In Wigner's friend setups, sealed-lab measurements are modeled unitarily, probing the measurement problem. In black hole physics, the unitarity problem concerns information preservation in evaporation. We extend a recent analogy between these two puzzles exposed by Hausmann and Renner [arXiv:2504.03835] by constructing new paradoxes that merge black hole physics with extensions of the Wigner's friend scenario into a unified argument. This unified construction allows us to sharpen the black hole cloning paradox, which leaves room for a theory to consistently describe the physics of black holes satisfying the assumptions of this paradox but without operational contradictions concerning quantum theory's predictions. We close this loophole, showing that no such theory exists, conditional on standard assumptions of black hole puzzles. We moreover show how the firewall argument can be used to derive a violation of no-signalling. We conclude by briefly highlighting important subtleties in assumptions commonly used in black hole puzzles, questioning the validity of these assumptions.
Despite its remarkable empirical success and predictive power, quantum theory is riddled with mysteries. One such conceptual puzzle is the measurement problem: why do quantum systems in superposition collapse to a single-valued outcome upon being measured? The scenario of Wigner's friend illustrates this tension, with recent extensions deriving strong no-go results for the nature of reality. Another fundamental puzzle arises at the interface of quantum theory and general relativity---the black hole information paradox. This thesis further explores these two foundational paradoxes. Part I of this thesis focuses on extensions of the Wigner's friend scenario. We introduce several novel extended Wigner's friend arguments, and establish connections with notions of nonclassicality, i.e. the study of quantum phenomena that evade classical explanation. Key results are a refined version of the Frauchiger--Renner paradox, new extended Wigner's friend scenarios based on contextuality, and an argument against the absoluteness of free choices based on the Pusey--Barrett--Rudolph theorem. The latter result complements the Local Friendliness no-go theorem, which challenged the absoluteness of experimentally obtained measurement outcomes. In Part II of this thesis, we turn to black hole puzzles and the interplay of quantum theory and gravity. We present a paradox that unifies extended Wigner's friend arguments with black hole puzzles, strengthening the cloning and firewall paradoxes. After discussing subtleties in these paradoxes, we next present an analysis combining elements of quantum theory with gravity, analyzing the detector response near a superposed black hole using elements of quantum reference frames.
Recently, Hausmann and Renner have pointed out that several famous paradoxes relating to black holes have a similar character to various Extended Wigner's Friend paradoxes. In this paper I consider what the connection between these things could teach us about the Wigner's Friend scenarios. I argue that if we take the analogy between these cases seriously, the black hole paradoxes appear to favour a certain class of response to the Wigner's Friend scenario - specifically, those which posit intrinsic relationality, rather than effective and emergent relationality, and also those which posit some kind of retrocausality.
Recently, Hausmann and Renner have pointed out that several famous paradoxes relating to black holes have a similar character to various Extended Wigner’s Friend paradoxes. In this paper I consider what the connection between these things could teach us about the Wigner’s Friend scenarios. I argue that if we take the analogy between these cases seriously, the black hole paradoxes appear to favour a certain class of response to the Wigner’s Friend scenario - specifically, those which posit intrinsic relationality, rather than effective and emergent relationality, and also those which posit some kind of retrocausality.
Unitary black hole evaporation necessarily involves a late-time superposition of decoherent states, including states describing distinct spacetimes (e.g., different center of mass trajectories of the black hole). Typical analyses of the black hole information problem, including the argument for the existence of firewalls, assume approximate unitarity ("factorization of unitarity") on each of the decoherent spacetimes. This factorization assumption is non-trivial, and indeed may be incorrect. We describe an ansatz for the radiation state that violates factorization and which allows unitarity and the equivalence principle to coexist (no firewall). Unitarity without factorization provides a natural realization of the idea of black hole complementarity.
A recent paper "Single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent" [arXiv:1604.07422] by D. Frauchiger and R. Renner has attracted a considerable interest of a broader physics audience and shortly elicited a number of replies. In spite of the objections that ensued, we find that significant part of the controversial initial claim has not been refuted - on the contrary, arguments presented both in the initial paper and in the replies seem to leave no longer room for the basic Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. We revisit the controversy trying to pinpoint the exact phenomenon that lies in its core, pointing out to some aspects of the problem that seem to have been mostly overlooked. Taking all conclusions into account, we here propose novel ways to approach the ostensible paradox, in which the Copenhagen interpretation is naturally preserved. Whereas arguments presented in Frauchiger and Renner paper and the replies that followed revolve over whether Wigner's friend would perceive only one or both of the possible outcomes, we offer the third, pretty obvious solution - namely, that Wigner's friend, in the well known setup, would subjectively perceive {\it none} of the potentially conflicting outcomes. As a side note, we also argue that, contrary to the often stated beliefs, hypothetical real experimental realization of Wigner's friend thought experiment actually would not provide us with any new insight into the quantum mechanics.
Thirty years ago, John Preskill concluded "that the information loss paradox may well presage a revolution in fundamental physics" and mused that "Conceivably, the puzzle of black hole evaporation portends a scientific revolution as sweeping as that that led to the formulation of quantum theory in the early 20th century." Many still agree with this assessment. On the other hand, it seems to me the "paradox" has little to do with the physical world but rather, at best, simply points out the possible inconsistency of two, already disparate, theories (mathematical models) of nature, general relativity and quantum mechanics, with virtually no conceivable observational consequences. The information paradox hinges on the concepts of a pure quantum state, the unitarity of quantum mechanics, and Hawking's semi-classical calculation of black hole evaporation. I used the qualifier "at best" above because, for me, the concept of a quantum state is far more restrictive than required by the paradox while unitarity is not a property of nature but rather of a mathematical model and is already violated by the process of making a measurement. Furthermore, the semi-classical calculation of Hawking is surely of limited applicability.