Static classical solutions
The argument
Because static black holes localized on the brane exist at all sizes in the Randall-Sundrum II model, as shown by the numerical solutions of Figueras and Wiseman (2011) and independently confirmed in 2012, brane-localized black holes are not forced to evaporate classically, contrary to the holographic conjecture of Tanaka and of Emparan, Fabbri and Kaloper that no such static solutions could exist.
Does it work?
Not yet evaluated.
Premises
- UnassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →Static black holes localized on the brane exist at all sizes in the Randall-Sundrum II model
Where it is made
Passages where sources make, criticize or mention this argument. They record where it appears, not how strong it is, and none has precedence over another.
No source is recorded as making it.
Earlier ratings
- Jul 25, 2026
Granting its premise, the argument decisively refutes the original no-static-solution form of the evaporation conjecture, and it rests entirely on the existence of static brane-localized black holes at all sizes, which is numerically robust and independently reproduced though not yet assessed here. The caveat is one of scope: the existence of static solutions shows that evaporation is not classically forced, but it does not establish that an isolated brane black hole is stable, since the static configurations admit a reading as equilibrium states rather than isolated objects. The argument therefore weakens the claim's strongest form without contradicting the claim as stated.