[\text{Sch}]=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 + \left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2\left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2 \right),$$ where $M$ is the ADM mass, and $r$ is the areal radius. That is, the area of the event horizon $r_h$ is the area of the 2-sphere: $4\pi r_h^2$.

Unlike its surface area, the concept of “the volume” of a black hole is a tricky one. The reason is that volume depends on the choice of 3-dimensional spacelike hypersurface. As such, no unique volume can be prescribed to a black hole. Furthermore, the interior of a static black hole is nevertheless dynamical, so one should definitely *not* think of a black hole as a black box that bounds a certain amount of volume that can be easily estimated from knowing the size of its area. This is well-known: a maximally extended Schwarzschild \[Kruskal-Szekeres\] geometry has an infinitely large asymptotically flat region on the “other side”, connected via the Einstein-Rosen bridge. Similarly, one could attach a closed FLRW universe to the interior of a black hole via the Einstein-Rosen bridge, resulting in the so-called Wheeler’s “bag-of-gold” geometry [@Wheeler]. Even non-black hole configurations can have arbitrarily large interiors than their areas might suggest [@monsters]. What about black holes that were formed from gravitational collapse and have no second asymptotic region?

One important motivation to study the interiors of *generic* black holes is of course the information loss paradox. As matter falls into a black hole and the black hole gradually Hawking evaporates away, it seems that when the black hole disappears, the information of the in-fallen matter will be lost forever, thereby threatening the unitarity of quantum mechanics. One proposal to resolve this paradox is the idea that black holes do not completely evaporate away, but instead settle down to a \[meta-\]stable remnant. \[See [@1412.8366] for a recent review of black hole remnants.\] An obvious shortcoming of such a proposal is that, as the black hole shrinks in size it would seem that room is running out for storing a large
[ \text{Sch}]=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 + \left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1 } dr^2 + r^2\left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2 \right),$$ where $ M$ is the ADM mass, and $ r$ is the areal radius. That is, the area of the event horizon $ r_h$ is the sphere of the 2 - sector: $ 4\pi r_h^2$. 

 Unlike its surface area, the concept of “ the bulk ” of a bootleg hole is a tricky one. The reason is that bulk depends on the choice of 3 - dimensional spacelike hypersurface. As such, no alone volume can be prescribed to a bootleg hole. Furthermore, the interior of a static black fix is nevertheless dynamical, so one should definitely * not * think of a black fix as a black box that bounds a sealed amount of volume that can be well estimated from know the size of its area. This is well - known: a maximally extended Schwarzschild \[Kruskal - Szekeres\ ] geometry has an infinitely big asymptotically flat region on the “ other side ”, connected via the Einstein - Rosen bridge. Similarly, one could attach a closed FLRW universe to the interior of a black hole via the Einstein - Rosen bridge, resulting in the so - called Wheeler ’s “ bag - of - gold ” geometry [ @Wheeler ]. Even non - bootleg fix configurations can receive randomly big interiors than their areas might indicate [ @monsters ]. What about black holes that were formed from gravitational collapse and accept no second asymptotic region? 

 One important motivation to study the interiors of * generic * black holes is of class the information loss paradox. As matter falls into a bootleg hole and the bootleg hole gradually Hawking evaporates away, it seems that when the black fix disappears, the information of the in - fallen topic will be lost constantly, thereby threatening the unitarity of quantum mechanics. One marriage proposal to resolve this paradox is the idea that black holes do not completely melt away, but instead settle down to a \[meta-\]stable remnant. \[See [ @1412.8366 ] for a late review of black fix remnants.\ ] An obvious shortcoming of such a proposal is that, as the bootleg hole shrinks in size it would seem that room is running out for storing a large
[\texh{Sch}]=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 + \ltft(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2\left(v\theta^2 + \sin^2\thetx d\phi^2 \right),$$ where $M$ is the EDM nass, qnd $r$ is the areal radkus. That ps, the arwa oh the event horivkn $r_h$ is the zvea oy vhe 2-sphere: $4\pi r_m^2$.

Unlike its surface area, dhd eoncept of “the volume” of a black holq is a yrlcky one. The rgason ys tgat volume depends on the choice or 3-dimenvional spaceloke hypersurface. As such, nl unlque volume can be prescribed to w black hole. Wurthermort, che interiot of a static black hole is nevefthelzss dynamicql, so mne should vefininely *not* think of a bnack hoke as a black nox tiat vounds a certain amouit of volume that cag be easiny estimated from kboqing jhe shze ud igs zrxa. Fhis id wxll-known: a jaximally eztended Schwarzschikd \[Jruskal-Szekerss\] geoieery has an infinitely large asymptoticanly flat region on the “othwr side”, connected via the Einseein-Rosen bridge. Similarly, one could attach a cloved FMFW bklverrw ho the interior of a black hole via the Einstqjn-Toxen bridge, resmlting in the so-caklfd Rheeler’s “bag-ow-gold” ysojetry [@Wheeler]. Even non-blask hooe configtratoons can have arbitrarily lqrge interiogs tyan their areas miyht suggest [@oonsjers]. Wnat about black holes tkat wede formed fgom gravifxtional collapse anc vave no second asymptotic wegion?

One impprtant ootifation to study hhe ikderiors of *generic* blacn voles is ov course the information loss pecadox. As mattgr xalns into c blacl hole and thq black hole gtadually Kawkine evaporatvs away, iv seems that when the blawn hole disap'ears, the infirmarion of ghe in-fallen mstter will be lost dorever, thereby thveatevjng the unitaricv if quantum mechsnizs. Jnv pcoposwn to resolve thir pxtadox is the idec ghat black holes do not wompmetely evaporate aean, but insjead settje down to a \[keta-\]stable remnant. \[See [@1412.8366] foc a revenj review of black hole remnants.\] An obvioks fhortcoming jf smch w proposal is that, as the black hole shrinks in smze it would seem that eoom is running out nor storing e largq
[\text{Sch}]=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 + \left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1} dr^2 + r^2\left(d\theta^2 + \right),$$ $M$ is ADM mass, and That the area of event horizon $r_h$ the area of the 2-sphere: $4\pi Unlike its surface area, the concept of “the volume” of a black hole a tricky one. The reason is that volume depends on the choice of spacelike As no volume can be prescribed to a black hole. Furthermore, the interior of a static black hole nevertheless dynamical, so one should definitely *not* think a black hole as black box that bounds a amount volume that be estimated knowing the size its area. This is well-known: a maximally extended Schwarzschild \[Kruskal-Szekeres\] geometry has an infinitely large asymptotically flat on the connected via Einstein-Rosen Similarly, could attach a universe to the interior of a the Einstein-Rosen bridge, resulting in the so-called Wheeler’s geometry [@Wheeler]. non-black hole configurations can have arbitrarily interiors than their areas might suggest [@monsters]. What black holes that were formed from gravitational collapse and have no second asymptotic region? One to study the interiors *generic* black holes of the loss As matter into a black hole and the black hole gradually Hawking evaporates it seems that when the black hole disappears, the information in-fallen will be lost thereby threatening the unitarity quantum One proposal to resolve is idea do completely away, but instead settle to a \[meta-\]stable remnant. \[See for a recent review obvious shortcoming of such a proposal is that, the black hole shrinks in size it seem that room is running out for storing a large
[\text{Sch}]=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 + \lEft(1-\frac{2M}{r}\rIght)^{-1} dR^2 + r^2\lEft(D\tHeta^2 + \Sin^2\tHeta d\phi^2 \right),$$ wHEre $M$ Is the ADM mass, and $r$ is the aReal rAdIUs. ThAT iS, the aRea of thE EvENT hoRiZoN $r_h$ Is THe Area oF thE 2-sphere: $4\Pi r_h^2$.

Unlike Its SuRface area, the COnCept of “the vOluMe” of a black hoLe iS a tricKy One. tHe reaSon Is thaT volumE DependS on the choIcE Of 3-dimeNSional sPACeLike Hypersurface. As sucH, No UNique volume can Be presCrIBeD TO a bLacK hole. FurthErMore, tHE interiOR oF A STatIC black hole is nEvertheless DYnaMical, sO oNe sHOuld deFinitElY *Not* Think of a blaCk hoLe as a blacK box thAT bounds A Certain Amount Of vOluMe thAT cAn Be eAsILy eSTiMatED frOm knowinG tHe Size oF its AREA. this Is wEll-kNown: a Maximally exteNdeD SchWArzSchilD \[KrusKal-SZeKeres\] GeometRy has An Infinitely large AsymPtoticallY flAt RegIoN on thE “Other sIde”, ConNected vIa the EiNSteIn-rOSEn Bridge. Similarly, one CoULD aTtach a clOsed FLrw uNiVErse to thE iNteRior OF A blacK holE ViA the EinsTein-RoSEn BrIdge, resUlTing in ThE so-CalLed WhEEler’S “bag-of-Gold” geomEtry [@WHEeler]. Even non-blACk hole configuRAtIONs CAn haVe aRbitrarily lArge INterIors THaN thEIr areAs migHt SUgGEst [@monsters]. What abouT bLack hoLes thAt were formed fRom gravitaTIONal collaPse aND hAVe no second asymPtotiC region?

One IMportant MotivAtion to sTudy the inTERiors of *gEneRic* BlaCk hOLEs Is of course the INFormAtIon loss ParAdox. As mAttEr fAllS inTo A black holE and the bLaCk HoLe GraDuallY hawking eVaPorAtEs aWay, it SEems thAt wheN the BlAcK HolE disappEArS, THe inFoRmAtioN of ThE in-faLlen MAttEr will bE lost foreVer, THereBy ThReateniNg the unitaritY oF quantum meChAniCs. One pROPosal to rEsolve this paradox is the iDEa that bLacK holeS do nOt completEly EvaporAte AWay, but InsteaD settLe DowN TO a \[metA-\]STaBle ReMnant. \[See [@1412.8366] foR A RecEnt reViEw of Black hoLe remnants.\] An obviouS ShoRtcoming of sucH a pRopoSAL iS thAT, aS The BlACk hOLE shrinks in size iT would seem ThAT rOom is runniNG ouT fOr storiNg a largE
[\text{Sch}]=-\left(1-\fra c{2M}{r}\r ight) dt^ 2 +  \ left (1-\ frac{2M}{r}\ri g ht)^ {-1} dr^2 + r^2\left(d \thet a^ 2  + \ s in ^2\th eta d\p h i^ 2 \ri gh t) ,$$  w h er e $M$  is  the AD M mass, an d $ r$  is the area l  r adius. Tha t i s, the areaofthe ev en t h o rizon  $r _h$ i s thea rea of  the 2-sp he r e: $4\ p i r_h^2 $ . 
Unli ke its surface ar e a, the concept of  “thevo l um e ”  of  ablack hole  i s a t r icky on e .T h e  re a son is that v olume depen d s o n thech oic e  of 3- dimen si o nal  spacelikehype rsurface.  As su c h, no u n ique vo lume c anbepres c ri be d t oa  bl a ck  ho l e.Furtherm or e,  theinte r i o r  ofa s tati c bla ck hole is ne ver thel e ssdynam ical,  soon e sho uld de finit el y *not* think o f ablack hol e a sa b la ck bo x  thatbou nds  a cert ain amo u ntof v o lu me that can be eas il y es timatedfrom k n ow in g  the siz eofitsa r ea. T hisi swell-kno wn: am ax im ally ex te nded S ch war zsc hild\ [Kru skal-S zekeres\ ] geo m etry has an in f initely large as y m pt o tica lly  flat regio n on the“oth e rsid e ”, co nnect ed vi a  the Einstein-Rosen  b ridge.  Simi larly, one co uld attach a closed F LRWu ni v erse to the in terio r of a bla c k hole v ia th e Einste in-Rosenb r idge, re sul tin g i n t h e  s o-called Whee l e r’s“b ag-of-g old ” geome try  [@ Whe ele r] . Even no n-blackho le  c on fig urati o ns can h av e a rb itr arily largeinter iors  t ha n  th eir are a sm i ghtsu gg est[@m on sters ]. W h atabout b lack hole s t h at w er eformedfrom gravitat io nal collap se  an d have n o second  asymptotic region?

On e  import ant  moti vati on to stu dythe in ter i ors of  *gene ric*bl ack h olesi s  o f c ou rse the in f o rma tionlo ss p aradox.  As matter falls i n toa black holeand  the b la ckh ol e  gr ad u all y Hawking evapora tes away,it se ems that w h enth e black  hole d isapp e ars, th e informa tion of t he  in- f a lle n matter w ill be l ost forev e r, th e re by th rea tening  t heunita rity o f  qu antum  mecha ni cs. On e pro po sal to r esolve this paradox isthe id ea th atblack hol esd o n ot comple tely  evaporate  aw ay,  butins t ead s ettl e  d own to a\[me t a-\]stabl e  r emn a n t.  \[See [@14 1 2 . 836 6] fo r a recent  rev iew of black hole remnants.\] An  obv i o ussho r tcom in g of such a pr opo sa l is that,  a s the black  hole sh ri n ks in  sizeit wou ld seem t ha t  roomis r unn ing out f orst o ring ala rg e 
[\text{Sch}]=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2 +_\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)^{-1} dr^2_+ r^2\left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta_d\phi^2 \right),$$_where_$M$ is_the_ADM mass, and_$r$ is the_areal radius. That is,_the area of_the_event horizon $r_h$ is the area of the 2-sphere: $4\pi r_h^2$.

Unlike its surface area,_the_concept of_“the_volume”_of a black hole is_a tricky one. The reason_is that_volume depends on the choice of 3-dimensional spacelike_hypersurface._As such, no_unique volume can be prescribed to a black hole._Furthermore, the interior of a static_black hole is_nevertheless_dynamical,_so one should definitely_*not* think of a black hole_as a black box that bounds_a certain amount of volume that can_be easily estimated from knowing the_size of its area. This_is well-known:_a maximally extended Schwarzschild \[Kruskal-Szekeres\]_geometry has an_infinitely large_asymptotically flat region_on the “other side”, connected via_the Einstein-Rosen bridge._Similarly, one could attach a closed_FLRW_universe to the_interior_of_a black_hole via the_Einstein-Rosen_bridge, resulting_in_the so-called Wheeler’s “bag-of-gold” geometry [@Wheeler]._Even_non-black hole configurations can have arbitrarily large_interiors than their areas_might_suggest [@monsters]. What about_black holes that were formed_from gravitational collapse and have no_second asymptotic_region?

One important_motivation to study the interiors of *generic* black holes is of_course the information loss paradox. As_matter falls into a_black hole_and_the black hole_gradually_Hawking evaporates_away, it seems that when the black_hole disappears,_the information of the in-fallen matter_will be lost forever,_thereby_threatening the unitarity of quantum mechanics._One proposal to resolve this paradox_is the idea that black_holes_do_not completely evaporate away, but_instead settle down to a \[meta-\]stable_remnant. \[See [@1412.8366]_for a recent review of black hole_remnants.\]_An obvious shortcoming of such a_proposal_is that, as the black hole_shrinks_in_size it would seem that_room is running out for storing_a large