 a boost. But we can now even identify the null vector being held fixed. The coordinate $\beta$ in the (2+1)-dimensional metric (\[c5\]) originated as a gauge-dependent parameter in the (3+1)-dimensional tetrad (\[c2\]). But for (\[c5\]) to be truly (2+1)-dimensional, $\beta$ cannot depend on $\theta$ and $\varphi$ alone, but must be a function of the null coordinate $v$ along the horizon. Indeed, to preserve spherical symmetry, $\beta$ should be a function of $v$ alone. Hence the isometries (\[b1\]), chosen in 2+1 dimensions to leave $\beta$ invariant, fix $v$ in 3+1 dimensions. The null vector that defines our null rotations is just the null normal to the horizon.

This choice is physically natural, and may offer insights into the underlying degrees of freedom [@Carlipz]. But it is awkward to implement in a formulation with a real Barbero-Immirzi parameter, perhaps explaining why the derivation of black hole entropy is simpler with a self-dual connection.

Implications and open questions
===============================

I have focused on the Schwarzschild black hole, but the general arguments about the structure of holonomies hold for any black hole satisfying the isolated horizon boundary conditions (\[a5\]). Still, it would be interesting to see an explicit extension to an arbitrary black hole. For the Kerr black hole, much of the preliminary work appears in [@Roken], although a more general Lorentz gauge is needed.

The present derivation of black hole entropy differs from the standard loop quantum gravity approach of [@ABCK; @ABK] in an interesting way. The usual starting point is an ensemble of horizon configurations with arbitrarily many punctures and arbitrary holonomies, restricted only by the specified area $A_\Delta$. Counting states is then a combinatorial problem; an entropy proportional to area appears naturally, but the Barbero-Immirzi parameter must be tuned to give the right prefactor. Here, in contrast, the entropy is derived for a *single* configuration of punctures and holonomies, now restricted only by the closure condition (\[b3\]). This is reminiscent of the proposal that the number of punctures should be treated as a sort of “quantum hair” [@GhoshPerez] that physically distinguishes different black holes. In essence, the question is in how fine a coarse-graining is needed to define the entropy
a boost. But we can now even identify the null vector being held specify. The coordinate $ \beta$ in the (2 + 1)-dimensional measured (\[c5\ ]) originated as a gauge - pendent argument in the (3 + 1)-dimensional tetrad (\[c2\ ]). But for (\[c5\ ]) to be truly (2 + 1)-dimensional, $ \beta$ cannot depend on $ \theta$ and $ \varphi$ entirely, but must be a routine of the null coordinate $ v$ along the horizon. Indeed, to preserve ball-shaped isotropy, $ \beta$ should be a function of $ v$ alone. therefore the isometries (\[b1\ ]), chosen in 2 + 1 property to impart $ \beta$ invariant, specify $ v$ in 3 + 1 dimensions. The null vector that defines our null rotation is just the null normal to the horizon. 

 This choice is physically natural, and may propose insights into the underlying degrees of freedom [ @Carlipz ]. But it is awkward to enforce in a formulation with a real Barbero - Immirzi parameter, perhaps explaining why the deriving of black hole entropy is simpler with a self - dual connection. 

 Implications and open questions 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 I have focused on the Schwarzschild black hole, but the general arguments about the structure of holonomies hold for any black hole satisfy the isolated horizon boundary conditions (\[a5\ ]). even, it would be interesting to visualize an explicit extension to an arbitrary black fix. For the Kerr black hole, much of the preliminary work appears in [ @Roken ], although a more cosmopolitan Lorentz gauge is needed. 

 The present derivation of black hole entropy differs from the standard loop quantum gravity approach of [ @ABCK; @ABK ] in an interesting way. The usual starting distributor point is an ensemble of horizon configuration with arbitrarily many punctures and arbitrary holonomies, restricted only by the specified sphere $ A_\Delta$. Counting states is then a combinatorial problem; an entropy proportional to area appears naturally, but the Barbero - Immirzi parameter must be tuned to give the correct prefactor. Here, in contrast, the randomness is derived for a * single * shape of punctures and holonomies, now restricted only by the closing condition (\[b3\ ]). This is evocative of the proposal that the number of punctures should be cover as a sort of “ quantum haircloth ” [ @GhoshPerez ] that physically distinguishes different black holes. In essence, the question is in how fine a coarse - graining is needed to define the information
 a hoost. But we can now evek identify the nolo vectmr beihg held wixed. The coordinate $\beta$ in tye (2+1)-dinensional metric (\[c5\]) orieinated ad a gaugw-deptndent parameter mh the (3+1)-dliensjlnal vetrad (\[c2\]). But fot (\[c5\]) to be trgly (2+1)-dimensionan, $\ceca$ cannot depend on $\theta$ and $\varphi$ alone, nuh must be a fugctipg of nht null coordinate $v$ along the horjzon. Inveed, to preservr spherical symmetry, $\beta$ dhoupd be a function ov $v$ alone. Hghce rhe isometrids (\[b1\]), chosen in 2+1 dimensjons to leave $\beta$ invariant, fib $v$ iu 3+1 dimensiobs. Thf null vectoc that defines our null rodations is just the nmll nmrmql to the horizon.

This choice is physicajly naturdl, and may offer inwithts hnto the ynddrlgiig segreed oh freedom [@Czrlipz]. But ut is awkward to imkleivmt in a formhlatiog rith a real Barbero-Immirzi parameter, peghapa explaining why the deeivation of black holg entropy ys simpler with a self-dual connection.

Implications and koen qmestkind
===============================

I have focused on the Schwarzschild black hojs, nun the general argmments about the syrkcyore of holonomkes hold ror any black hole satisfiing tye isolattd hotizon boundary conditions (\[a5\]). Still, it wolld ve interesting to dee an explncit ectensoon to an arbitrary blaek hols. For the Kfrr black fole, much of the prvlimhnary work appears in [@Rokeg], althougi a mpre gendral Lorenez gauge id needed.

The present derigatiou of tlack hole entropy differs from the standecd loop quantom cranity apprjach pf [@ABCK; @ABK] ig an interestiug way. Tke usuxl startinf point is an enseible of horizmj configuratmons with arbutraeily mavh punctures anc arbitragy holinomies, restricted onug by the specifntd qrea $A_\Delta$. Coumtivg ftwtxs is dhen a combitatofiau probuem; an tutrioy ptoportional to area dppezrs naturally, but yhc Barbero-Ummirzi [arameter musy be tuned to give the cight 'refacyor. Here, in contrast, the entropy js derivef fjr a *single* sonflgurwtion of pbnctures and holonomies, now restricted oily by the closure condution (\[b3\]). This is remnnlscent of thx propjsal that the number of punctyres should be trtated as a sort of “quanfum hahr” [@GhlshPerez] that physically distinguishes different black holes. In essence, tye question is in gow gine d eoaxse-graiging ms needed to defime the entropy
a boost. But we can now even null being held The coordinate $\beta$ originated a gauge-dependent parameter the (3+1)-dimensional tetrad But for (\[c5\]) to be truly $\beta$ cannot depend on $\theta$ and $\varphi$ alone, but must be a function the null coordinate $v$ along the horizon. Indeed, to preserve spherical symmetry, $\beta$ be function $v$ Hence the isometries (\[b1\]), chosen in 2+1 dimensions to leave $\beta$ invariant, fix $v$ in 3+1 The null vector that defines our null rotations just the null normal the horizon. This choice is natural, may offer into underlying of freedom [@Carlipz]. it is awkward to implement in a formulation with a real Barbero-Immirzi parameter, perhaps explaining why the of black is simpler a connection. and open questions have focused on the Schwarzschild black general arguments about the structure of holonomies hold any black satisfying the isolated horizon boundary conditions Still, it would be interesting to see an extension to an arbitrary black hole. For the Kerr black hole, much of the preliminary in [@Roken], although a general Lorentz gauge needed. present of hole entropy from the standard loop quantum gravity approach of [@ABCK; @ABK] in interesting way. The usual starting point is an ensemble of with many punctures and holonomies, restricted only by specified $A_\Delta$. Counting states is combinatorial an area naturally, the Barbero-Immirzi parameter must tuned to give the right Here, in contrast, the *single* configuration of punctures and holonomies, now restricted by the closure condition (\[b3\]). This is of the proposal that the number of punctures should be treated as sort of [@GhoshPerez] that physically distinguishes different black holes. In the question is in fine a coarse-graining is needed to define the entropy
 a boost. But we can now even idenTify the nulL vectOr bEinG hEld fIxed. the coordinate $\bETa$ in The (2+1)-dimensional metric (\[c5\]) oRiginAtED as a GAuGe-depEndent pARaMETer In ThE (3+1)-diMeNSiOnal tEtrAd (\[c2\]). But fOr (\[c5\]) to be truLy (2+1)-dImEnsional, $\beta$ CAnNot depend oN $\thEta$ and $\varphi$ AloNe, but mUsT be A FunctIon Of the Null coORdinatE $v$ along thE hORizon. INDeed, to pRESeRve sPherical symmetry, $\bETa$ SHould be a functiOn of $v$ aLoNE. HENCe tHe iSometries (\[b1\]), ChOsen iN 2+1 DimensiONs TO LEavE $\Beta$ invariant, Fix $v$ in 3+1 dimenSIonS. The nuLl VecTOr that DefinEs OUr nUll rotationS is jUst the nulL normaL To the hoRIzon.

ThiS choicE is PhySicaLLy NaTurAl, ANd mAY oFfeR InsIghts intO tHe UnderLyinG DEGRees Of fReedOm [@CarLipz]. But it is awKwaRd to IMplEment In a foRmulAtIon wiTh a reaL BarbErO-Immirzi parametEr, peRhaps explAinInG whY tHe derIVation Of bLacK hole enTropy is SImpLeR WITh A self-dual connectioN.

IMPLiCations aNd open QUeStIOns
===============================

I have FoCusEd on THE SchwArzsCHiLd black hOle, but THe GeNeral arGuMents aBoUt tHe sTructURe of HolonoMies hold For anY Black hole satisFYing the isolatED hORIzON bouNdaRy conditionS (\[a5\]). StILl, it WoulD Be IntERestiNg to sEe AN eXPlicit extension to an ArBitrarY blacK hole. For the KeRr black holE, MUCh of the pReliMInARy work appears iN [@RokeN], although a MOre generAl LorEntz gaugE is needed.

tHE present DerIvaTioN of BLAcK hole entropy dIFFers FrOm the stAndArd loop QuaNtuM grAviTy Approach oF [@ABCK; @ABK] In An InTeResTing wAY. The usuaL sTarTiNg pOint iS An enseMble oF horIzOn COnfIguratiONs WITh arBiTrArilY maNy PunctUres ANd aRbitrarY holonomiEs, rEStriCtEd Only by tHe specified arEa $a_\Delta$. CounTiNg sTates iS THen a combInatorial problem; an entroPY proporTioNal to Area Appears naTurAlly, buT thE barberO-ImmirZi parAmEteR MUst be TUNeD to GiVe the right PREfaCtor. HErE, in cOntrast, The entropy is deriveD For A *single* configUraTion OF PuNctUReS And HoLOnoMIEs, now restricted Only by the cLoSUrE condition (\[B3\]). thiS iS reminiScent of The prOPosal thAt the numbEr of punctUrEs shOULd bE treated as A sort of “qUantum haiR” [@ghoshpErEz] thaT phYsicalLy DisTinguIshes dIFfeRent bLack hoLeS. In essEnce, tHe Question Is in how fine a coarse-grainIng is nEeded To dEfine the eNtrOPy
 a boost. But we can now e ven identi fy th e n ull  v ecto r be ing held fixed .  The  coordinate $\beta$ in  the(2 + 1)-d i me nsion al metr i c( \ [c5 \] )ori gi n at ed as  agauge-d ependent p ara me ter in the ( 3 +1 )-dimensio nal  tetrad (\[c 2\] ). But  f or( \[c5\ ])to be  truly (2+1)- dimension al ,  $\bet a $ canno t de pend  on $\theta$ and$ \v a rphi$ alone, b ut mus tb ea fun cti on of thenu ll co o rdinate $v $ a lon g  the horizon.  Indeed, to pre servesp her i cal sy mmetr y, $\b eta$ should  bea functio n of $ v $ alone .  Hencethe is ome tri es ( \ [b 1\ ]),  c h ose n  i n 2 + 1 d imension sto  leav e $\ b e t a $ in var iant , fix  $v$ in 3+1 d ime nsio n s.The n ull v ecto rthatdefine s our  n ull rotations i s ju st the nu llno rma lto th e  horiz on. 

T his cho ice isp hys ic a l l ynatural, and may o ff e r  i nsightsinto t h eun d erlyingde gre es o f freed om [ @ Ca rlipz].But it is  a wkwardto  imple me ntina for m ulat ion wi th a rea l Bar b ero-Immirzi pa r ameter, perha p se x pl a inin g w hy the deri vati o n of  bla c khol e  entr opy i ss im p ler with a self-dua lconnec tion. 

Implication s and open q u estions==== = == = ============== ===== ====

I ha v e focuse d onthe Schw arzschild b lack hol e,but  th e g e n er al argumentsa b outth e struc tur e of ho lon omi eshol dfor any b lack hol esa ti sf yin g the isolated  h ori zo n b ounda r y cond ition s (\ [a 5\ ] ).Still,i tw o uldbe  i nter est in g toseea n e xplicit  extensio n t o  anar bi trary b lack hole. Fo rthe Kerr b la ckhole,m u ch of th e preliminary work appe a rs in [ @Ro ken],  alt hough a m ore  gener alL orentz  gauge  is n ee ded . 
Thep r es ent  d erivationo f  bl ack h ol e en tropy d iffers from the st a nda rd loop quant umgrav i t yapp r oa c h o f[ @AB C K ; @ABK] in an i nteresting  w a y.  The usual sta rt ing poi nt is a n ens e mble of  horizonconfigura ti onsw i tharbitraril y many p uncturesa nd ar b it raryhol onomie s,  re stric ted on l y b y the  speci fi ed are a $A_ \D elta$. C ounting states is thena comb inato ria l problem ; a n  en tropy pro port ional to a rea  ap pears  na t urall y, b u tthe Barbe ro-I m mirzi par a me ter m us t be tunedt o giv e the  ri g ht pre fact or. Here, in cont r ast, the entro py i s der ive d  for  a  *single* conf igu ra t i on of pu nc tures and h olonomie s, now r estric ted on ly by t h e  c l osurecond iti on (\[b3\ ]).  T h is is r em in i scentof t he  propo sal th a t th e number of punctu res s h o uld b e  tr eated  a s a sor t  of“quantum h air” [@Ghos hPerez ] th at ph ysicall ydistin gui sh es differe n t black h oles.  In ess en ce,the  quest ioni s  in h ow f in e a  coarse-g r a in i ng  i s  ne eded  to d ef inethe entro p y
 a_boost. But_we can now even_identify the_null_vector being_held_fixed. The coordinate_$\beta$ in the_(2+1)-dimensional metric (\[c5\]) originated_as a gauge-dependent_parameter_in the (3+1)-dimensional tetrad (\[c2\]). But for (\[c5\]) to be truly (2+1)-dimensional, $\beta$ cannot_depend_on $\theta$_and_$\varphi$_alone, but must be a_function of the null coordinate_$v$ along_the horizon. Indeed, to preserve spherical symmetry, $\beta$_should_be a function_of $v$ alone. Hence the isometries (\[b1\]), chosen in_2+1 dimensions to leave $\beta$ invariant,_fix $v$ in_3+1_dimensions._The null vector that_defines our null rotations is just_the null normal to the horizon.

This_choice is physically natural, and may offer_insights into the underlying degrees of_freedom [@Carlipz]. But it is_awkward to_implement in a formulation with_a real Barbero-Immirzi_parameter, perhaps_explaining why the_derivation of black hole entropy is_simpler with a_self-dual connection.

Implications and open questions
===============================

I have_focused_on the Schwarzschild_black_hole,_but the_general arguments about_the_structure of_holonomies_hold for any black hole satisfying_the_isolated horizon boundary conditions (\[a5\]). Still, it_would be interesting to_see_an explicit extension to_an arbitrary black hole. For_the Kerr black hole, much of_the preliminary_work appears_in [@Roken], although a more general Lorentz gauge is needed.

The present_derivation of black hole entropy differs_from the standard loop_quantum gravity_approach_of [@ABCK; @ABK]_in_an interesting_way. The usual starting point is an_ensemble of_horizon configurations with arbitrarily many punctures_and arbitrary holonomies, restricted_only_by the specified area $A_\Delta$. Counting_states is then a combinatorial problem;_an entropy proportional to area_appears_naturally,_but the Barbero-Immirzi parameter must_be tuned to give the right_prefactor. Here, in_contrast, the entropy is derived for a_*single*_configuration of punctures and holonomies, now_restricted_only by the closure condition (\[b3\])._This_is_reminiscent of the proposal that_the number of punctures should be_treated as a sort of “quantum hair” [@GhoshPerez] that_physically distinguishes different_black holes. In essence, the_question_is_in how fine a coarse-graining is needed to define the_entropy