DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2009.10584V3 [Gr-Qc] 14 Jan 2021 Shell [10, 11]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2009.10584V3 [Gr-Qc] 14 Jan 2021 Shell [10, 11] Quantum Detection of Inertial Frame Dragging Wan Cong,1, 2, ∗ Jiří Bičák,3, † David Kubizňák,2, 1, ‡ and Robert B. Mann1, 2, § 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1 2Perimeter Institute, 31 Caroline St., Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 2Y5, Canada 3Institute of Theoretical Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, V Holešovičkách 2, 180 00 Prague 8, Czech Republic A relativistic theory of gravity like general relativity produces phenomena differing fundamentally from Newton’s theory. An example, analogous to electromagnetic induction, is gravitomagnetism, or the dragging of inertial frames by mass-energy currents. These effects have recently been confirmed by classical observations. Here we show, for the first time, that they can be observed by a quantum detector. We study the response function of Unruh De-Witt detectors placed in a slowly rotating shell. We show that the response function picks up the presence of rotation even though the spacetime inside the shell is flat and the detector is locally inertial. The detector can distinguish between the static situation when the shell is non-rotating and the stationary case when the shell rotates and the dragging of inertial frames, i.e. gravitomagnetic effects, arise. Moreover, it can do so when the detector is switched on for a finite time interval within which a light signal cannot travel to the shell and back to convey the presence of rotation. I. INTRODUCTION a rotating shell. They can in principle determine its rota- tion by, for example, sending out a spherical pulse which, Frame-dragging, also known as the Lense–Thirring ef- upon reflection, will experience a differential Doppler ef- fect [1, 2], is a general-relativistic effect that arises due fect, with different shell latitudes Doppler shifting dif- to moving, in particular rotating, matter [3] and “rotat- ferently. Meanwhile, frame-dragging outside a rotating ing” gravitational waves [4, 5]. If a gyroscope is located body, the Earth, has taken the Gravity Probe B satellite in the vicinity of a rotating body, it will keep its direc- mission [12, 13] almost a half-century since its inception tion with respect to the axes of a local inertial frame at to detect. the same place but both the inertial axes and the gy- In this paper, we show for the first time that frame- roscope will be rotating with respect to static distant dragging inside a slowly rotating shell can be observed observers (“fixed stars” at asymptotically flat infinity). by an inertial quantum Unruh-DeWitt (UDW) detector Its profound explicit manifestation can be seen for a ro- [14]. Specifically, it can do so in a time shorter than tating black hole, which drags particles into co-rotation, the light crossing time, ts, of the shell, and hence more the dragging becoming so strong inside the ergosphere efficiently than a classical detector. We consider this to that no particle there can remain at rest with respect to be a quantum detection of inertial frame dragging [15– fixed stars [6]. Frame-dragging is also behind various as- 18]. trophysical phenomena such as relativistic jets and the We note that the ability of such detectors to ob- Bardeen-Petterson effect [7], which aligns accretion disks tain non-local information about spacetime structure has perpendicular to the axis of a rotating black hole. been demonstrated in other contexts [19–23]. In particu- In addition, frame-dragging inside a rotating shell was lar, it was shown in [19, 20] that UDW detectors can dis- taken by Einstein to be in support of Mach’s principle. tinguish between global flat Minkowkian spacetimes and For a nice discussion on Mach’s principle, dragging ef- local flat spacetimes inside massive shells. Our paper is fects and their impact on astrophysics and cosmology, an important step forward from these results, much like see [8] (also [3, 9]). Consider a slowly rotating material the transition from electrotatics to electromagnetism, or arXiv:2009.10584v3 [gr-qc] 14 Jan 2021 shell [10, 11]. Observers inside the shell who are at rest the transition from Schwarzchild to Kerr; it demonstrates with respect to distant fixed stars will find that a particle for the first time that a fundamentally relativistic (non- moving inside the shell experiences a Coriolis acceleration Newtonian) effect of dragging of inertial frames, namely (the centrifugal acceleration is of the second order in the the existence of gravitomagnetism, can in principle be shell’s angular velocity). These observers are not inertial, observed by a quantum detector in settings that are not therefore fictitious forces arise. classically possible. For inertial observers, without looking at or outside the rotating shell, there is no way of determining, by em- ploying classical physics, whether they are surrounded by II. SLOWLY ROTATING SHELLS ∗ [email protected] † [email protected]ff.cuni.cz ‡ [email protected] Let us begin by describing the spacetime metric of a § [email protected] slowly rotating shell. The metric the shell can be written 2 as III. NORMALIZED MODE SOLUTIONS 2Ma 2 2 2 2 2 In order to compute the response of the UDW detector ds+ = −f(r)dt + r sin θ(dφ − 3 dt) r (1) we need to obtain the normalized mode solutions to the −1 2 2 2 +f(r) dr + r dθ , scalar wave equation. For the scalar field Ψ the wave equation is where f(r) = 1 − 2M/r, M is the mass of the shell and √ µν a = J/M is the angular momentum per unit mass. The ∂µ( −gg ∂ν Ψ) = 0 , (4) r-coordinate ranges from [R, ∞), R being the radius of the shell. To first order in a, the above metric agrees where g is the determinant of the metric. Upon sub- with the Kerr metric and satisfies the vacuum Einstein’s stituting in the metric (1) and (2) , this equation can equations. Inertial frame-dragging is characterized by be solved by separation of variables. To leading or- 3 the function $(r) = gφt/gφφ = 2J/r , where J = Ma der in a, one can employ the usual mode expansion is the fixed total angular momentum as measured at in- Ψ (t, r, θ, φ) = √ 1 e−iωtY (θ, φ)ψ(r) in spherical ω`m 4πω m` finity. The gradients of $(r) determine the precession of harmonics Ym`. This yields a separated radial equation: gyroscopes relative to the orthonormal frame of locally non-rotating observers [6]. On the shell itself, r = R, and 2 α d α 2 dψ α `(` + 1) 2 3 r − + γ + ω ψ = 0 . (5) $s = 2J/R . β r2 dr β dr r2 For an inertial observer inside the shell (who rotates as seen from infinity) spacelike geodesics (for example, The functions α, β and γ are φ = 0, θ = π/2, r = constant, t ∈ R) connected to fixed ( points at infinity rotate backwards; the shell is rotating pf(R), r ≤ R, forward (the dragging of the inertial frame becomes com- α(r) = pf(r), r > R, plete i.e., inertial observers rotate at the same angular ve- ( locity as the shell, only if the shell is at its Schwarzschild 1, r ≤ R β(r) = (6) radius); the fixed stars are rotating backwards. In [18] 1/pf(r), r > R, these effects are expressed quantitatively1. ( 2 The metric (1) must be joined at r = R to the metric 4Mamω − 2Mam , r ≤ R, γ(r) = R3 R3 4Mamω 2Mam 2 r3 − r3 , r > R. 2Ma 2 ds2 = −f(R)dt2 + r2 sin2 θ dφ − dt − R3 (2) For r ≤ R, the radial equation reduces to the spherical +dr2 + r2dθ2 Bessel equation, with the solution being p ω2 2Mam2 inside the shell, which can be seen to be flat using the j`( b(ω)r) , b(ω) = 1 − . (7) coordinate transformation, f(R) R3ω 2Ma However, the solution outside the shell has to be deter- ϕ = φ − t , (3) mined numerically and matched to the solution on the R3 shell. Specifically, we impose continuity of the solution p which transforms the metric (2) to the flat metric in stan- at the shell, ψ(R) = j`( b(ω)R). To find the value of dard coordinates. The stress energy tensor of the shell dψ/dr|R+ , we integrate Eq. (5) across the shell, obtaining giving rise to the above spacetime can be found using the the condition Israel junction condition [24] and has been well-studied α(r) d ∂ψ in the literature [25]. ψ = eµ = 0 , (8) β(r) dr ∂xµ r The coordinates used in (1) are (spherical) Lorentzian at infinity and are naturally associated with stationary where eµ is the radial element of the tetrad and the observers at infinity. All observers at fixed (r, θ, ϕ) inside r 3 square brackets represent the difference in the value of the the shell rotate rigidly at the rate dφ/dt = 2Ma/R with term across the shell. Noting from (6) the discontinuity respect to observers at rest at infinity (φ =constant). in β(r), this yields the required initial conditions ψ(R+) This effect is called the dragging of inertial frames, first and ψ0(R+) for numerically solving the radial equation discovered in 1918 by Thirring and Lense [1] and dis- outside the shell. cussed in the introduction. Finally, to normalize the solution, we will follow the scheme presented in [19]. Defining r? such that d/dr? = α β d/dr and ρ = rψ, the radial equation (5) reads 1 In [18] the shell is in general considered to be collapsing but the d2 results can be immediately specialized if it is just rotating. ρ + (ω2 − V (r))ρ = 0 , (9) dr?2 3 π π for r > R, where τ ∈ (− 2k , 2k ) We will denote the total duration of the interaction by ∆τ = π/k.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kaluza-Klein Gravity, Concentrating on the General Rel- Ativity, Rather Than Particle Physics Side of the Subject
    Kaluza-Klein Gravity J. M. Overduin Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 3055, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 3P6 and P. S. Wesson Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1 and Gravity Probe-B, Hansen Physics Laboratories, Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. 94305 Abstract We review higher-dimensional unified theories from the general relativity, rather than the particle physics side. Three distinct approaches to the subject are identi- fied and contrasted: compactified, projective and noncompactified. We discuss the cosmological and astrophysical implications of extra dimensions, and conclude that none of the three approaches can be ruled out on observational grounds at the present time. arXiv:gr-qc/9805018v1 7 May 1998 Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 3 February 2008 1 Introduction Kaluza’s [1] achievement was to show that five-dimensional general relativity contains both Einstein’s four-dimensional theory of gravity and Maxwell’s the- ory of electromagnetism. He however imposed a somewhat artificial restriction (the cylinder condition) on the coordinates, essentially barring the fifth one a priori from making a direct appearance in the laws of physics. Klein’s [2] con- tribution was to make this restriction less artificial by suggesting a plausible physical basis for it in compactification of the fifth dimension. This idea was enthusiastically received by unified-field theorists, and when the time came to include the strong and weak forces by extending Kaluza’s mechanism to higher dimensions, it was assumed that these too would be compact. This line of thinking has led through eleven-dimensional supergravity theories in the 1980s to the current favorite contenders for a possible “theory of everything,” ten-dimensional superstrings.
    [Show full text]
  • Conformal Symmetry in Field Theory and in Quantum Gravity
    universe Review Conformal Symmetry in Field Theory and in Quantum Gravity Lesław Rachwał Instituto de Física, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília DF 70910-900, Brazil; [email protected] Received: 29 August 2018; Accepted: 9 November 2018; Published: 15 November 2018 Abstract: Conformal symmetry always played an important role in field theory (both quantum and classical) and in gravity. We present construction of quantum conformal gravity and discuss its features regarding scattering amplitudes and quantum effective action. First, the long and complicated story of UV-divergences is recalled. With the development of UV-finite higher derivative (or non-local) gravitational theory, all problems with infinities and spacetime singularities might be completely solved. Moreover, the non-local quantum conformal theory reveals itself to be ghost-free, so the unitarity of the theory should be safe. After the construction of UV-finite theory, we focused on making it manifestly conformally invariant using the dilaton trick. We also argue that in this class of theories conformal anomaly can be taken to vanish by fine-tuning the couplings. As applications of this theory, the constraints of the conformal symmetry on the form of the effective action and on the scattering amplitudes are shown. We also remark about the preservation of the unitarity bound for scattering. Finally, the old model of conformal supergravity by Fradkin and Tseytlin is briefly presented. Keywords: quantum gravity; conformal gravity; quantum field theory; non-local gravity; super- renormalizable gravity; UV-finite gravity; conformal anomaly; scattering amplitudes; conformal symmetry; conformal supergravity 1. Introduction From the beginning of research on theories enjoying invariance under local spacetime-dependent transformations, conformal symmetry played a pivotal role—first introduced by Weyl related changes of meters to measure distances (and also due to relativity changes of periods of clocks to measure time intervals).
    [Show full text]
  • Gravity, Inertia, and Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Fields
    Foundations of Physics, Vol.31,No. 5, 2001 Gravity, Inertia, and Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Fields James F. Woodward1 Received July 27, 2000 Over the past several years Haisch, Rueda, and others have made the claim that the origin of inertial reaction forces can be explained as the interaction of electri- cally charged elementary particles with the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point field expected on the basis of quantum field theory. After pointing out that this claim, in light of the fact that the inertial masses of the hadrons reside in the electrically chargeless, photon-like gluons that bind their constituent quarks, is untenable, the question of the role of quantum zero-point fields generally in the origin of inertia is explored. It is shown that, although non-gravitational zero-point fields might be the cause of the gravitational properties of normal matter, the action of non-gravitational zero-point fields cannot be the cause of inertial reac- tion forces. The gravitational origin of inertial reaction forces is then briefly revisited. Recent claims critical of the gravitational origin of inertial reaction forces by Haisch and his collaborators are then shown to be without merit. 1. INTRODUCTION Several years ago Haisch, Rueda, and Puthoff (1) (hereafter, HRP) pub- lished a lengthy paper in which they claimed that a substantial part, indeed perhaps all of normal inertial reaction forces could be understood as the action of the electromagnetic zero-point field (EZPF), expected on the basis of quantum field theory, on electric charges of normal matter. In several subsequent papers Haisch and Rueda particularly have pressed this claim, making various modifications to the fundamental argument to try to deflect several criticisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Loop Quantum Cosmology, Modified Gravity and Extra Dimensions
    universe Review Loop Quantum Cosmology, Modified Gravity and Extra Dimensions Xiangdong Zhang Department of Physics, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China; [email protected] Academic Editor: Jaume Haro Received: 24 May 2016; Accepted: 2 August 2016; Published: 10 August 2016 Abstract: Loop quantum cosmology (LQC) is a framework of quantum cosmology based on the quantization of symmetry reduced models following the quantization techniques of loop quantum gravity (LQG). This paper is devoted to reviewing LQC as well as its various extensions including modified gravity and higher dimensions. For simplicity considerations, we mainly focus on the effective theory, which captures main quantum corrections at the cosmological level. We set up the basic structure of Brans–Dicke (BD) and higher dimensional LQC. The effective dynamical equations of these theories are also obtained, which lay a foundation for the future phenomenological investigations to probe possible quantum gravity effects in cosmology. Some outlooks and future extensions are also discussed. Keywords: loop quantum cosmology; singularity resolution; effective equation 1. Introduction Loop quantum gravity (LQG) is a quantum gravity scheme that tries to quantize general relativity (GR) with the nonperturbative techniques consistently [1–4]. Many issues of LQG have been carried out in the past thirty years. In particular, among these issues, loop quantum cosmology (LQC), which is the cosmological sector of LQG has received increasing interest and has become one of the most thriving and fruitful directions of LQG [5–9]. It is well known that GR suffers singularity problems and this, in turn, implies that our universe also has an infinitely dense singularity point that is highly unphysical.
    [Show full text]
  • Gravitational Interaction to One Loop in Effective Quantum Gravity A
    IT9700281 LABORATORI NAZIONALI Dl FRASCATI SIS - Pubblicazioni LNF-96/0S8 (P) ITHf 00 Z%i 31 ottobre 1996 gr-qc/9611018 Gravitational Interaction to one Loop in Effective Quantum Gravity A. Akhundov" S. Bellucci6 A. Shiekhcl "Universitat-Gesamthochschule Siegen, D-57076 Siegen, Germany, and Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, pr. Azizbekova 33, AZ-370143 Baku, Azerbaijan 6INFN-Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, P.O. Box 13, 00044 Frascati, Italy ^International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Strada Costiera 11, P.O. Box 586, 34014 Trieste, Italy Abstract We carry out the first step of a program conceived, in order to build a realistic model, having the particle spectrum of the standard model and renormalized masses, interaction terms and couplings, etc. which include the class of quantum gravity corrections, obtained by handling gravity as an effective theory. This provides an adequate picture at low energies, i.e. much less than the scale of strong gravity (the Planck mass). Hence our results are valid, irrespectively of any proposal for the full quantum gravity as a fundamental theory. We consider only non-analytic contributions to the one-loop scattering matrix elements, which provide the dominant quantum effect at long distance. These contributions are finite and independent from the finite value of the renormalization counter terms of the effective lagrangian. We calculate the interaction of two heavy scalar particles, i.e. close to rest, due to the effective quantum gravity to the one loop order and compare with similar results in the literature. PACS.: 04.60.+n Submitted to Physics Letters B 1 E-mail addresses: [email protected], bellucciQlnf.infn.it, [email protected] — 2 1 Introduction A longstanding puzzle in quantum physics is how to marry the description of gravity with the field theory of elementary particles.
    [Show full text]
  • Vacuum Energy
    Vacuum Energy Mark D. Roberts, 117 Queen’s Road, Wimbledon, London SW19 8NS, Email:[email protected] http://cosmology.mth.uct.ac.za/ roberts ∼ February 1, 2008 Eprint: hep-th/0012062 Comments: A comprehensive review of Vacuum Energy, which is an extended version of a poster presented at L¨uderitz (2000). This is not a review of the cosmolog- ical constant per se, but rather vacuum energy in general, my approach to the cosmological constant is not standard. Lots of very small changes and several additions for the second and third versions: constructive feedback still welcome, but the next version will be sometime in coming due to my sporadiac internet access. First Version 153 pages, 368 references. Second Version 161 pages, 399 references. arXiv:hep-th/0012062v3 22 Jul 2001 Third Version 167 pages, 412 references. The 1999 PACS Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme: http://publish.aps.org/eprint/gateway/pacslist 11.10.+x, 04.62.+v, 98.80.-k, 03.70.+k; The 2000 Mathematical Classification Scheme: http://www.ams.org/msc 81T20, 83E99, 81Q99, 83F05. 3 KEYPHRASES: Vacuum Energy, Inertial Mass, Principle of Equivalence. 1 Abstract There appears to be three, perhaps related, ways of approaching the nature of vacuum energy. The first is to say that it is just the lowest energy state of a given, usually quantum, system. The second is to equate vacuum energy with the Casimir energy. The third is to note that an energy difference from a complete vacuum might have some long range effect, typically this energy difference is interpreted as the cosmological constant.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Loop Quantum Gravity with Application to Cosmology
    DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON MSC DISSERTATION An Introduction to Loop Quantum Gravity with Application to Cosmology Author: Supervisor: Wan Mohamad Husni Wan Mokhtar Prof. Jo~ao Magueijo September 2014 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science of Imperial College London Abstract The development of a quantum theory of gravity has been ongoing in the theoretical physics community for about 80 years, yet it remains unsolved. In this dissertation, we review the loop quantum gravity approach and its application to cosmology, better known as loop quantum cosmology. In particular, we present the background formalism of the full theory together with its main result, namely the discreteness of space on the Planck scale. For its application to cosmology, we focus on the homogeneous isotropic universe with free massless scalar field. We present the kinematical structure and the features it shares with the full theory. Also, we review the way in which classical Big Bang singularity is avoided in this model. Specifically, the spectrum of the operator corresponding to the classical inverse scale factor is bounded from above, the quantum evolution is governed by a difference rather than a differential equation and the Big Bang is replaced by a Big Bounce. i Acknowledgement In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. All praise be to Allah for giving me the opportunity to pursue my study of the fundamentals of nature. In particular, I am very grateful for the opportunity to explore loop quantum gravity and its application to cosmology for my MSc dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Gravity: a Primer for Philosophers∗
    Quantum Gravity: A Primer for Philosophers∗ Dean Rickles ‘Quantum Gravity’ does not denote any existing theory: the field of quantum gravity is very much a ‘work in progress’. As you will see in this chapter, there are multiple lines of attack each with the same core goal: to find a theory that unifies, in some sense, general relativity (Einstein’s classical field theory of gravitation) and quantum field theory (the theoretical framework through which we understand the behaviour of particles in non-gravitational fields). Quantum field theory and general relativity seem to be like oil and water, they don’t like to mix—it is fair to say that combining them to produce a theory of quantum gravity constitutes the greatest unresolved puzzle in physics. Our goal in this chapter is to give the reader an impression of what the problem of quantum gravity is; why it is an important problem; the ways that have been suggested to resolve it; and what philosophical issues these approaches, and the problem itself, generate. This review is extremely selective, as it has to be to remain a manageable size: generally, rather than going into great detail in some area, we highlight the key features and the options, in the hope that readers may take up the problem for themselves—however, some of the basic formalism will be introduced so that the reader is able to enter the physics and (what little there is of) the philosophy of physics literature prepared.1 I have also supplied references for those cases where I have omitted some important facts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Confrontation Between General Relativity and Experiment
    The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment Clifford M. Will Department of Physics University of Florida Gainesville FL 32611, U.S.A. email: [email protected]fl.edu http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~cmw/ Abstract The status of experimental tests of general relativity and of theoretical frameworks for analyzing them are reviewed and updated. Einstein’s equivalence principle (EEP) is well supported by experiments such as the E¨otv¨os experiment, tests of local Lorentz invariance and clock experiments. Ongoing tests of EEP and of the inverse square law are searching for new interactions arising from unification or quantum gravity. Tests of general relativity at the post-Newtonian level have reached high precision, including the light deflection, the Shapiro time delay, the perihelion advance of Mercury, the Nordtvedt effect in lunar motion, and frame-dragging. Gravitational wave damping has been detected in an amount that agrees with general relativity to better than half a percent using the Hulse–Taylor binary pulsar, and a growing family of other binary pulsar systems is yielding new tests, especially of strong-field effects. Current and future tests of relativity will center on strong gravity and gravitational waves. arXiv:1403.7377v1 [gr-qc] 28 Mar 2014 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Tests of the Foundations of Gravitation Theory 6 2.1 The Einstein equivalence principle . .. 6 2.1.1 Tests of the weak equivalence principle . .. 7 2.1.2 Tests of local Lorentz invariance . .. 9 2.1.3 Tests of local position invariance . 12 2.2 TheoreticalframeworksforanalyzingEEP. ....... 16 2.2.1 Schiff’sconjecture ................................ 16 2.2.2 The THǫµ formalism .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Loop Quantum Gravity
    QUANTUM GRAVITY Loop gravity combines general relativity and quantum theory but it leaves no room for space as we know it – only networks of loops that turn space–time into spinfoam Loop quantum gravity Carlo Rovelli GENERAL relativity and quantum the- ture – as a sort of “stage” on which mat- ory have profoundly changed our view ter moves independently. This way of of the world. Furthermore, both theo- understanding space is not, however, as ries have been verified to extraordinary old as you might think; it was introduced accuracy in the last several decades. by Isaac Newton in the 17th century. Loop quantum gravity takes this novel Indeed, the dominant view of space that view of the world seriously,by incorpo- was held from the time of Aristotle to rating the notions of space and time that of Descartes was that there is no from general relativity directly into space without matter. Space was an quantum field theory. The theory that abstraction of the fact that some parts of results is radically different from con- matter can be in touch with others. ventional quantum field theory. Not Newton introduced the idea of physi- only does it provide a precise mathemat- cal space as an independent entity ical picture of quantum space and time, because he needed it for his dynamical but it also offers a solution to long-stand- theory. In order for his second law of ing problems such as the thermodynam- motion to make any sense, acceleration ics of black holes and the physics of the must make sense.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Dynamics of Supergravity
    Quantum Dynamics of Supergravity David Tong Work with Carl Turner Based on arXiv:1408.3418 Crete, September 2014 1 2GM 2GM − distance2 = 1 δt2 + 1 dr2 + r2 δθ2 +sin2 θδφ2 − − rc2 − rc2 x = R sin θ sin φ y = R sin θ cos φ z = R cos θ δx =(R cos θ sin φ)δθ +(R sin θ cos φ)δφ δy =(R cos θ cos φ)δθ (R sin θ sin φ)δφ − δz = (R sin θ)δθ − θ φ Acknowledgement My thanks to Nick Dorey for many useful discussions. I’m supported by the Royal Society. An Old Idea: Euclidean Quantum Gravity References [1] J. Polchinski, “Dirichlet-Branes and Ramond-Ramond Charges,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4724 (1995) [arXiv:hep-th/9510017]. = g exp d4x √g Z D − R topology 17 1 2GM 2GM − distance2 = 1 δt2 + 1 dr2 + r2 δθ2 +sin2 θδφ2 − − rc2 − rc2 x = R sin θ sin φ y = R sin θ cos φ z = R cos θ δx =(R cos θ sin φ)δθ +(R sin θ cos φ)δφ δy =(R cos θ cos φ)δθ (R sin θ sin φ)δφ − δz = (R sin θ)δθ − θ A Preview of the Main Results φ 1,d 1 1 Kaluza-Klein Theory: = R − S M × 1 ∂ σ = F νρ µ 2 µνρ Λ M grav pl R Acknowledgement My thanks to Nick Dorey for many useful discussions. I’m supported by the Royal Society.There is a long history of quantum instabilities of these backgrounds • Casimir Forces References • Tunneling to “Nothing” Appelquist and Chodos ‘83 [1] J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosophy Behind Quantum Gravity
    The Philosophy behind Quantum Gravity Henrik Zinkernagel Department of Philosophy, Campus de Cartuja, 18071, University of Granada, Spain. [email protected] Published in Theoria - An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science (San Sebastián, Spain), Vol. 21/3, 2006, pp. 295-312. Abstract This paper investigates some of the philosophical and conceptual issues raised by the search for a quantum theory of gravity. It is critically discussed whether such a theory is necessary in the first place, and how much would be accomplished if it is eventually constructed. I argue that the motivations behind, and expectations to, a theory of quantum gravity are entangled with central themes in the philosophy of science, in particular unification, reductionism, and the interpretation of quantum mechanics. I further argue that there are –contrary to claims made on behalf of string theory –no good reasons to think that a quantum theory of gravity, if constructed, will provide a theory of everything, that is, a fundamental theory from which all physics in principle can be derived. 1. Introduction One of the outstanding tasks in fundamental physics, according to many theoretical physicists, is the construction of a quantum theory of gravity. The so far unsuccessful attempt to construct such a theory is an attempt to unify Einstein's general theory of relativity with quantum theory (or quantum field theory). While quantum gravity aims to describe everything in the universe in terms of quantum theory, the purpose of the closely related project of quantum cosmology is to describe even the universe as a whole as a quantum system.
    [Show full text]