Arxiv:2105.00360V2 [Gr-Qc] 5 Aug 2021

Semiclassical and quantum features of the Bianchi I cosmology in the polymer representation

Eleonora Giovannetti,1, ∗ Giovanni Montani,1, 2, † and Silvia Schiattarella1, ‡ 1Physics Department, “Sapienza” University of Rome, P.le Aldo Moro 5, 00185 (Roma), Italy 2ENEA, FSN-FUSPHY-TSM, R.C. Frascati, Via E. Fermi 45, 00044 Frascati, Italy (Dated: August 9, 2021) We analyze the Bianchi I cosmology in the presence of a massless scalar field and describe its dynamics via a semiclassical and quantum polymer approach. We investigate the morphology of the emerging Big Bounce by adopting three different sets of configurational variables: the natural Ashtekar connections, a set of anisotropic volume-like coordinates and the Universe volume plus two anisotropy coordinates (the latter two sets of variables would coincide in the case of an isotropic Universe). In the semiclassical analysis we demonstrate that the value of the critical matter energy density depends on the Cauchy problem for the dynamics when adopting the Ashtekar connections or the anisotropic volume-like coordinates. On the contrary, when the Universe volume itself is considered as a configurational coordinate, we are able to derive a polymer-modified Friedmann equation for the Bianchi I model, from which the proper expression of the critical energy density can be derived. In particular, this analysis shows that the Big Bounce has a universal nature (i.e. its critical energy density has a maximum value fixed by fundamental constants and the Immirzi parameter only) when defining the Universe volume on the polymer lattice. Then, a cosmological constant is included in the Ashtekar connections’ formulation and some interesting results are men- tioned making a comparison between the synchronous dynamics and that one when the scalar field is taken as a relational time. From a pure quantum point of view, we investigate the Bianchi I dynamics only in terms of the Ashtekar connections, the privileged variables as dictated by Loop Quantum Gravity. We apply the Arnowitt-Deser-Misner reduction of the variational principle and then we quantize the system. We study the resulting Schrödingerdynamics, stressing that the behavior of the wave packet peak over time singles out common features with the semiclassical trajectories, confirming the non-universal character of the emerging Big Bounce also on a quantum level.

I. INTRODUCTION discrete spectrum [6, 7]. In the first approach, the turning point in the past depends on the wave packet profile One of the most relevant phenomenological implica- as fixed at a given instant of time and also the critical tions of Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) [1, 2] is certainly energy density can approach very large values [2, 17]. In the emergence of a Big Bounce in the quantum dynam- the dynamical reformulation, both the Big Bounce and ics of the isotropic Universe [3–13]. Despite the cosmo- the critical energy density become intrinsic features of logical implementation of the formalism of the full the- the Universe, namely fixed by the fundamental constants ory present some limitations, especially concerning the and parameters only [6]. From the point of view of the proper assessment of the SU(2) symmetry (see [14–16]), adopted configurational variables, the difference can be the discreteness of the geometrical operator (area and summarized in the use of the pure Ashtekar connection volume) spectra is at the ground of a deep revision in in the kinematical spectrum case or the Universe vol- the concept of the early Universe. ume when an intrinsic cut-off comes out. With respect Actually, the emergence of a Big Bounce and the cor- to this dualism of possible representations, see the dis- responding existence of a cut-off for the matter energy cussion in [13] where the same question is addressed in Polymer Quantum Mechanics (PQM) by tracing a close arXiv:2105.00360v2 [gr-qc] 5 Aug 2021 density take place in their own evidence essentially on a semiclassical level: the mean value of localized wave parallelism with Loop Quantum Cosmology (LQC). In- packets follows a revised dynamics in which the singular- deed, the polymer approach [18, 19] is the most simple ity is removed. On this level, the most intriguing open treatment able to provide insights on the emergence of question concerns the specific morphology of this semi- a bouncing cosmology without entering the subtleties of classical turning point in the past of the present Universe. LQG and LQC, but reliably retaining the same informa- In fact, two possible representations are possible: one im- tion of the latter. posing a kinematical cut-off on the minimal area element [5] and the other one assigning the same cut-off on a dy- Here, we apply PQM to the Bianchi I model in the namical level, i.e. involving the cosmic scale factor in the presence of a massless scalar field and we explore the dynamics in different sets of configurational variables by applying both the so-called semiclassical approach and the purely quantum one [19]. We compare the use of the ∗ [email protected] natural Ashtekar connections to the implementation of † [email protected] two different sets of volume-like variables (the anisotropic ‡ [email protected] volume-like coordinates as well as the Universe volume 2 plus two anisotropies), following the LQC formulation wave packets seems to be well-grounded on a quantum in [20, 21]. On a semiclassical level we show that, when level too. PQM is applied to the anisotropic Universe dynamics, the The paper is structured as follows. In Sec. II the Big Bounce as an intrinsic feature is reached only in the theory of PQM is introduced. In Sec. III the main pure volume formulation, while both in the anisotropic results obtained by describing the Friedmann-Lemaitre- volume-like coordinates and in the Ashtekar connections Robertson-Walker (FLRW) model in the polymer picture the resulting bouncing cosmology depends on the initial are presented, providing the analyses in the Ashtekar conditions on the system. This result suggests that it is variables and in the volume ones into two subsections. strictly the use of the Universe volume coordinate that In Sec. IV the Hamiltonian formulation of the Bianchi ensures an intrinsic cut-off, while the geometrical dimen- I model in the Ashtekar variables is described, in order sions of the variables described as discrete on the poly- to introduce the original part of the paper developed in mer lattice is only linked to the the determination of Secc. V-VIII. In particular, in Secc. V and VI it is whether or not the Big Bounce exists (see [22] where it solved the semiclassical polymer dynamics of the Bianchi is shown that the Bianchi I and IX models in the Misner I model in the Ashtekar variables and in the two sets variables are still singular in the polymer formulation). of volume-like variables respectively, then in Sec. VII Moreover, the analysis in the Universe volume formula- a inflation-like dynamics is analyzed thanks to the in- tion is strongly supported by the derivation of a polymer- troduction of a positive cosmological constant when the modified Friedmann equation in the anisotropic case, Ashtekar variables are taken into account. Furthermore, from which we can analyze the expression of the proper in the same set a full quantum treatment is introduced energy density at the Bounce, including the anisotropy in Sec. VIII using a Scrödinger-like formalism. Finally, contribution to the standard matter energy density term. in Sec. IX some concluding remarks are commented. Then, we provide a discussion of the semiclassical polymer dynamics also in the presence of a cosmological constant term, introduced to mimic an inflation-like evolu- II. POLYMER QUANTUM MECHANICS tion [23]). It is outlined a crucial difference in the dynamical picture if we adopt the relational time variable As a first step, we introduce the polymer quantiza- associated to the scalar field or the synchronous one. Us- tion of a system, which is a non-equivalent representation ing the scalar field as a clock, we show the emergence of of the quantum mechanics with respect to the standard a peculiar divergence of the Universe volume at specific Schrödingerone (see [19]). This formulation is based instants, that is removed at all in the synchronous time on the assumption that one or more variables of the representation (for the discussion of a similar behavior phase space are discretized. Hence, in this approach it is see [12, 24]). Considering the semiclassical dynamics as not possible to defineq ˆ andp ˆ as operators at the same resembling the trajectory of the quantum mean values time. However, the power of this alternative quantum (in the spirit of the Ehrenfest theorem [25]), this feature approach is the possibility to describe cut-off physics ef- seems to be of interest. Indeed, once the scalar field has fects through a simple formalism and this is particularly been fixed as the relational time in the quantum theory, useful in the cosmological setting, where the generalized it is the only legitimated clock so the peculiarity of the coordinates are identified with the cosmic scale factors. Universe evolution would acquire a physical meaning. First of all, we introduce a set of abstract kets |µi with µ ∈ IR and fix the inner product as Regarding the proper application of PQM, we analyze the evolution of the Bianchi I cosmology only limiting our hµ| |νi = δµν , (1) attention to the choice of the Ashtekar connections, the privileged set in LQG. We choose the matter scalar field being δµν a Kronecker delta. This procedure defines the as a clock before quantizing by means of an Arnowitt- non-separable Hilbert space Hpoly where we can define Deser-Misner (ADM) reduction of the variational prin- two fundamental operators: the label operator ˆ, whose ciple [26]. Actually, the use of this Schrödinger-like ap- action on the kets is given by ˆ|µi = µ |µi, and the shift proach is justified by the need to avoid all the issues operators ˆ(λ)(λ ∈ IR), wheres ˆ(λ) = |µ + λi. The action regarding the well-definition of a conserved probability ofs ˆ(λ) is discontinuous since the kets are orthonormal density constructed using the Wheeler-DeWitt equation ∀λ. Therefore, no Hermitian operator could generate it (in this respect, see [27, 28]). The evolution of a localized by exponentiation. quantum wave packet is studied by following the peaks Now, we suppose that the configurational coordinate of the probability density (i.e. the square modulus) and q has a discrete character, i.e. the position is defined on allows to show that there is a good coincidence between a lattice having a given spacing. The projection of the the semiclassical trajectories and the behaviors of the states in the p-polarization is (~ = 1) quantum mean values. Therefore, we can infer that the ipµ results obtained in the semiclassical sector in terms of ψµ(p) = hp|µi = e . (2) the Ashtekar variables remain valid in the full quantum By applying the shift operator on these states as picture. In other words, the feature of a non-universal iλp iµp Big Bounce depending on the initial conditions on the sˆ(λ)ψµ(p) = e e = ψ(µ+λ)(p) , (3) 3

we can conclude that the operatorp ˆ cannot be defined define the dynamical properties of the Universe. Substi- in a rigorous fashion, while the action ofq ˆ reads as tuting the metric (10) in the Einstein-Hilbert action we obtain iµp qψˆ µ(p) = −i∂pe = µψµ(p) , (4) representing exactly that one of the label operator ˆ. Z t2 S = dt (p a˙ − NH ) On a dynamical level we have to face the problem of RW a RW t1 defining an approximated version of thep ˆ operator, since Z t2 κ p2 6π2K the Hamiltonian H is a function of both (q, p) as a 2 3 = dt paa˙ − N − 2 − a + 2π ρa , t1 24π a κ p2 (11) H(q, p) = + V (q) , (5) 2m where ρ = ρ(a) is the matter energy density and κ = 8πG is the Einstein constant (we have set the speed of where we have considered the case of a non-relativistic light equal to one). particle of mass m in a potential V (q). In order to over- To achieve a complete canonical description of the dy- come this problem, we introduce a regular graph namics for the isotropic Universe, we consider the varia- tions of the action above with respect to the lapse func-

γµ0 = {q ∈ IR | q = nµ0, ∀n ∈ Z} , (6) tion N and the conjugate variables (a, pa). In particular, the variation of (11) with respect to N provides the i.e. a numerable set of equidistant points whose spacing Hamiltonian constraint for the FLRW model is given by the scale µ0. In this way, we can restrict the action of the shift operator eiλp by imposing λ = nµ in p2 144π4 48π4 0 H = a + K − ρ = 0 , (12) order to remain in the lattice. Then, we can use it to RW a4 κ2a2 κ approximate any function of p since which coincides with the Friedmann equation 1 1 iµ0p −iµ0p p ≈ sin (µ0p) = e − e . (7) a˙ 2 κρ K µ0 2iµ0 H2 = = − . (13) a 3 a2 We notice that this approximation is good for µ0p 1. Under this hypothesis one derives Finally, we notice that the dynamics of the isotropic Universe in the Hamiltonian formulation resembles that i one of a one-dimensional pinpoint particle, with general- pˆµ0 |µni = − (|µn+1i − |µn−1i) . (8) 2µ0 ized coordinate a and momentum pa.

Thus, it is possible to define a regularized operatorp ˆµ0 that depends on the scale µ0 and a modified version of A. Semiclassical polymer dynamics of the FLRW the Hamiltonian as model pˆ2 µ0 Hˆµ := + V (ˆq) . (9) In order to elucidate the different features characteriz- 0 2m ing the bouncing dynamics when adopting different sets In what follows we will apply this same picture to con- of variables in the polymer framework, we start by ana- figurational variables describing the Bianchi I cosmology. lyzing the semiclassical behavior of the isotropic Universe Each independent variable will be associated to the rep- using the standard Ashtekar connection or the Universe resentation traced above for the polymer framework. volume. This material will provide a clear trace for the subsequent analysis on the Bianchi I cosmology.

III. THE ISOTROPIC UNIVERSE 1. Analysis in the Ashtekar variables In this section we provide a brief analysis of the homogeneous and isotropic Universe as described by the Firstly, we focus on the implementation of the poly- FLRW model. The ADM line element of the FLRW Uni- mer scheme to the FLRW space time for the ﬂat Uni- verse is given by verse (K = 0) in the Ashtekar variables (see [13]). In the semiclassical approach the canonical variables are dr2 restated according to the polymer formulation and the ds2 = −N(t)2dt2+a2(t) +r2dθ2+r2sin2θdφ2 , 1 − Kr2 Hamiltonian dynamics is retained, providing a signiﬁcant (10) insight about the behavior of the mean values character- where N(t) is the lapse function, a(t) the cosmic scale fac- izing PQM and, actually, also LQC [18]. tor and K = 0, ±1 the signature of the spatial curvature. We choose the couple (c, p) as the conjugate variables The factor a(t) is the only degree of freedom available to of the phase space, which can be expressed as functions 4 of the scale factor as

|p| = a2 , c = γa˙ . (14)

The scalar constraint (12) in these variables reduces to

2 3 2p pφ H = − 2 c |p| + 3 = 0 , (15) κγ 2|p| 2 when a massless scalar field is included in the dynamics. Now, in order to implement the polymer paradigm we apply the substitution (see (7)) FIG. 1. The polymer trajectory p(φ) (continuous line) shows that a Big Bounce regularizes the singular behavior of the 1 classical trajectories (dotted lines) at a Planckian scale for c → sin(µc) , (16) µ the flat FLRW model. where the term µ represents the characteristic spacing of the polymer lattice on which the variable p it is defined, i.e. the configurational variable that has the dimensions 3 of an area. So, it is possible to express the Hamiltonian 3 2 1 ρcrit = 2 2 . (21) for the FLRW model in the polymer approach as κγ µ pφ

2 2 3 √ sin (µc) pφ In this representation, ρcrit tends to 0 when pφ increases, Hpoly = − 2 p 2 + 3 = 0 (17) κγ µ 2|p| 2 while the Big Bounce approaches the Big Bang singularity when pφ 1. This result resembles that one obtained and to write the Hamilton equations of motion for the in the LQC theory in its original formulation [5]. system:

 Nkγ ∂Hpoly 2N √ p˙ = = − p sin(µc) cos(µc) 2. Analysis in the volume variable  3 ∂c γµ 2 p2  Nkγ ∂Hpoly Nκγ sin (µc) φ Let us now change the variables we adopted above by c˙ = − = √ 2 2 + 3 3 ∂p 2 p κγ µ |p| 2 introducing a new canonical set in which the generalized (18) coordinate corresponds to the Universe volume (see [13]), recalling that the commutation relations for the configu- i.e.: rational variables are 3 2c a˙ κγ v = |p| 2 =a ˙ , η = ∼ . (22) {c, p} = , (19) p |a| 3 3 |p| where γ is the Immirzi parameter. Here, we fix the time Due to the canonicity of the transformation, the intro- 3 gauge imposing φ˙ := N ∂Hpoly = 1 ⇒ N = |p| 2 , that duction of these variables conserves the algebra of the ∂pφ 2pφ Poisson brackets. In the new set the semiclassical poly- corresponds to the choice of φ as a relational time. We mer Hamiltonian constraint rewrites as notice that with the dotted variables we denote their re- spective t derivative. 2 27 2 pφ As we can see from Fig. 1, the polymer trajectory of Hpoly = − 2 2 v sin (µη) + = 0 , (23) 3 4κγ µ 2v the FLRW volume V = |p| 2 follows the classical one (characterized by the presence of a singularity also in the where the polymer substitution has been implemented on Ashtekar variables) until the Universe reaches a quantum the momentum conjugate to the Universe volume v that era. Here, the effects of quantum geometry due to the is chosen as the discrete variable. In correspondence to polymer lattice become dominant and the classical Big this restated problem, the Hamilton equations take the Bang is replaced by a quantum Big Bounce. form Using the equations (18) and the scalar constraint (17) we can write the analytic expression of the Friedmann  Nkγ ∂Hpoly 18N v˙ = = − v sin(µη) cos(µη) equation as  3 ∂η 4γµ 2 2 2 Nkγ ∂Hpoly Nκγ 27 sin (µη) pφ 2 p˙ κ ρ η˙ = − = + H = = ρ 1 − , (20)  3 ∂v 3 4κγ2µ2 2v2 2p 3 ρcrit (24) where the critical energy density of the Universe (i.e. the and can be easily solved after fixing again the time gauge maximum energy density which is taken at the Bounce) φ˙ = 1, in order to provide the behavior of the Universe corresponds to volume. 5

model in the Ashtekar variables is six-dimensional and it is expressed through the canonical couple (ci, pj) deﬁned as

pi = |ijkajak|sign(ai) , ci = γa˙ i , (28)

with i = 1, 2, 3 and {ci, pj} = κγδij. Starting from the metric (27), we ﬁnd the structure of the Bianchi I Hamil- tonian constraint in the Ashtekar variables when a massless scalar ﬁeld is considered, i.e. FIG. 2. Polymer trajectory of the Universe volume v for the 1 p2 H = − (c p c p + c p c p + c p c p ) + φ = 0 , FLRW model that clearly shows a minimum in correspon- κγ2V 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 2V dence of the Big Bounce. (29) √ with V = p1p2p3. This constraint reduces to that one As depicted in Fig. 2 we see that the Universe has again of the isotropic model (15) if the isotropy condition is a bouncing point in correspondence to the minimum of imposed. its volume. The classical dynamics of the system is clearly com- To elucidate the nature of the Big Bounce, we restate pleted by the following Hamiltonian equations:  the associated Friedmann equation as ∂H pi p˙i = Nkγ = − cjpj + ckpk v˙ 2 κ ρ  ∂ci γpφ H2 = = ρ 1 − , (25) (30) 3v 3 ρ  ∂H ci crit c˙i = −Nkγ = cjpj + ckpk ∂pi γpφ where the critical energy density is explicitly expressed by for i, j, k = 1, 2, 3, i 6= j 6= k. After imposing the time gauge φ˙ = 1 =: N ∂H ⇒ N = V , we can solve equations ∂pφ pφ 27 (30) and the scalar constraint (29) by assigning proper ρcrit = . (26) 4κγ2µ2 initial conditions. In particular, the initial value problem must satisfy the Hamiltonian constraint, so that the This result shows that the energy density at which the solution can be numerically provided. Bounce occurs does not depend on the value assumed

V(ϕ) by the constant of motion pφ in this representation, in 100 contrast with the scenario obtained in the previous subsection. This analysis establishes a clear correspondence 80 between the LQCµ ¯-scheme [6] and the polymer approach 60 when the volume variable is adopted.

Big Crunch 20 IV. HAMILTONIAN FORMULATION OF THE Big Bang

BIANCHI I MODEL IN THE ASHTEKAR ϕ -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 VARIABLES √ FIG. 3. Trajectories of the Universe volume V = p1p2p3 in The aim of this section is to introduce some general function of time φ in the Ashtekar variables for the Bianchi I features of the classical dynamics of the Bianchi I cos- model. mological model as expressed in terms of the Ashtekar variables (see [20]), before introducing the original anal- Actually, once the constants of motion ysis performed in the paper in the next section. The im- cipi = Ki , pφ = Kφ (31) portance of studying this model resides in the legitimacy of considering more general cosmological models near the have been indentiﬁed (i = 1, 2, 3), the six-equations sys- singularity with respect to the highly symmetric isotropic tem (36) decouples as follows: Universe. dp p In particular, the Bianchi I model represents the sim-  i = − i (K + K )  dφ γp j k plest homogeneous but anistropic geometry that reduces φ (32) to the ﬂat FLRW model in the isotropic limit. Its line dci ci  = (Kj + Kk) element reads as dφ γpφ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 for i 6= j 6= k and (32) is made analytically solvable. In ds = −N(t) dt + a1dx1 + a2dx2 + a3dx3 , (27) particular, Fig. 3 shows that the Universe volume V = √ where a1, a2, a3 are the three independent scale factors, p1p2p3 follows the classical singular behavior also in one for each direction. The phase space of the Bianchi I the Ashtekar variables. 6

V. SEMICLASSICAL POLYMER DYNAMICS transform the six-equations system showed in (36) in the OF THE BIANCHI I MODEL IN THE three closed systems ASHTEKAR VARIABLES dp p cos(µc )h i  i = − i i K + K In this section we present the original part of this pa-  dφ γp j k φ (39) per by investigating the dynamics of the Bianchi I model dc sin(µc )h i  i = i K + K in terms of the Ashtekar variables when the polymer  dφ γµp j k paradigm is implemented. We recall that this analysis φ is expected to provide significantly insight on the behav- where i 6= j 6= k. Thanks to this procedure, the equa- ior of the quantum expectation values in PQM as well in tions of motion can be solved analytically, leading to the LQC dynamics. following solutions (i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2): As seen for the FLRW case in Sec. III, we proceed by imposing the polymer substitution for the configurational 2 2 2 2 2 κγ pφµ + 2¯pj variables in (29) ci(φ) = arccot exp − φ , µ 2(¯pi +p ¯j)γµpφ 1 c → sin(µ c ) , (33) h(κγ2p2 µ2 + 2¯p2)φi i µ i i p (φ) =p ¯ cosh φ j ; i i i 2γp µ(¯p +p ¯ ) φ i j (40) so the polymer Hamiltonian takes the form 2 p¯1 +p ¯2 2 c3(φ) = arccot exp − φ , 1 X sin(µici)pi sin(µjcj)pj pφ µ γpφµ Hpoly = − 2 + = 0 , κγ V µiµj 2V h(¯p1 +p ¯2)φi i6=j p3(φ) =p ¯3 cosh . (34) γpφµ √ where i, j = 1, 2, 3 and V = p1p2p3. Similarly, φ repre- Using (40), we can obtain the Universe volume behav- p sents our internal time, so N is fixed by the gauge ior V (φ) = p1(φ)p2(φ)p3(φ) that is shown in Fig. 4. √ The resulting trajectory highlights that a semiclassical ∂Hpoly p1p2p3 φ˙ := N = 1 ⇒ N = , (35) Big Bounce replaces the classical Big Bang thanks to the ∂p p φ φ polymer effects, which are expected to become dominant in a way that the equations of motion in the polymer near the Planckian region. representation are the following: V(ϕ) dp p cos(µ c )h p p i 3.5  i = − i i i j sin(µ c ) + k sin(µ c )  dφ γp µ j j µ k k φ j k 3.0 dc sin(µ c )h p p i  i = i i j sin(µ c ) + k sin(µ c )  j j k k 2.5 dφ γµipφ µj µk (36) for i, j, k = 1, 2, 3, i 6= j 6= k. It is possible to solve this 2.0 system by establishing the initial conditions on the vari- 1.5 ables (ci, pi) that must satisfy the Hamiltonian constraint (34). In this respect, we make the choice ϕ -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 π c (0) = c (0) = c (0) = , 1 2 3 FIG. 4. Polymer trajectory of the Universe volume V = 2µ √ p2 κγ2µ2 − 2p ¯ p¯ p1p2p3 in function of time φ: the Big Bounce replaces the φ 1 2 classical singularity of the Bianchi I model. In this graph we p1(0) =p ¯1 , p2(0) =p ¯2 , p3(0) =p ¯3 = , √ 2(¯p1 +p ¯2) have set κ = γ = 1, µ = 1/2, pφ = 2. (37) where µ = µ = µ = µ without loss of generality. 1 2 3 Now we focus our attention on the analysis of the crit- Moreover, it can be easily seen that the momentum con- ical energy density of matter jugate to the scalar field is a first integral, since the variable φ is cyclic in (34), and other constants of motion can 2 2 2 p p p (¯p1 +p ¯2) be obtained by combining the Hamilton equations (36). ρφ = φ = φ = φ , crit 2 2 2 2 So, in analogy with (31) we get 2¯p1p¯2p¯3 p¯1p¯2(κγ pφµ − 2¯p1p¯2) 2V (φ) φ=0 (41) pi sin(µci) = K , p = K , (38) i.e. the energy density of the matter scalar field in corre- µ i φ φ spondence of the minimum Universe volume at the time where the considered values of Kφ and Ki for i = 1, 2, 3 φ = 0 of the Bounce. The critical energy density repre- depends on the initial conditions (37). As already men- sents the most meaningful quantity in order to investigate tioned, identifying these first integrals makes possible to the physical properties of the Big Bounce. In particular, 7

ϕ ρ crit by the following Poisson brackets 600 3 500 {η ,V } = κγδ . (44) i j 2 ij 400 In this case we are not promoting one of the conﬁgura- 300 tional variables to represent the Universe volume. On the 200 contrary, we are imposing that the three independent co-

100 ordinates are isomorphic to the isotropic volume for each 1 direction, so that V = (V1V2V3) 3 . pϕ 2 4 6 8 10 The Hamiltonian constraint for this framework in the semiclassical polymer representation is obtained by using FIG. 5. Dependency of the critical energy density of matter the polymer substitution for the momenta ηi after that ρφ on the momentum of the scalar ﬁeld p when the polymer crit φ the canonical transformation on (29) has been performed, representation is introduced at a semiclassical level (κ = γ = and it reads as 1, µ = 1/2). 2 1 X Vi sin(µiηi)Vj sin(µjηj) pφ Hpoly = − 2 + = 0 , 4κγ V µiµj 2V as we can see from (41), ρφ clearly depends on the ini- i6=j crit (45) tial conditions on the motion. Moreover, in the simplest V where i, j = 1, 2, 3. We impose N = p due to the choice case K1 = K2 = K3 it reduces to φ of φ as relational time, so the Hamilton equations de- 3 scribing the dynamics are φ 6 2 1 ρcrit = 3 , (42) κ 2(µγ) pφ dV V cos(µ η )V V  i = − i i i j sin(µ η ) + k sin(µ η )  dφ 4γp µ j j µ k k reproducing a consistent behavior with that obtained in φ j k dη sin(µ η )V V the FLRW model in the same variables (see Sec. III A 1).  i = i i j sin(µ η ) + k sin(µ η )  dφ 4γµ p µ j j µ k k Indeed, in Fig. 5 it is possible to see that for pφ 1 the 1 φ j k critical matter energy density increases until it diverges, (46) for i 6= j 6= k. In analogy with the previous treatment, while it approaches zero when pφ 1, highlighting that in the Ashtekar formulation of the Bianchi I model the we can identity the following constants of motion: Big Bounce has no universal features. V sin(µη ) i i = K , p = K , (47) µ i φ φ

VI. SEMICLASSICAL POLYMER DYNAMICS that decouple the system (46) along the three directions. OF THE BIANCHI I MODEL IN THE As before, we have set µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ. By taking VOLUME-LIKE VARIABLES general initial conditions according to (45), the analytical solutions for the anisotropic volume coordinates read as: In this section we study the dynamics of the Bianchi I h(2κγ2p2 µ2 + V¯ 2)φi V (φ) = V¯ cosh φ 2 , Universe for a new choice of variables, in complete anal- 1 1 4γp µ(V¯ + V¯ ) ogy with the analysis performed for the FLRW model in φ 1 2 2 2 2 ¯ 2 Sec. III A 2. More specifically, the anisotropic character h(2κγ pφµ + V1 )φi V2(φ) = V¯2 cosh , (48) of the Bianchi I model leads to the possibility of taking 4γpφµ(V¯1 + V¯2) into account two different sets of volume-like variables, h(V¯1 + V¯2)φi that coincide in the case of the isotropic model. Then, V3(φ) = V¯3 cosh , 4γp µ we will compare the obtained results. φ where V1(0) = V¯1, V2(0) = V¯2 and V3(0) = V¯3 = 2 2 2 ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (2κγ µ pφ − V1V2)/(V1 + V2). By combining solutions A. Analysis in the anisotropic volume-like (48) we can find the Universe volume behavior in func- 1/3 variables: (V1,V2,V3) tion of φ as V (φ) = (V1(φ)V2(φ)V3(φ)) . As shown in Fig. 6, the Big Bounce clearly appears as a polymer Firstly, we consider as a set of volume-like variables regularization effect instead of the classical Big Bang. three equivalent generalized coordinates which coalesce Analogously, it is possible to investigate the properties to the proper volume in the isotropic limit only (see [21]): of the energy density of matter at the Bounce p2 p2 3 ci φ φ V = sign(p )|p | 2 , η = , (43) ρcrit = = = i i i i p 2 2(V¯ V¯ V¯ )2/3 |pi| 2V (φ) 1 2 3 φ=0 (49) 2 2/3 p (V¯1 + V¯2) where ηi for i = 1, 2, 3 are the conjugate momenta and the = φ , ¯ ¯ 2 2 2 ¯ ¯ 2/3 new symplectic structure for the system is characterized 2[V1V2(2γ pφµ − V1V2)] 8

V(ϕ) 2.5 and also for the conjugate variables (λ1, η1), (λ2, η2)

2.4 dλi λi cos(µiηi) v λj 2.3  = − sin(µ3η3) + sin(µjηj)  dφ 4γpφ µ3 µj 2.2 dη sin(µ η ) v λ  i = i i sin(µ η ) + j sin(µ η ) 2.1  3 3 j j dφ 4γµipφ µ3 µj 2.0 (53) where we have used N = V in order to derive the dy- 1.9 pφ namics of the model in function of the relational time ϕ -2 -1 0 1 2 φ. Once fixed the initial conditions on the variables FIG. 6. Semiclassical polymer trajectory of the Universe vol- 1/3 (λ1, η1), (λ2, η2), (v, η3) according to (51), we can solve ume V = (v1v2v3) as function of φ. this system analytically since the 3D-motion is decoupled in three one-dimensional trajectories thanks to the use of analogous constants of motion: which result to be dependent on the initial conditions also in this set of anisotropic volume-like variables. Rig- λ sin(µη ) i i = K , p = K , (54) orously, a proper answer to the question of whether or not µ i φ φ the Big Bounce possesses universal features would involve the total critical energy density, accounting also for the where µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ. In this case, we fix the con- anisotropies contribution. Actually, in [29, 30] it is shown stants of motion as follows: that, at the level of the effective LQC (which is well- s approximated by the semiclassical polymer approach, see 2 2 2 2κγ Pφ + K [18]), the set of anisotropic volume-like variables does not K1 = + K , 3 predicts a fixed cut-off on the total energy density of the s Universe. In the next subsection we will implement di- 2κγ2P 2 + K2 φ (55) rectly the Universe volume as a generalized coordinate, K2 = − K , 3 trying to overcome this issue and to perform a complete s study of the bouncing dynamics. 2κγ2P 2 + K2 K = φ , 3 3

B. Analysis in the volume variables: (v, λ1, λ2) where K is an arbitrary constant. As we will see be- low, this choice allows to write a convenient form for the The proper set of volume variables is defined as polymer-modified Friedmann equation of the model, in p order to perform a complete analysis of the bouncing dy- λi = sign(pi) |pi| , v = λ1λ2λ3 , (50) namics for the present anisotropic cosmology. Indeed, the existence of a non-trivial solution to the equation with conjugate momenta ηi and i = 1, 2, 3. The Pois- H2 = 0 identifies the expression of the critical energy son brackets are conserved ({ηi, λj} = κγδij for i 6= j, density for which the scale factor velocity becomes null. i, j = 1, 2 and {η3, v} = κγ) and the semiclassical poly- More precisely, this information allows to identify also mer Hamiltonian takes the form the anisotropy contribution to the total critical energy 1 X λi sin(µiηi)v sin(µ3η3) density added to the standard one associated to the mat- Hpoly = − 2 + ter fields. This way, it is possible to rigorously analyze 4κγ V µiµ3 i=1,2 (51) the physical properties of the critical point, whose pres- 2 λ1 sin(µ1η1)λ2 sin(µ2η2) pφ ence is due to the polymer cut-off effects. + + = 0 , Regarding the Bianchi I model, the standard Fried- µ1µ2 2V mann equation reads as (see [31]) where the canonical transformation has been performed 2 κ before the implementation of the semiclassical polymer H = (ρ + ρaniso) , (56) paradigm, as in the previous subsection. Analogously, we 3 derive the Hamilton equations for the couple of variables where the additional term ρaniso accounts for the contri- (v, η3) bution of the anisotropic gravitational degrees of freedom to the total energy density. In what follows, we want to  dv v cos(µ3η3) λ1 λ2  = − sin(µ1η1) + sin(µ2η2) verify how the semiclassical polymer approach modifies dφ 4γpφ µ1 µ2 equation (56) and, in addition, if the total critical energy dη3 sin(µ3η3) λ1 λ2 density derived from the modified Friedmann equation  = sin(µ1η1) + sin(µ2η2) dφ 4γµ3pφ µ1 µ2 has universal properties when the Universe volume itself (52) is considered as a configurational variable. 9

In this set of volume variables, the Hubble parameter ticular, we have can be written as 2 2 pφ K¯ 2 tot 1 dv 2 (K + K ) ρcrit = + = H2 = = 1 2 cos2(µη ) = 2v(φ)|2 2v(φ)|2 3v dt 144γ2v2 3 φ=0 φ=0 2 2 2 2 2 3pφ 3K (K1 + K2) (K1 + K2) µ 2 2 = 2 + 2 , = [1 − sin (µη3)] = (1 − K3) 2µ2(2κγ2p + K2) 4κγ2µ2(2γ2p + K2) 144γ2v2 144γ2v2 v2 φ φ (57) (62) where we restored the synchronous time-gauge N = 1 that clearly reduces to (60); therefore, the total criti- in the equation for the volume written in (52). Now, if cal energy density computed from the laws of motion we substitute the conditions expressed above in (55) we for the Universe volume is consistent with the expres- obtain sion derived from the Friedmann equation (58). This result shows that taking the Universe volume itself as a κ p2 + K¯2 h 4κγ2µ2 p2 + K¯2 i K configurational variable makes the Big Bounce acquire H2 = φ 1− φ , K¯ = . 54 v2 3 2v2 p2κγ2 universal physical properties, in agreement with the be- (58) haviour obtained for the set (v, η) in the FLRW model This expression represents the polymer-modified Fried- (see Sec. III A 2). We notice that, even if the polymer mann equation for the Bianchi I model in the proper modified Friedmann equation in this convenient form has volume variables. Written in this convenient form, (58) been derived by considering the particular choice (55) for allows to derive the total critical energy density of the the constants of motion, the physical properties of the model. In particular, the additional term K¯2/2v2 rea- bouncing behaviour of our model as derived from (58) sonably mimics the anisotropic contribution ρaniso, so have a general meaning since they are independent from tot the value assigned to the constant K. that we can compute ρcrit as

tot φ aniso ρcrit = ρ + ρcrit , (59) crit VII. THE BIANCHI I MODEL WITH A where the term regarding the matter scalar ﬁeld takes COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT Λ 2 2 the usual expression pφ/(2v ). Moreover, from (58) the total critical energy density results to be In this section we perform the analysis of the Bianchi I model in the Ashtekar variables when a positive cosmo- tot 3 logical constant Λ is considered. This additional term has ρcrit = . (60) 4κγ2µ2 been introduced to mimic an inﬂation-like evolution and it is not responsible for a regularization of the singular The solution for the Universe volume v(φ) when the ini- behavior in general relativity, so our aim is to investigate tial conditions on the motion satisfy (55) is the dynamics of the model when the polymer paradigm s q is implemented. In this case the Hamiltonian constraint 2 2 2 2κγ2p2 + K2 φ 2κγ p + K φ reads as (i = 1, 2, 3) v(φ) = φ µ cosh( √ ) 3 2 3 γp φ p2 (61) 1 X sin(µici)pi sin(µjcj)pj φ HΛ = − 2 + +ΛV = 0 2κγ V µiµj 2V and it clearly resembles a bouncing behaviour as shown i6=j in Fig. 7. (63) and the equations of motion are v(ϕ)

3.4 dpi pi cos(µici)h pj pk i  = − sin(µjcj) + sin(µkck) 3.2  dφ γpφ µj µk dc sin(µ c )h p p i Λκγ 3.0  i i i j k  = sin(µjcj) + sin(µkck) − pjpk dφ γµipφ µj µk 2pφ 2.8 (64) 2.6 with the free massless scalar ﬁeld taken as a relational

2.4 time. The system can be numerically solved and, in particular, in Fig. 8 it is shown the trajectory of the Universe ϕ √ -2 -1 0 1 2 volume V = p1p2p3 in function of time φ characterized by the presence of several minima. So, the initial singu- FIG. 7. Semiclassical polymer trajectory of the Universe vol- larity is already absorbed at a semiclassical level by the ume v(φ). introduction of the polymer paradigm also in the presence of a cosmological constant. Now we can verify if the total critical energy density However, by following the analysis performed in [12], computed as (59) acquires the expression (60). In par- it is useful to compare this behavior with that one in 10

V (ϕ) operators and the Poisson brackets to commutators. We 80 perform the full polymer quantization of the model in the Ashtekar variables in view of their natural link with LQG 60 and the original formulation of LQC (see Sec. V), while in Sec. VI B it has been shown that the use of the volume 40 variable is linked to the improved approach. However, we stress that the obtained results possess a very general 20 meaning, since similar considerations about the semiclassical equivalence between the two schemes in the isotropic ϕ -2 -1 1 2 model (see [13]) could be generalized to the present case √ of the Bianchi I model. Moreover, following [25] this FIG. 8. Trajectory of the Universe volume V = p1p2p3 equivalence remains valid also at the level of quantum in function of time φ in the polymer representation. The mean values1. dynamics resembles that one of a Bounce but with several minima and vertical asymptotes. It is well-known that the Wheleer-DeWitt equation can be recast in the form of a Klein-Gordon-like equation [17]. However, the associated probability density the synchronous reference. By fixing the lapse function is positive-defined only for Hamiltonian eigenstates and as N = 1, the Hamilton equations again constitute a this property is not guaranteed for generic superpositions system of six coupled equations of quantum solutions [28]. In cosmology it is necessary to work with wave packets in order to provide a reliable de-  pi cos(µici)h pj pk i scription of the quantum Universe, so with the attempt p˙i = − sin(µjcj) + sin(µkck)  γV µj µk of defining a positive and conserved probability density we rewrite the Wheeler-DeWitt equation in the form of sin(µici)h pj pk i Λκγ c˙ = sin(µ c ) + sin(µ c ) − p p a Schrödingerone. Therefore, we recall the semiclassical  i γµ V µ j j µ k k 2V j k i j k scalar constraint with the aim of performing an ADM (65) reduction of the variational principle: that has been numerically solved. In this new reference system the vertical asymptotes disappear together with p2 + Θ = 0 , (66) the atypical behavior of the volume. This result is pre- φ sented in Fig. 9, where the Big Bounce is clearly visible where and unique. However, it is worth noting that on a pure quantum level the real relational time would be φ. In this 2 hsin(µ1c1)p1 sin(µ2c2)p2 Θ = 2 + (67) case, as discussed in [12, 24], the existence of an asymp- κγ µ1µ2 tote in the scale factor evolution should be taken as a sin(µ1c1)p1 sin(µ3c3)p3 sin(µ2c2)p2 sin(µ3c3)p3 i physical phenomenon to be properly addressed in view + + . µ µ µ µ of constructing a self-consistent cosmology. 1 3 2 3 (68)

V(t) 100 After choosing the scalar ﬁeld φ as the temporal parameter, we derive the ADM-Hamiltonian by solving the 80 scalar constraint (66) with respect to the momentum as-

60 sociated to the scalar ﬁeld: √ 40 pφ ≡ HADM = Θ , (69)

20 where we choose the positive root in order to guarantee the positive character of the lapse function (see (35)). t -5 0 5 Exploiting this procedure, the Wheeler-DeWitt equation can be rewritten in the form of a Schr¨odingerone by pro- FIG. 9. Trajectory of the Universe volume in the synchronous moting the ADM-Hamiltonian to a quantum operator: reference (N = 1). Both the asymptotes and the diﬀerent minima are removed. p − i∂φΨ = ΘΨˆ , (70)

VIII. QUANTUM ANALYSIS 1 Rigorously, the demonstration of the equivalence between the two LQC formulations in the full quantum polymer approach is still The purpose of this section is studying the Bianchi I an open question, since it would require the non-trivial imple- model at a quantum level by applying the Dirac quan- mentation of a translational operator with non-constant polymer tization, that consists in promoting the constraints to parameter, as discussed in [13]. 11

(x1,ϕ) (x2,ϕ) (x3,ϕ)

0.25 0.25 0.25

(x1,-10) (x2,-10) (x3,-10) 0.20 0.20 0.20 (x1,-4) (x2,-4) (x3,-4)

0.15 (x1, 0) 0.15 (x2, 0) 0.15 (x3, 0)

(x1, 4) (x2, 4) (x3, 4) 0.10 0.10 0.10 (x1, 10) (x2, 10) (x3, 10)

0.05 0.05 0.05

x1 x2 x3 -20 -10 10 20 -20 -10 10 20 -20 -10 10 20

FIG. 10. The normalized sections P(xi, φ) (with xj ∼ mj φ and xk ∼ mkφ) are shown in sequence for i = 1, 2, 3 respectively at diﬀerent times (here µk1 = µk2 = µk3 = 0, σk1 = σk2 = σk3 = 1/2). Their spreading behavior over time is evident together with the gaussian-like shape.

〈x1〉 〈x2〉 〈x3〉

4 5 5

ϕ ϕ ϕ -10 -5 5 10 -10 -5 5 10 -10 -5 5 10

-2

-5 -5 -4

-6

FIG. 11. The three pictures show the position of the peaks of P(xi, φ) for i = 1, 2, 3 respectively in function of time φ (red dots). The resulting ﬁtting functions (red dashed straight lines) overlap the semiclassical trajectories (continuous lines) with a conﬁdence level of three standard deviations.

p where the operator Θ,ˆ that we assume well-defined, way, we can analyze the quantum dynamics of (74), in can be written as order to verify the consistency between the information carried by the quantum wave packet of the Bianchi I p h 2 i1/2 model and the semiclassical solutions provided in Sec. V Θˆ = ∂x ∂x + ∂x ∂x + ∂x ∂x , (71) κ2γ2 1 2 1 3 2 3 when the Ashtekar variables are considered. In Fig. 10 some different sections of the probability thanks to the substitution density P at different values of φ are shown in order to analyze how its shape and its maximum changes over µci x = ln tan +x ¯ . (72) time. In addition, the present sections have been ob- i 2 i tained by fixing two of the three coordinates through the The associated probability density is values that they assume in the semiclassical trajectories. More specifically, by combining the analytical solutions P(~x,φ) = Ψ∗(~x,φ)Ψ(~x,φ) , (73) for the connections ci (see (40)) and the relation (72), we obtain that xi verifies a pure linear behavior in function where of φ. In particular, we have that Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞ 2 2 2 2 κγ pφµ + 2¯p2 Ψ(~x,φ) = dk1 dk2 dk3 A(k1, k2, k3)× x (φ) ∼ φ = m φ , 1 2(¯p +p ¯ )γµp 1 −∞ −∞ −∞√ 1 2 φ i(k x +k x +k x + 2|k k +k k +k k |φ) 2 2 2 2 ×e 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 κγ pφµ + 2¯p1 x2(φ) ∼ φ = m2φ , (76) (74) 2(¯p1 +p ¯2)γµpφ p¯1 +p ¯2 and x3(φ) ∼ φ = m3φ . γpφµ 3 2 Y (ki − µki ) We want to remark that this analysis based on the P A(k1, k2, k3) = exp − . (75) 2σ2 sections is justified by the semiclassical decoupling of the i=1 ki dynamics along the three directions (see Sec. V). Hence, we have discarded the covariant formulation of the As we can see from Fig. 10, the normalized quantum Wheeler-DeWitt equation in favor of a Schrödinger-like distributions of x1, x2, x3 respectively are shown in se- one in order to define the probability density (73) that quence and their spreading behavior over time is evident, is positive everywhere by definition and whose spatial as well as their gaussian-like shape. Also, in Fig. 11 the integral remains constant through time (regarding the position of the peaks of P are represented by the red dots problem of time in quantum gravity, see [34, 35]). This that have also been fitted by means of a linear interpo- 12 lation. The resulting fitting functions are represented by to the Universe volume in the isotropic limit. This issue the red dashed straight lines, while the semiclassical tra- could have some impact in the attempt to clarify which jectories by the continuous straight ones. In particular, property of the configurational space is associated to a the slope of the fitting straight lines is consistent with bouncing cosmology when PQM is applied (for a discus- the semiclassical one mi (i = 1, 2, 3) with a confidence sion of this question see [13, 22]). Rigorously, a complete level of the order of three standard deviations for all the analysis should include the study of the polymer-modified three coordinates. Therefore, we can conclude that there Friedmann equation in the anisotropic volume-like vari- is a good correspondence between the quantum behav- ables for this model. ior of Universe wave function and the solutions of the Similarly, when we adopted the Ashtekar connections semiclassical dynamics. Furthermore, this feature of our (adapted to the Bianchi I model) we see that the Big analysis in the Ashtekar variables suggests the presence of Bounce is not a universal feature of the cosmological a bouncing dynamics with non-universal properties also model, since it depends on the initial conditions on the at a quantum level when the polymer paradigm is fully dynamics. Therefore, if we regard as preferable the implemented. use of the Ashtekar connections in accordance with the paradigm of LQG, we can conclude that the polymer quantum dynamics of a Bianchi I model is always as- IX. CONCLUDING REMARKS sociated to a Bounce, but the Universe critical energy density does not take a fixed cut-off value. In this paper we analyzed the semiclassical and quan- Another interesting feature we outlined in the semiclas- tum dynamics of the Bianchi I cosmology in the pres- sical approach concerns the shape of the solution when a ence of a massless scalar field as viewed in the polymer cosmological constant term is included in the dynamics, paradigm, which is able to introduce a discrete nature in in order to mimic an inflationary phase of the Universe the behavior of the configurational variables. Our study evolution. In particular, we showed a remarkable differ- is focused on the comparison between the dynamical fea- ence in the dynamical picture provided in terms of the tures emerging when the natural Ashtekar connections or relational time φ with respect to the use of the stan- the volume-like variables are implemented. More specif- dard synchronous time (i.e. that one in which we com- ically, the anisotropic character of the Bianchi I model monly measure the Universe age). Indeed, as already has allowed us to adopt two different sets of volume-like emphasized in other analyses on the isotropic cosmology variables, one [20] (see also [11, 12]) that corresponds to [12, 24], we see that the Universe volume diverges in cor- adopting the Universe volume itself (de facto the prod- respondence to finite values of φ, but it is regularized uct of all the three scale factors) and the other [21] which when the synchronous time variable is adopted. How- consists of a set of three anisotropic volume-like variables. ever, the functional form linking φ to a synchronous time It is important to stress that in the case of an isotropic is a proper classical notion, so it is not available on a Universe it would reduce to a unique choice, in particu- quantum level. Therefore, in the spirit of the Ehrenfest lar that one at the ground of the so-called improved LQC theorem, this result calls attention for a clearer inter- Hamiltonian [6]. pretation in quantum cosmology when the cosmological On the semiclassical level, i.e. when we deal with a term becomes relevant. modified dynamics due to a redefined conjugate momen- Finally, we performed the canonical quantization of the tum, we provided a detailed study in all the three sets model in the Ashtekar connections paradigm and studied of variables. This analysis is justified by the Ehrenfest the behavior of the Universe wave packet. Actually, by theorem [25], by which the modified classical solutions performing an ADM reduction of the variational problem well-approximate the behavior of the quantum mean val- we passed to a Schrödinger-like representation, in order ues when the full quantum polymer approach is imple- to avoid the issue regarding the sign of the Klein-Gordon mented. In the theoretical framework traced above we probability density that would be emerged following the clarified how the emergence of a universal Bounce in Wheeler-DeWitt approach (in this respect, see [27, 28]). the past Universe evolution (i.e. fixed by fundamental Following the dynamics of the probability density peak, constants and parameters only) is guaranteed only using we saw that it has common features with the correspond- the Universe volume itself as a configurational coordi- ing classical trajectories and this leads us to claim that nate defined on the polymer lattice. This analysis is also also on a quantum level the use of Ashtekar variables supported by the derivation of a convenient form of the provides a bouncing cosmology whose critical energy den- anisotropic polymer-modified Friedmann equation for the sity depends on the distribution of the quantum numbers Bianchi I model. This way, the proper expression of the characterizing the Universe wave packet. critical energy density for the system has been provided, By concluding, thanks to the relevant role that the giving a complete picture of the Big Bounce features. In Bianchi I model plays in constructing the behavior to- this respect, it is interesting to highlight that choosing wards the singularity of a Bianchi IX cosmological model anisotropic volume-like variables (i.e. coordinates with (and hence of a generic inhomogeneous Universe [17, 32]), the geometrical dimensions of a volume) does not ensure we claim that also in more general cosmological models the presence of an intrinsic cut-off, even if they reduce our results suggest the presence of a Big Bounce with the 13 same features traced here, especially when the Ashtekar connections are concerned [33].

[1] C. Rovelli and F. Vidotto, Covariant Loop Quantum Phys.Rev. (2007). Gravity: an Elementary Introduction to Quantum Grav- [20] A. Ashtekar and E. Wilson-Ewing, Loop Quantum Cos- ity and Spinfoam Theory (Cambridge University Press, mology of Bianchi type I models, Physical Review D 79 2014). (2009). [2] F. Cianfrani, O. M. Lecian, M. Lulli, and G. Montani, [21] L.Szulc, Loop Quantum Cosmology of Diagonal Bianchi Canonical Quantum Gravity (World Scientific, 2014). type I model: Simplifications and Scaling Problems, [3] A. Ashtekar, M. Bojowald, J. Lewandowski, et al., Physical Review D 78 (2008). Mathematical Structure of Loop Quantum Cosmology, [22] E. Giovannetti and G. Montani, Polymer representation Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 7 of the Bianchi IX cosmology in the Misner variables, (2003). Physical Review D 100, 10.1103/physrevd.100.104058 [4] A. Ashtekar, Gravity and the Quantum, New Journal of (2019). Physics 7 (2005). [23] F. Cianfrani, G. Montani, and M. Muccino, Semiclassical [5] A. Ashtekar, T. Pawlowski, and P. Singh, Quantum isotropization of the Universe during a de Sitter phase, nature of the big bang: An analytical and numeri- Physical Review D 82, 10.1103/physrevd.82.103524 cal investigation, Physical Review D 73, 10.1103/phys- (2010). revd.73.124038 (2006). [24] T. Paw lowski and A. Ashtekar, Positive cosmological con- [6] A. Ashtekar, T. Pawlowski, and P. Singh, Quantum na- stant in Loop Quantum Cosmology, Physical Review D ture of the big bang: Improved dynamics, Physical Re- 85, 10.1103/physrevd.85.064001 (2012). view D 74, 10.1103/physrevd.74.084003 (2006). [25] D. Sen, S. K. Das, A. N. Basu, and S. Sengupta, Sig- [7] A. Ashtekar, A. Corichi, and P. Singh, Robustness of key nificance of Ehrenfest theorem in quantum–classical re- features of Loop Quantum Cosmology, Physical Review lationship, Current Science 80, 536 (2001). D 77, 10.1103/physrevd.77.024046 (2008). [26] R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, Canonical vari- [8] A. Ashtekar and P. Singh, Loop Quantum Cosmology: ables for general relativity, Phys. Rev. 117, 6 (1959). a Status Report, Classical and Quantum Gravity 28 [27] J. Ziprick, J. Gegenberg, and G. Kunstatter, Polymer (2011). quantization of a self-gravitating thin shell, Physical Re- [9] M. Bojowald, Loop Quantum Cosmology, Living Reviews view D 94, 10.1103/physrevd.94.104076 (2016). in Relativity 11 (2008). [28] B. Rosenstein and L. Horwitz, Probability Current Ver- [10] M. Bojowald, Consistent Loop Quantum Cosmology, sus Charge Current of a Relativistic Particle, Journal of Classical and Quantum Gravity 26, 075020 (2009). Physics A: Mathematical and General 18 (1985). [11] S. Antonini and G. Montani, Singularity-free and non- [29] A. Corichi and P. Singh, Geometric perspective on singu- chaotic inhomogeneous Mixmaster in polymer represen- larity resolution and uniqueness in Loop Quantum Cos- tation for the volume of the universe, Physics Letters B mology, Phys. Rev. D 80, 044024 (2009). 790, 475–483 (2019). [30] L. Linsefors and A. Barrau, Modified Friedmann equa- [12] G. Montani, C. Mantero, F. Bombacigno, F. Cianfrani, tion and survey of solutions in effective bianchi I Loop and G. Barca, Semi-classical and quantum analysis of the Quantum Cosmology, Classical and Quantum Gravity isotropic universe in the polymer paradigm, Phys. Rev. 31, 015018 (2013). D 99 (2019). [31] C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler, Gravi- [13] F. Mandini, G. Barca, E. Giovannetti, and G. Montani, tation (Princeton University Press, 1973). Polymer quantum dynamics of the isotropic Universe by [32] V. Belinskii, I. Khalatnikov, and E. Lifshitz, A general the Ashtekar-Barbero-Immirzi variables: a comparison solution of the Einstein equations with a time singularity, with LQC (2021), arXiv:2006.10614 [gr-qc]. Advances in Physics 31, 639 (1982). [14] F. Cianfrani and G. Montani, A critical analysis of the [33] A. Ashtekar, A. Henderson, and D. Sloan, Hamiltonian cosmological implementation of ùLoop Quantum Grav- formulation of the Belinskii-Khalatnikov-Lifshitz conjec- ity, Modern Physics Letters A 27, 1250032 (2012). ture, Physical Review D 83, 10.1103/physrevd.83.084024 [15] F. Cianfrani and G. Montani, Implications of the gauge- (2011). fixing Loop Quantum Cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 85, [34] C. J. Isham, Canonical Quantum Gravity and the Prob- 024027 (2012). lem of Time, in Integrable Systems, Quantum Groups, [16] E. Alesci and F. Cianfrani, A new perspective on cosmol- and Quantum Field Theories, edited by L. A. Ibort ogy in Loop Quantum Gravity, EPL (Europhysics Let- and M. A. Rodr´ıguez(Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, ters) 104, 10001 (2013). 1993) pp. 157–287. [17] G. Montani, Primordial Cosmology (World Scientific, [35] K. Kuchaˇr,Canonical Quantization of Gravity, in Rela- 2011). tivity, Astrophysics and Cosmology, edited by W. Israel [18] A. Ashtekar, Polymer geometry at Planck scale and quan- (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 1973) pp. 237–288. tum Einstein equations, International Journal of Modern [36] A. Ashtekar and J. Lewandowski, Relation between poly- Physics D 05, 629–648 (1996). mer and Fock excitations, Classical and Quantum Grav- [19] J. A. Z. Alejandro Corichi, Tatjana Vukasinac, Poly- ity 18, L117–L127 (2001). mer Quantum Mechanics and its Continuum Limit,