arXiv:hep-th/0611206v1 18 Nov 2006 ∗ hsdvre o Λ for diverges This h adcp eoewihe ytemnm of minima the by weighted of vacua become probable most landscape the Uni- the Thus, the of “nothing”. creation from the as verse interpreted or be tunneling quantum can as mini- continuation either across The continuation hypersurfaces. analytic mal sig- by Euclidean Lorentzian spacetime over to rise integral nature gives path instanton underlying This sad- an 4-geometries. a of is which point instanton dle gravitational the domi- exp( on action, is Euclidean calculated This exponentiated 7]. the based 6, by them [5, nated Other of wavefunction some cosmological least the at itself. invoked, on be theory to string have ei- methods large-scale predict within or to of formation [4] phenomenology structure big particle landscape observed too the is the landscape ther restrict This effectively vacua. string might [3] gravity h xoeta f()adtu pntepsiiiyfor possibility the open in thus sign and opposite tun- (1) an the of employ from exponential which the Apart [9] cre- of prefers universes. anti- proposals large and neling and of infinitely inflation controversial value of disfavors both zero ation it a remains of because result origin intuitive this the early [8], as some it Λ Despite interpret to action. attempts gravitational Euclidean the .TeHrl-akn aefnto 3,wihde- form Eu- the the which from has Universe hemisphere, [3], Sitter 4-dimensional function de clidean the wave of Hartle-Hawking nucleation constant scribes The cosmological small of Λ. catastrophe infrared the from vacuum landscape. a string selecting big of enormously method the a as serve might This otemmr fByeDeWitt. Bryce of memory the To unu omlg 1 ]adEcienquantum Euclidean and 2] [1, cosmology Quantum nimdaedffiut ihti rga rssfrom arises program this with difficulty immediate An hroyaisvaCeto rmNtig iiigteCos the Limiting Nothing: from Creation via Thermodynamics Ψ HH fuiesswt h omlgclcntn iie oabou a to limited constant cosmological the with universes of oanΛ domain ASnumbers: landscape PACS the for a mechanism of ra selection point constant dynamical cosmological accumulation possible the the a of – ghost-avoidanc dependence qua The scale special the quantum instantons. a from new by results a mediated cutoff establishes upper anomaly The conformal the matter). hot of reaction hoyDprmn,LbdvPyisIsiue eisyPr Leninsky Institute, Physics Lebedev Department, Theory h raino unu nvrei ecie ya by described is Universe quantum a of creation The ∼ exp( ..Lna nttt o hoeia hsc,Ksgnstr Kosygin Physics, Theoretical for Institute Landau L.D. → − < S iatmnod iiaadIF,VaInro4,416Bolog 40126 46, Irnerio Via INFN, and Fisica di Dipartimento eas fubuddesof unboundedness of because 0 E Λ exp(3 = ) min srldotb omlgclbosrprqieet(h se (the requirement bootstrap cosmological a by out ruled is π/ 2 G Λ) . A.Yu.Kamenshchik − Landscape A.O.Barvinsky S S (1) E E ), . yebdigbt ye fsae noauie frame- unified a matrix. into density states a question below of of dynamical question work types this a both address is embedding We of by mixed postulate. state a or initial than pure rather the is exten- whether Universe These because the natural [11]. seem background instanton sions the quantum hot on of matter reaction back nonperturbative the rating tanti eutb:i xedn h oino Hartle- of notion the a extending i) by: Hawking result this We attain catastrophe. infrared this avoids naturally framework suggested. been far this thus of has resolution problem convincing no [10], conclusions opposite I.1 est arxisatn ahdlnsdpc the depict Σ lines and Σ Dashed surfaces minimal at instanton. nucleating matrix Universe Lorentzian Density 1: FIG. unu rvt 1]b nisatnhvn w disjoint Σ two and having Σ instanton boundaries an by [12] gravity quantum pa hi oe Fg2 itr lutaigtefac- the illustrating picture ˆ a — of close (Fig.2) torization smoothly poles which their hemispheres at up disjoint two of union ϕ iymti ftepr ateHwigsaetebridge the Σ den- state and Hartle-Hawking the Σ pure for between the contrast, of In matrix Fig.1. establishing sity see thus correlations, these, mixing between interpolates instanton ′ mixed nti etrw hwta ulda ahintegration path Euclidean that show we Letter this In est matrix density A h aneetta eavct eei htthermal that is here advocate we that effect main The cletn ohgaiyadmte bevbe) The observables). matter and gravity both (collecting ∗ est matrix density g npril hnmnlg suggests phenomenology particle on nge fsrn vacua. string of unu tt fteUies n i incorpo- ii) and Universe the of state quantum ddrneΛ range nded pure set5,199 ocw Russia Moscow, 119991 53, ospect eomlzto.TectffΛ cutoff The renormalization. e tmeet fvcu nryand energy vacuum of effects ntum nnt euneo garland-type of sequence infinite n ,193 ocw Russia Moscow, 119334 2, . ρ tt oadniymti hc describes which matrix density a to state = | ′ Ψ sboe,s htteisatni a is instanton the that so broken, is ′ HH hc ilsa ensemble an yields which ρ soitdwt t w entries two its with associated [ min Σ ih ,ϕ ϕ, a Italy na, Ψ ≤ HH ′ srpeetdi Euclidean in represented is ] fcnitn back lf-consistent ooia Constant mological Λ | . ≤ Σ Λ ' max The . max ϕ and ′ . 2
Σ Σ' integral for Γ expresses in terms of the effective action Γ [g0(τ)] of quantized matter on the background g0(τ), exp( Γ [g ]) = DΦ(x) exp( S [g , Φ(x)]), as − 0 − E 0 R e Γ − = Dg0(τ) exp Γ [g0(τ)] . (4) Z −
FIG. 2: Density matrix of the pure Hartle-Hawking state rep- Our approximation will be to consider Γ [g0(τ)] in the resented by the union of two vacuum instantons. one-loop order, Γ [g0]= SE[g0]+ Γ1−loop[g0], and handle (4) at the tree level, which is equivalent to solving the effective equations for Γ [g0]. fluctuations and quantum conformal anomaly destroy the Remarkably, Γ [ g0 ] is exactly calculable for confor- Hartle-Hawking instanton and replace it with one filled mally-invariant fields by a conformal transformation [15] 2 2 2 by radiation. This is already manifest in classical theory, relating generic FRW metric ds = a ds¯ to that of a 2 2 2 (3) specifically in the Euclidean Friedmann equation for a static universe of a unit size, ds¯ = dη + d Ω (these scale factor a(τ),a ˙ 2/a2 =1/a2 H2 C/a4 (we use spa- metrics are denoted below as g andg ¯, while η is the con- tially closed FRW metric ds2 =−N 2(τ−) dτ 2 + a2(τ) d2Ω(3) formal time). The total action reads in the gauge N = 1 and express Λ = 3H2 in terms of the τ+ aa˙ 2 Hubble constant). The radiation density C/a4 prevents Γ [ a(τ),N(τ)]=2 dτ Na + NH2a3 the half-instantons from closing and allows a to vary be- Zτ− − N − tween two turning points [13, 14] a± = (1/√2H)(1 τ+ a˙ 2 1 a˙ 4 1/2 ± +2B dτ √1 4CH2) . This forces a tubular structure on the Na 6 N 3a − Zτ− − instanton which spans (at least) one period of oscillation τ+ τ+ between a±, provided the constant C characterizing the +B dτ N/a + F 2 dτ N/a . (5) 2 amount of radiation satisfies the bound 4H C 1. Zτ− Zτ− The existence of radiation naturally follows≤ from the partition function of this state associated with the We work in units of mP = 3π/4G, and the integration toroidal instanton obtained by identifying Σ′ and Σ. The runs between two turning pointsp at τ±. The first line is radiation back reaction supports the instanton geometry the classical part, the second line is the conformal con- in which it exists. Remarkably, when the vacuum energy tribution and the last line is the one-loop action on the and conformal anomaly are taken into account this boot- static instanton of the metricg ¯. The conformal contribution Γ − [g] Γ − [¯g] is strap yields a set of instantons – a landscape – only in 1 loop − 1 loop the bounded range of Λ, determined by the coefficients of R, the Gauss-Bonnet 2 2 2 invariant E = Rµναγ 4Rµν +R and Weyl tensor term in − 1/2 Λmin < Λ < Λmax. (2) the conformal anomaly gµν δΓ1−loop/δgµν = g (αR + 2 2 βE + γCµναβ)/4(4π) . Specifically this contribution can All values Λ < Λmin are completely eliminated either be obtained by the technique of [16]; it contains higher- because of the absence of instanton solutions or because derivative terms a¨2 which produce ghost instabilities of their infinitely large positive action. A similar situation in solutions of effective∼ equations. However, such terms holds for Λ > Λmax – no instantons exist there, and the are proportional to the coefficient α which can be put to Lorentzian configurations in this overbarrier domain (if zero by adding the following finite local counterterm any) are exponentially suppressed relative to those of (2). To quantify the above picture consider the density ma- 1 α 4 1/2 2 ΓR[g]= Γ1−loop[g]+ d xg R (g). (6) trix given by the Euclidean path integral [12] 2(4π)2 12 Z
′ Γ This ghost-avoidance renormalization is justified by the ρ[ ϕ, ϕ ]= e D[ g, φ ] exp SE[ g, φ ] , (3) Z − requirement of consistency of the theory at the quantum level. The contribution Γ [g] Γ [¯g] to the renormalized R − R where SE[ g, φ ] is the classical action, and the integration action then gives the second line of (5) with B =3β/4. runs over gravitational g and matter φ fields interpolat- The static instanton with a period η0 playing the ′ ′ ing between ϕ and ϕ at Σ and Σ . The statistical sum role of inverse temperature contributes Γ1−loop[¯g] = exp( Γ ) is given by a similar path integral over periodic E0 η0 + F (η0), where the vacuum energy E0 and free − ′ fields on the torus with identified boundaries Σ and Σ . energy F (η0) are the typical boson and fermion sums The back reaction follows from decomposing [g, φ] into over field oscillators with energies ω on a unit 3-sphere − a minisuperspace g (τ) = a(τ),N(τ) , and the ”mat- E = ω/2 , F (η ) = ln 1 e ωη0 . The 0 0 ± ω 0 ± ω ∓ ter” sector which includes also inhomogeneous metric renormalizationP (6) which shouldP be applied also to perturbations on minisuperspace background Φ(x) = Γ1−loop[¯g] modifies E0, so that ΓR[¯g] = C0 η0 + F (η0), (φ(x), ψ(x), Aµ(x),hµν (x), ...). With a relevant decom- C0 E0 +3α/16. This gives the third line of Eq.(5) position of the measure D[ g, φ ]= Dg (τ) DΦ(x), the with≡C = B/2. This universal relation between C and 0 × 0 0 3
2 B = 3β/4 follows from the known anomaly coefficients exists only when a− B, which gives rise to (10). Oth- [17] and the UV-renormalized Casimir energy in a static erwise, a(τ) at the contraction≥ phase becomes complex universe [18] for scalar, Weyl spinor and vector fields re- or runs to zero which violates instanton periodicity. In spectively having: the latter case a smooth Hartle-Hawking instanton with a− = 0 forms and yields η0 in view of (9), so that 1 2 4 ′ → ∞ 1 − 1 1 F (η0) F (η0) 0. Therefore, its on-shell action α = 3 , β = 11 , E0 = 17. (7) ∼ → 90 × − 360 × 960 × a+ 2 18 124 88 ′ daa˙ 2 Ba˙ Γ0 = F (η0) η0F (η0)+4 B a (11) − Za− a − − 3 It is important that for conformally invariant fields the due to B > 0 diverges to + at a− = 0 and completely nonlocal action (5) is exact, and contains no other terms ∞ of higher order in the curvature. rules out pure-state instantons [11]. The effective equation δΓ/δN(τ) = 0 has the form of Moreover, inside the range (10) our bootstrap elimi- the classical equation modified by the quantum B-term nates the infrared catastrophe of Λ 0. Indeed η0 as H2 0, so that due to (9) C →B/2, but this is→ im- ∞ 2 4 2 → → 2 a˙ 1 a˙ a˙ 1 2 C possible because in view of (10) C B at H = 0. Thus, + B = H , (8) ≥ 2 a2 2 a4 − a4 a2 − − a4 instanton family never hits the C-axes of H = 0 and τ+ can only interpolate between the points on the bound- ′ C = B/2+ F (η0), η0 =2 dτ/a(τ). (9) aries of the domain (10). For a conformal scalar field Zτ− the numerical analysis gives such a family [11] starting at H2 2.00, C 0.004, Γ 0.16, and terminating Remarkably, the contribution of the nonlocal F (η ) in (5) 0 0 at H2 ≈ 13.0, C ≈ 0.02, Γ ≈−0.09. The upper point reduces to the radiation constant C as a nonlocal func- 0 describes≈ the static≈ universe filled≈ − by a hot radiation with tional of a(τ), determined by the bootstrap equation (9). ′ the temperature T = H/π√1 2BH2, whereas the lower Here F (η ) dF (η )/dη > 0 is the energy of a hot gas 0 0 0 point establishes the lower bound− of the Λ-range. of particles,≡ which adds to their vacuum energy B/2. The upper bound of the landscape follows from the C existence of garlands that can be obtained by glueing
k = 1 together into a torus k copies of a simple instanton [13, 19]; see Fig.4. Their formalism is the same as above except that the conformal time in (9) and the integral term of (11) should be multiplied by k. As in the case of
k=2 B
k=3 k=4 FIG. 4: The garland segment consisting of three folds of a B/2 simple instanton glued at surfaces of a maximal scale factor.
2 k = 1, garland families interpolate between the lower and 1/2B H upper boundaries of (10). They exist for all k, 1 k ≤ ≤ 2 , and their infinite sequence accumulates at the critical FIG. 3: Instanton domain in the (H ,C)-plane. Garland fam- point∞ C = B/2, H2 = 1/2B, where these boundaries ilies are shown for k = 1, 2, 3, 4. Their sequence accumulates merge. Within the 1/k2-accuracy the upper and lower at the critical point (1/2B,B/2). points of each family coincide and read
2 2 3 2 Periodic instanton solutions of Eqs.(8)-(9) exist only 1 ln k (k) ln k H2 1 , Γ B . (12) inside the curvilinear wedge of (H2, C)-plane between (k) ≃ 2B − 2k2π2 0 ≃− 4k2π2 bold segments of the upper hyperbolic boundary and the lower straight line boundary of Fig.3, With a growing k, garlands become more and more static and cold with T 1/(√B ln k2) 0. Contrary to [19] (k) ≃ → 4CH2 1, C B B2H2, BH2 1/2. (10) the garland action is not additive in k, so that as k ≤ ≥ − ≤ garlands do not dominate the ensemble. Their sequence→ ∞ 2 Below this domain the solutions are either complex and converges to the instanton with Hmax = 1/2B, which aperiodic or suppressed by infinite positive Euclidean ac- gives the upper bound of the range (2). tion. Above this domain only Lorentzian (overbarrier) Thus, our Universe is created in a hot mixed state, but configurations exist, but they are again exponentially its evolution does not contradict the large-scale structure damped relative to instantons in (10). formation. After nucleation from the instanton the Uni- These properties are based on the fact that the turning verse expands; its radiation dilutes, so that Λ starts dom- points of (8) exactly coincide with classical a±, but a− inating and generates inflation under an assumption that 4 everywhere above Λ is a composite field (like an inflaton) ian range when ascending the particle hierarchy. decaying at the exit by a standard slow-roll scenario. Though motivated by the string landscape, all the The ensemble of universes belongs to a bounded range above results hold outside of the string theory context 2 (2) of Λ = 3H . Its infrared cutoff is provided by the and, as a feedback, suggest a long-sought selection mech- radiation back reaction and survives even in the classical anism for the plethora of string vacua. Modulo the de- limit as B 0. In contrast, the high-energy cutoff at → tails of a relevant 4D-compactification, this might work as follows. For B growing with N and spin, the upper Λ =3m2 /2B, m2 3π/4G, (13) max P P ≡ scale (13) decreases towards the increasing phenomenol- ogy scale, and approaches the latter at the string scale is the quantum effect of vacuum energy and the conformal m2 where a positive Λ might be generated by the mech- anomaly; this generates a new scale in gravity theory. s anism of [20]. Our conjecture is that at this scale our We have considered only conformal fields which make bootstrap becomes perturbatively consistent, provided our model exactly solvable and provide critically im- m2 /B m2 m2 , and selects from the string land- portant positivity of the constant B = 3β/4, cf. (7). P s P scape a≃ small subset≪ compatible with observations. Moreover, conformal invariance together with the ghost- avoidance renormalization renders a particular value of Our results hold within the Euclidean path integral the vacuum energy B/2 in (9) which yields the upper (3) which automatically excludes Lorentzian config- boundary of (2) exactly at the critical point (1/2B,B/2) urations possibly existing above the upper boundary 2 of Fig.3. Even if non-conformal fields qualitatively pre- of (10), 4CH > 1. However, one can imagine an serve the whole picture, they are likely to break this re- extended formulation of quantum gravity generalizing (3) to a wider path integration domain. Our conclu- lation. Then if C0 < B/2 all garlands survive, though they saturate at Λmax with a finite temperature. If sions nevertheless remain true. Indeed the effective action scales as Γ √B, B 1, and because it B > C0 > B/2, their sequence is truncated at some k. 0 is negative our landscape∼ − at the≫ scale m is weighted Finally, if C0 >B the infrared catastrophe occurs again s by exp(#√B) exp(# m /m ) 1. Therefore it – the k = 1 instanton family hits the C-axes at C0. ≃ P s ≫ Conformal invariance can be justified as a good ap- strongly dominates over Lorentzian configurations, the proximation when conformal particles outnumber non- amplitudes of the latter being O(1) in view of their pure conformal ones. Moreover, their large number N justifies phase nature. Thus, our results look robust against a semiclassical expansion by scaling down the range (2). possible generalizations of Euclidean quantum gravity. Indeed, for a single scalar field the latter is determined 2 2 by Planckian values, Λmin 8.99 mP ,Λmax = 360 mP A.B. thanks H.Tye, C.Deffayet, J.Khoury, R.Woodard, which, however, decrease as≈ 1/N in view of the simple T.Osborn and especially Jim Hartle for thought provok- scaling C NC, B NB, F (η0) NF (η0) and ing discussions and helpful suggestions. A.B. was sup- H2 H2/N→. Semiclassical→ expansion can→ also be justi- ported by the RFBR grant 05-02-17661 and the grant fied→ for large B =3β/4 growing with spin, cf.(7), because LSS 4401.2006.2. A.K. was partially supported by the the domain (2) with (13) shrinks to a narrow subplanck- RFBR grant 05-02-17450 and the grant LSS 1757.2006.2.
[1] B.S.DeWitt, Phys. Rev. 160, 1113 (1967). [13] J.J. Halliwell and R.C.Myers, Phys. Rev. D 40, 4011 [2] A. Vilenkin, Phys. Lett. B 117, 25 (1982); Phys. Rev. D (1989). 27, 2848 (1983). [14] G.V.Lavrelashvili et al, Nucl. Phys. B 329, 98 (1990); [3] J.B.Hartle and S.W.Hawking, Phys.Rev. D28, 2960 A.Yu.Kamenshchik et al, Phys. Lett. B 357, 36 (1995). (1983); S.W.Hawking, Nucl. Phys. B 239, 257 (1984). [15] M.V.Fischetti, J.B.Hartle and B.L.Hu, Phys. Rev. D 20, [4] R.Bousso and J.Polchinsky, JHEP 06 006 (2000); 1757 (1979). M.R.Douglas, JHEP 05, 046 (2003), hep-th/0303194. [16] E.S.Fradkin and A.A.Tseytlin, Phys. Lett. B 134, 187 [5] H.Ooguri et al, Lett. Math. Phys. 74, 311 (2005). (1984); A.O.Barvinsky et al, gr-qc/9510037; P.O.Mazur [6] H.Firouzjahi et al, JHEP 0409, 060 (2004); S.Sarangi and E.Mottola, Phys. Rev. D 64, 104022 (2001). and S.-H.H.Tye, hep-th/0505104, hep-th/0603237. [17] J.S.Dowker and R.Critchley, Phys. Rev. D 16, 3390 [7] R.Brustein and S.P.de Alwis, Phys. Rev. D 73, 046009 (1977); S.M.Christensen, Phys. Rev. D 17, 946 (1978). (2006). [18] J.S.Dowker and R.Critchley, J. Phys. A 9, 535 (1976); [8] S.W.Hawking, Phys. Lett. B 134, 403 (1984); S.R.Cole- S.G.Mamaev et al, Sov. Phys. JETP, 43, 823 (1976); man, Nucl. Phys. B 310, 643 (1988). L.H.Ford, Phys. Rev. D 14, 3304 (1976); P.Candelas and [9] A.D. Linde, JETP 60, 211 (1984); A.Vilenkin, Phys. J.S.Dowker, Phys. Rev. D 19, 2902 (1979). Rev. D 30, 509 (1984). [19] W.Fischler, D.Morgan and J.Polchinsky, Phys. Rev.D42 [10] A.O. Barvinsky and A.Yu. Kamenshchik, Class. Quan- (1990) 4042. tum Grav. 7, L181 (1990); Phys. Lett. B 332, 270 (1994). [20] S.Kachru et al, Phys.Rev. D 68, 046005 (2003); S.Kachru [11] A.O.Barvinsky and A.Yu.Kamenshchik, JCAP 09, 014 et al, JCAP 10, 013 (2003). (2006). [12] D.N.Page, Phys. Rev. D 34, 2267 (1986).