Università degli studi di Napoli “Federico II” Scuola Politecnica e delle Scienze di Base Area Didattica di Scienze Matematiche Fisiche e Naturali Dipartimento di Fisica “Ettore Pancini” Laurea Magistrale in Fisica Quantum Metric and Entanglement on Spin Networks Relatori: Candidato: Dr. Goffredo Chirco (AEI, Potsdam) Fabio Maria Mele arXiv:1703.06415v1 [gr-qc] 19 Mar 2017 Dr. Daniele Oriti (AEI, Potsdam) N94/244 Prof. Patrizia Vitale A.A. 2015=2016 To my parents Pasquale and Rosaria, and to my uncle Gaspare 2 Contents Introduction5 1 Quantum States of Geometry: Spin Networks9 1.1 Canonical Formulation of General Relativity . 10 1.1.1 Hamiltonian Formalism . 10 1.1.2 Tetrad Formalism and Ashtekar Variables . 14 1.2 The Canonical Quantization Program: LQG . 17 1.2.1 Holonomy-Flux Algebra . 18 1.2.2 Cylindrical Functions and Structure of the Kinematical Hilbert Space . 21 1.2.3 Gauge-invariant States and Spin Network Basis . 24 1.3 Geometric Operators on Spin Networks . 27 1.4 The Dual Picture: Tetrahedron (Classical and Quantum) . 30 1.4.1 Classical Phase Space via Symplectic Reduction . 32 1.4.2 Quantization and 4-Valent Vertex Hilbert Space . 34 1.5 Interpretation of Spin Networks: Quanta of Geometry . 35 1.6 A Digression on Diffeomorphism Invariance and Relationalism . 37 1.7 Pregeometric Structure of Quantum Spacetime . 40 2 Entanglement for Spin Network States 46 2.1 Quantum Information: Basics . 46 2.1.1 Composite Systems and Entanglement . 47 2.1.2 The Schmidt Decomposition . 50 2.1.3 Entanglement Entropy and Mutual Information . 53 2.2 Examples of Entanglement for Spin Networks . 56 2.2.1 An Introductory Example: Wilson Lines . 57 2.2.2 The Dipole Graph . 61 2.2.3 Two Tetrahedra Entangled States . 63 3 CONTENTS 4 3 Geometric Quantum Mechanics and Information Geometry 67 3.1 Preliminaries . 67 3.2 Quantum Mechanics on the Space of Rays . 69 3.3 From Hilbert Spaces to Hilbert Manifolds: Tensorial Structures on the Space of the State Vectors . 72 3.4 Tensorial Structures on the Space of Rays . 76 3.5 Pull-back Tensor Fields on (Sub)manifolds of Quantum States . 80 3.6 Tensorial Characterization of Entanglement . 88 3.7 Information Theory in Geometric Quantum Mechanics . 93 3.7.1 The Geometry of Statistical Models: The Fisher Informa- tion Metric . 93 3.7.2 Fisher Metric in the Geometrical Formulation of Quantum Mechanics . 96 3.8 Entanglement Measure and Distance . 101 4 Quantum Metric and Entanglement on Spin Networks 104 4.1 The Underlying Idea . 105 4.2 Outlook of the Procedure . 107 4.3 A Dictionary Correspondence via Wilson Line States . 108 4.3.1 Step 1: Metric Tensor on the Space of States . 108 4.3.2 Step 2: Pull-back on Orbits of Quantum States . 111 4.3.3 Step 3: Link as Entanglement of Semi-links . 114 4.4 Two Explicit Cases: Maximally Entangled and Separable States . 117 4.5 Entanglement of Glued Links . 121 4.6 Discussion and Interpretation . 123 Conclusions and Outlook 127 Appendices 131 A The Theta Graph Spin Network 131 B Symplectic Reduction and Geometric Quantization 134 B.1 Kirillov-Konstant Poisson Structure . 134 B.2 Quantization . 136 C Hermitian Tensor on Orbits of Maximally Entangled and Sepa- rable Wilson Line States 139 C.1 Case 1: Maximally Entangled State . 139 C.2 Case 2: Separable State . 146 Introduction Quantum Mechanics (QM) and General Relativity (GR) are the two main revo- lutions in the Physics of the last century and provide the pillars of our current knowledge of Nature. If on the one hand Einstein’s theory rules the large scales phenomena of the astrophysical and cosmological regimes and has shed a com- pletely new light on the nature of gravity, space and time, on the other hand QM rules the small scales of the atomic and subatomic world. However, despite of their empirical success, these theories are conceptually incompatible. Indeed, QM is defined on a fixed background spacetime and its interpretation as well as its mathematical coherence deeply rely on an external time variable. As such it is incompatible with GR, according to which space and time must be treated on the same level and spacetime itself is a dynamical entity. Such an incompatibility makes the attempt to unify QM and GR into a consistent theory of Quantum Gravity (QG) one of the main challenges at the foundations of modern theoretical physics. Why then QG in first place. There are many arguments in favour of a posi- tive answer coming from different sides [1]: • At a conceptual level, the main lesson of GR is that (the geometry of) space- time is a dynamical object identified with the gravitational field, while QM tells us that dynamical fields are quantum objects, i.e., they have a discrete and probabilistic nature. Therefore, we conclude that spacetime itself must have a fundamental discrete quantum structure as can be synthesized in the following sillogism: “spacetime is a dynamical field, any dynamical field is quantum, then also spacetime is quantum”; • In the case of gravity, ordinary QFT perturbation techniques lead to a non renormalizable theory; • The fact that three of the fundamental interactions are successfully de- scribed within a quantum framework may be regarded as an hint that also the gravitational interaction should be quantized. Moreover, the success of 5 Introduction unification in the history of science may also suggest that gravity cannot be quantized alone but we need to include also the other interactions (this is for istance the more ambitious ideology behind string theory, but we will not deal with it in this dissertation); • The presence of singularities in GR and of UV divergences in QFT tells us that the both theories break down at the very small scales; • Horizon entropy (of black holes or more generally of any causal horizon) [2,3] should be explained in terms of some fundamental degrees of freedom characterizing the microscopic structure of the spacetime region hidden behind the horizon surface; • Classical gravity seems to have a thermodynamic nature. Indeed, Einstein’s equations can be derived by using only thermodynamic concepts [4]. But the laws of thermodynamics are statistical, i.e., they are a macroscopic aver- age manifestation of the microscopic behaviour, and so the statistical nature of gravity suggests that spacetime may be a macroscopic approximation of more fundamental costituents. Being a still unsolved issue, QG is not just a single theory waiting for experi- mental tests but rather a plenary of approaches based on different motivations and techniques characterized by their own successes and internal difficulties (see [9] for a report). The proliferation of various paths is also due to the lack of an empirical guidance as a consequence of the fact that the physical regimes where quantum gravitational effects should become relevant are outside the present ob- servational reach. In this dissertation, we take the point of view according to which, in order to ac- comodate the main features of GR and QM, a theory of quantum gravity should be a background independent (i.e., a diffeomorphism invariant) quantum field theory describing in a fully relational way the fundamental costituents of space and time, in terms of which a quantized (discrete) spacetime geometry is made of. Most of the main background-independent candidates to a full theory of QG, such as Loop Quantum Gravity, Spin Foam Models and Group Field Theories, propose a radical picture of the Planck scale structure of spacetime. According to them, at the very small scales space and time dissolve into non-geometric, combinatorial and algebraic objects. Such a microscopic description is given in terms of spin networks, roughly graphs coloured by irreducible representations of the local gauge group (usually SU(2)). Quantum spin network states repre- sent elementary excitations of spacetime. The properties of these quanta of the gravitational field are determined by the spectral properties of the operators rep- resenting the quantities involved in our interaction with the system. 6 Introduction Specifically, geometric quantities such as area and volume correspond to quan- tum operators and spin networks are their eigenstates. The heuristic picture of quantum space provided by spin networks is therefore that of “grains of space” with discrete volumes and areas which describe the building blocks of a quantized three-dimensional geometry. However, it is not yet clear how ordinary spacetime would emerge from such a discrete description. The issues come from the diffeomorphism invariance of the theory and the consequent difficulty to define a notion of locality in space. There are hints that entanglement and tools from information theory should play a cru- cial role both in the characterization of the intrinsic properties of the quantum texture of spacetime and in the reconstruction of its geometry. For istance, even if based on completely different grounds both at the conceptual and technical level, recent developments in AdS/CFT have shown that the entanglement of parti- cles on the boundary is directly related to the connectivity of the bulk regions thus suggesting that our three-dimensional space is held together by quantum entanglement [122]. Later works based on the so-called Ryu-Takayanagi formula, which relates the entanglement entropy in a conformal field theory to the area of a minimal surface in its holographic dual [5], has also shown that the stress- energy tensor near the boundary of a bulk spacetime region can be reconstructed from the entanglement on the boundary [6,7]. Also on the spin network side, there are proposals to use quantum information to reconstruct geometrical notions such as distance in terms of the entanglement on spin network states [8, 120, 134].