hauntings n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
HAUNTINGS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
HAUNTINGS

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 43

HAUNTINGS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 146 Views
  • Uploaded on

This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create action items. Use PowerPoint to keep track of these action items during your presentation In Slide Show, click on the right mouse button Select “Meeting Minder” Select the “Action Items” tab

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'HAUNTINGS' - stu


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
hauntings

This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create action items. Use PowerPoint to keep track of these action items during your presentation

  • In Slide Show, click on the right mouse button
  • Select “Meeting Minder”
  • Select the “Action Items” tab
  • Type in action items as they come up
  • Click OK to dismiss this box
  • This will automatically create an Action Item slide at the end of your presentation with your points entered.

HAUNTINGS

Nemanja Kaloper

UC Davis

Based on: C. Charmousis, R. Gregory, A. Padilla, hep-th/0604086; and work in preparation with D. Kiley.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

overview
Overview
  • Who cares?
  • Chasing ghosts in DGP
    • Codimension-1 case
    • Specteral analysis: diagnostics
    • Shock therapy
  • Shocking codimension-2
    • Gravity of photons = electrostatics on cones
    • Gravitational See-Saw
  • Summary

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

the concert of cosmos
The Concert of Cosmos?
  • Einstein’s GR: a beautiful theoretical framework for gravity and cosmology, consistent with numerous experiments and observations:
    • Solar system tests of GR
    • Sub-millimeter (non)deviations from Newton’s law
    • Concordance Cosmology!
  • How well do we REALLY know gravity?
    • Hands-on observational tests confirm GR at scales between roughly 0.1 mm and - say - about 100 MPc; are we certain that GR remains valid at shorter and longer distances?

New tests?

New tests?

Or, Dark Discords?

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

cosmological constant failure
Cosmological constant failure
  • The situation with the cosmological constant is desperate (by at least 60 orders of magnitude!)  desperate measures required?
  • Might changing gravity help? A (very!) heuristic argument:
    • Legendre transforms: adding ∫ dx(x) J(x) to Strades an independent variable F for another independent variable J.
    • Reconstruction of G(F) from W(J) yields a family of effective actionsparameterized byan arbitraryJ; J=0 is put in by hand!
    • ∫ dx√det(g) L isa Legendre transform.
    • In GR, general covariance det(g) does not propagate!
    • So the Legendre transform ∫ dx√det(g) L‘loses’ information about only ONE IR parameter - L. Thus L is not calculable, but is an input!
    • Could changing gravity alter this, circumventing no-go theorems?…

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

headaches
Headaches
  • Changing gravity → adding new DOFs in the IR
  • They can be problematic:
    • Too light and too strongly coupled → new long range forces

Observations place bounds on these!

    • Negative mass squaredor negative residue of the pole in the propagator for the new DOFs: tachyonsand/orghosts

Instabilities can render the theory nonsensical!

Caveat emptor: this need not be a theory killer; it means that a naive perturbative description about some background is very bad. BUT: one *must* develop a meaningful perturbative regime before surveying phenomenological issues and applications.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

slide8

Shock box

Modified

Gravity

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

dgp braneworlds
DGP Braneworlds
  • Brane-induced gravity(Dvali, Gabadadze, Porrati, 2000):
    • Ricci terms BOTH in the bulk and on the end-of-the-world brane, arising from e.g. wave function renormalization of the graviton by brane loops
    • May appear in string theory (Kiritsis, Tetradis, Tomaras, 2001; Corley, Lowe, Ramgoolam, 2001)
    • Related works on exploration of brane-localized radiative corrections (Collins, Holdom, 2000)

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

codimension 1
Codimension-1
  • Action: for the case of codimension-1 brane,
  • Assume ∞ bulk: 4D gravity has to be mimicked by the exchange of bulk DOFs!
  • 5th dimension is concealed by the brane curvature enforcing momentum transfer  1/p2for p > 1/rc (DGP, 2000; Dvali, Gabadadze, 2000):

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

strong coupling caveats
Strong coupling caveats
  • In massive gravity, naïve linear perturbation theory in massive gravity on a flat space breaks down → idea: nonlinearities improve the theory and yield continuous limit(Vainshtein, 1972)?
  • There are examples without IvDVZ discontinuity in curved backgrounds(Kogan et al; Karch et al; Porrati; 2000). (dS with a rock of salt!)
  • Key: the scalar graviton is strongly coupled at a scale much bigger than the gravitational radius(a long list of people… sorry, y’all!).
  • In DGP a naïve expansion around flat space also breaks down at macroscopic scales(Deffayet, Dvali, Gabadadze, Vainshtein, 2001; Luty, Porrati, Rattazi, 2003; Rubakov, 2003).Including curvature may push it down to about ~1 cm (Rattazi & Nicolis, 2004).
  • LPR also claim a ghost in the scalar sector on the self-accelerating branch; after some vacillation, people seem to - mostly - agree(Koyama, 2005; Gorbunov, Koyama, Sibiryakov, 2005; Charmousis, Gregory, NK,, Padilla, 2006; Izumi, Koyama, Tanaka, 2006; Carena, Lykken, Park, Santiago, 2006 (two days ago); attempt to remove it by weird boundary conditions, by Deffayet, Gabadadze, Iglesias, 2006, fails to convince this speaker; ghost after all means that the system leaks to infinity, so finding that the system is sensitive to what happens faraway is an indicator of occult phenomena)

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

perturbing cosmological vacua
Perturbing cosmological vacua
  • Difficulty: equations are hard, perturbative treatments of both background and interactions subtle... Can we be more precise?
  • An attempt: construct realistic backgrounds; solve
  • Look at the vacua first:
  • Symmetries require(see e.g. N.K, A. Linde, 1998):

where 4d metric is de Sitter.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

codimension 1 vacua
Codimension-1 vacua

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

normal and self inflating branches
Normal and self-inflating branches
  • The intrinsic curvature and the tension related by (N.K.; Deffayet,2000)
  • e = ±1 an integration constant; e = -1 normal branch,

i.e. this reduces to the usual inflating brane in 5D!

  • e =1 self-inflating branch, inflates even if tension vanishes!

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

specteroscopy
Specteroscopy
  • Logic: start with the cosmological vacua and perturb the bulk & brane system, allowing for brane matter as well; gravity sector is
  • But, there are still unbroken gauge invariances of the bulk+brane system! Not all modes are physical.
  • The analysis here is linear- think of it as a diagnostic tool. But: it reflects problems with perturbations at lengths > Vainshtein scale.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

gauge symmetry i
Gauge symmetry I
  • Infinitesimal transformations
  • The perturbations change as
  • Set e.g. and to zero; that leaves us with and

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

gauge symmetry ii
Gauge symmetry II
  • Decomposition theorem (see CGKP, 2006) :
  • Not all need be propagating modes!
  • To linear order, vectors decouple by gauge symmetry, and the only modes responding to brane matter are TT-tensors and scalars.
  • Write down the TT-tensor and scalar Lagrangian.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

gauge symmetry iii
Gauge symmetry III
  • Note: there still remain residual gauge transformations

under which

so we can go to a brane-fixed gauge F’=0 and

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

forking
Forking
  • Direct substitution into field equations yields the spectrum; use mode decomposition
  • Get the bulk eigenvalue problem
  • A constant potential with an attractive -function well.
  • This is self-adjoint with respect to the norm

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

brane localized modes tensors
Brane-localized modes: Tensors
  • Gapped continuum:
  • Bound state:

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

bound state specifics
Bound state specifics
  • On the normal branch, e=-1, the bound state is massless! This is the normalizable graviton zero mode, arising because the bulk volume ends on a horizon, a finite distance away. It has additional residual gauge invariances, and so only 2 propagating modes, with matter couplings g ~ H. It decouples on a flat brane.
  • On the self-accelerating branch, e=1, the bound state mass is not zero! Instead, it has Pauli-Fierz mass term and 5 components,
  • Perturbative ghost: m2<2H2, helicity-0 component has negative kinetic term (Deser, Nepomechie, 1983; Higuchi, 1987; I. Bengtsson, 1994; Deser, Waldron 2001).

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

brane localized modes scalars
Brane-localized modes: Scalars
  • Single mode, with m2 = 2H2, obeying

with the brane boundary condition

  • Subtlety: interplay between normalizability, brane dynamics and gauge invariance. On the normal branch, the normalizable scalar can always be gauged away by residual gauge transformations; not so on the self-accelerating branch. There one combination survives:

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

full perturbative solution
Full perturbative solution
  • Full perturbative solution of the problem is
  • On the normal branch, this solution has no scalar contribution, and the bound state tensor is a zero mode. Hence there are no ghosts.
  • On the self-accelerating branch, the bound state is massive, and when  its helicity-0 mode is a ghost; for , the surviving scalar is a ghost (its kinetic term is proportional to ).
  • Zero tension is tricky.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

zeroing in
Zeroing in
  • Zero tension corresponds to m2 = 2H2 on SA branch. The lightest tensor and the scalar become completely degenerate. In Pauli-Fierz theory, there is an accidental symmetry (Deser, Nepomechie, 1983)

so that helicity-0 is pure gauge, and so it decouples – ghost gone!

  • With brane present, this symmetry is spontaneously broken! The brane Goldstone mode becomes the Stuckelberg-like field, and as long as we demand normalizability the symmetry lifts to
  • We can’t gauge away both helicity-0 and the scalar; the one which remains is a ghost (see also Dubovsky, Koyama, Sibiryakov, 2005).

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

d effective action ii
(d)Effective action II
  • By focusing on the helicity zero mode, we can check that in the unitary gauge (see Deser, Waldron, 2001; CGKP, 2006) its Hamiltonian is

where , and therefore this mode is a ghost when m2 < 2H2; by mixing with the brane bending it does not decouple even when m2 = 2H2 .

  • In the action, the surviving combination is

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

shocking nonlocalities
Shocking nonlocalities
  • What does this ghost imply? In the Lagrangian in the bulk, there is no explicit negative norm states; the ghost comes about from brane boundary conditions - brane does not want to stay put.
  • Can it move and/or interact with the bulk and eliminate the ghost?
  • In shock wave analysis (NK, 2005) one finds a singularity in the gravitational wave field of a massless brane particle in the localized solution. It can be smoothed out with a non-integrable mode.
  • But: this mode GROWS far from the brane – it lives at asymptotic infinity, and is sensitive to the boundary conditions there.
  • Can we say anything about what goes on there?

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

trick shock waves
Trick: shock waves
  • Physically: because of the Lorentz contraction in the direction of motion, the field lines get pushed towards the instantaneous plane which is orthogonal to V.
  • The field lines of a massless charge are confined to this plane! (P.G Bergmann, 1940’s)
  • The same intuition works for the gravitational field. (Pirani; Penrose; Dray, ‘t Hooft; Ferrari, Pendenza, Veneziano; Sfetsos; NK; …)

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

4d aichelburg sexl shockwave
4D: Aichelburg-Sexl shockwave
  • In flat 4D environment, the exact gravitational field of a photon found by boosting linearized Schwarzschild metric (Aichelburg, Sexl, 1971).
  • Here u,v = (x ±t)/√2 are null coordinates of the photon.
  • For a particle with a momentum p , f is, up to a constant

where R = (y2 + z2)1/2 is the transverse distance and l0 an arbitrary integration parameter.

  • This will be our template…

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

dgp in a state of shock
DGP in a state of shock
  • The starting point for ‘shocked’ DGP is (NK, 2005 )
  • Term ~ f is the discontinuity in dv . Substitute this metric in the DGP field equations, where the new brane stress energy tensor includes photon momentum
  • Turn the crank!

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

chasing shocks
Chasing shocks
  • Best to work with two ‘antipodal’ photons, that zip along the past horizon (ie boundary of future light cone) in opposite directions. This avoids problems with spurious singularities on compact spaces. It is also the correct infinite boost limit of Schwarzschild-dS solution in 4D(Hotta, Tanaka, 1993) . The field equation is(NK, 2005)

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

shocking solutions i
Shocking solutions I
  • Thanks to the symmetries of the problem, we can solve the equations by mode expansion:

where the radial wavefunctions are

  • Here is normalizable: it describes gravitons localized on the brane. The mode is not normalizable. Its amplitude diverges at infinity. This mode lives far from the brane, and is sensitive to boundary conditions there.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

shocking solutions ii
Shocking solutions II
  • Defining , using the spherical harmonic addition theorem,

and changing normalization to we can finally write the solution down as:

  • The parameter controls the contribution from the nonintegrable modes. This is like choosing the vacuum of a QFT in curved space.
  • At short distances: the solution is well approximated by the Aichelburg-Sexl 4D shockwave - so the theory does look 4D!
  • But at large distances, one finds that low-l (large wavelength) are repulsive - they resemble ghosts, from 4D point of view.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

more on shocks
More on shocks…
  • For integer g there are poles similar to the pole encountered on the SA branch in the tensionless limit g=1 for the lightest brane mode.
  • This suggests that the general problem has more resonant channnels for energy losses into the bulk, once the door is opened to non-integrable modes.
  • Once a single non-integrable mode is allowed, one cannot stop all of them from coming in without breaking bulk general covariance.

In contrast, normal branch solutions are completely well behaved. One may be able to use them as a benchmark for looking for cosmological signatures of modified gravity. Once a small cosmological term is put in by hand,

      • it simulates w<-1(Sahni, Shtanov, 2002; Lue, Starkman, 2004)
      • it changes cosmological structure formation

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

codimension 2 dgp
Codimension-2 DGP
  • Higher codimension models are different. A lump of energy of codimension greater than unity gravitates. This lends to gravitational short distance singularities which must be regulated.
  • The DGP gravitational filter may still work, confining gravity to the defect. However the crossover from 4D to higher-D depends on the short distance cutoff. (Dvali, Gabadadze, Hou, Sefusatti, 2001)
  • There were concerns about ghosts, and/or nonlocal effects. (Dubovsky, Rubakov; Kolanovic, Porrati, Rombouts; Gabadadze, Veinshtein)
  • We find a very precise and simple description of the cod-2 case. The shocks show both the short distance singularities and see-saw of the cross-over scale by the UV cutoff. (NK, D. Kiley, in preparation)
  • We suspect: no ghosts (very preliminary - but we almost have the proof)! HOWEVER: There are light gravitationally coupled modes so that the theory is Brans-Dicke below the crossover. Can the BD field be stabilized?

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

unresolved codimension 2
Unresolved codimension-2
  • Look for the vacua; field equations:
  • Select 4D Minkowski vacuum x 2D cone:
  • This is IDENTICAL to the codimension-2 flat brane in conventional 6D gravity. (Sundrum, 1998)
  • Here b measures deficit angle: far from the core, g ~ B22 d2,
  • The tension (a.k.a. brane-localized vacuum energy) dumped in the bulk!
  • But to have static solution, one NEEDS B>0 ! And, one must have appearance of 4D to Hubble scales… How is rc ~H0-1generated from M6 ≥ TeV, and M4 ~ 1019 GeV ?

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

unresolved vacuum
Unresolved vacuum
  • A conical singularity in two infinite extra dimensions:

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

gravity on unresolved cone
Gravity on unresolved cone
  • Put a photon on the brane:
  • Field equation, using l = M4/M62: conical electrostatics!
  • “Solution”: note that D(k, ) ~ I(0) K(k)

where r is the longitudinal and  transverse distance. Both I and K are divergent at small argument; but on the brane (=0) divergences cancel, and for r < l /(1-b) one finds the leading behavior of 4D A-S shockwave!

  • However for any ‡ 0 the divergence in the denominator fixes f=0 - very singular! We must regulate this…

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

resolving the cone
Resolving the cone

An example of an ill-defined exterior boundary value problem in electrostatics! Resolution: replace the point charge with a ring source and solve by imposing regular boundary conditions in and out! This can be done by taking a 4-brane with a massless scalar and wrapping it on a circle of a fixed radius r0.

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

resolved vacuum
Resolved vacuum
  • Replace the 3-brane with a 4-brane and wrap it on a cylinder! To do this, put in the matter action an `axion’ , so the vacuum action is
  • Look for 4D Minkowski vacuum x 2D truncated cone, with q; with one tuning condition, . Then we can dimensionally reduce on the angle, viewing the matter as 4D with a KK tower of states moving around the cylinder, with a mass gap ~ (r Then we can think of the cylindrical brane as a thin 3-brane at large distances, with the effective 4D tension . The solution is precisely the conical `mesa’, with the metric
  • The only difference that b is twice as big as for a naïve thin brane, due to the `axion’ contribution:

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

shocking resolved vacuum
Shocking resolved vacuum
  • Now, put a photon (a massless ring) on the brane, a la Dray-’t Hooft
  • Field equation, using l = M4/M62 and R=+br0/(1-b), with r0 the 4-brane radius:
  • Solution!

everywhere regular! Explicitly taking the limits, at distances r < rc one finds the 4D Aichelburg-Sexl shock wave! At r > rc changes to 6D (of Ferrari, Pendenza,Veneziano, 1988).

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

see saw
See-Saw
  • Thus this theory simulates 4D gravity at least in the helicity-2 sector, at distances shorter than the cross-over scale.
  • The cross-over scale rc is not the naïve ratio of M4 and M6, but it depends on the short ditsnace regularization scale r0 . It is exactly the see-saw scale of DGHS:
  • But now it is easy to see why. Recall that we really have brane graviton term on a 4-brane, with the brane Planck scale M5. But then brane is wrapped on a cylinder  truncation of the action to only the zero modes yields effective graviton term on a 3-brane, with the normalisation given by
  • Substituting in the cross-over scale formula, we find exactly the codimension-1 result, but for 5D :

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis

summary
Summary
  • The keystone: gravitational filter - hides the extra dimension. But: longitudinal scalar is tricky!
  • On SA brane, the localized mode is a perturbative ghost. Cosmology with it running loose is unreliable.
  • What does the ghost do?
    • Can it catalyze transition from SA to normal branch?
    • Can it `condense’?
    • What do strong couplings do? At short scales? At long scales?…
  • Cod-2: the simple wrapped 4-brane resolution looks ghost-free. But: the tuning of the axion generates a “multiverse” of vacua. Can those contain long deep “gulches” insensitive to the SM contributions?
  • More work: we may reveal interesting new realms of gravity!

Nemanja Kaloper, UC Davis