On Efforts to Decouple Early Universe Cosmology and Quantum Gravity Phenomenology

IF 1.2 3区物理与天体物理 Q3 PHYSICS, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Foundations of Physics Pub Date : 2023-08-14 DOI:10.1007/s10701-023-00720-y

Mike D. Schneider

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Big Bang singularity in standard model cosmology suggests a program of study in ‘early universe’ quantum gravity phenomenology. Inflation is usually thought to undermine this program’s prospects by means of a dynamical diluting argument, but such a view has recently been disputed within inflationary cosmology, in the form of a ‘trans-Planckian censorship’ conjecture. Meanwhile, trans-Planckian censorship has been used outside of inflationary cosmology to motivate alternative early universe scenarios that are tightly linked to ongoing theorizing in quantum gravity. Against the resulting trend toward early universe quantum gravity phenomenology within and without inflation, Ijjas and Steindhardt suggest a further alternative: a ‘generalized cosmic censorship’ principle. I contrast the generalized cosmic censorship principle with the logic of its namesake, the cosmic censorship conjectures. I also remark on foundational concerns in the effective field theory approach to cosmology beyond the standard model, which would be based on that principle.

查看原文本刊更多论文

论早期宇宙宇宙学与量子引力现象学的解耦

标准模型宇宙学中的大爆炸奇点提出了一个研究“早期宇宙”量子引力现象学的计划。暴胀通常被认为通过动态稀释论证破坏了该计划的前景，但这种观点最近在暴胀宇宙学中以“跨普朗克审查”猜想的形式受到了争议。与此同时，在暴胀宇宙学之外，跨普朗克审查已经被用来激发与正在进行的量子引力理论紧密相关的其他早期宇宙场景。Ijjas和Steindhardt提出了一个进一步的替代方案:“广义宇宙审查”原则，以反对在暴胀和不暴胀的情况下早期宇宙量子引力现象学的趋势。我将广义的宇宙审查原则与其同名的逻辑——宇宙审查猜想——进行了对比。我还评论了超越标准模型的有效场论宇宙学方法的基本问题，这将基于该原则。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Foundations of Physics 物理-物理：综合

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

6.70%

发文量

104

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The conceptual foundations of physics have been under constant revision from the outset, and remain so today. Discussion of foundational issues has always been a major source of progress in science, on a par with empirical knowledge and mathematics. Examples include the debates on the nature of space and time involving Newton and later Einstein; on the nature of heat and of energy; on irreversibility and probability due to Boltzmann; on the nature of matter and observation measurement during the early days of quantum theory; on the meaning of renormalisation, and many others. Today, insightful reflection on the conceptual structure utilised in our efforts to understand the physical world is of particular value, given the serious unsolved problems that are likely to demand, once again, modifications of the grammar of our scientific description of the physical world. The quantum properties of gravity, the nature of measurement in quantum mechanics, the primary source of irreversibility, the role of information in physics – all these are examples of questions about which science is still confused and whose solution may well demand more than skilled mathematics and new experiments. Foundations of Physics is a privileged forum for discussing such foundational issues, open to physicists, cosmologists, philosophers and mathematicians. It is devoted to the conceptual bases of the fundamental theories of physics and cosmology, to their logical, methodological, and philosophical premises. The journal welcomes papers on issues such as the foundations of special and general relativity, quantum theory, classical and quantum field theory, quantum gravity, unified theories, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, cosmology, and similar.