- #1

- 14,115

- 6,614

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc?papernum=0608135

more appealing than the usual LQG approach.

What the experts think?

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter Demystifier
- Start date

In summary: I find the covariant version of loop quantum gravitymore appealing than the usual LQG approach.The claims in the abstract seem very persuasive. Livine isn't usually off base, either.What I've heard says it's promising but more incomplete from a technical PoV. IIRC there's no well defined Hilbertspace or Loop transform or anything like the usual technical apparatus. You can't do LOST style quantization with it.Most people these days work on Spinfoams anyways, for precisely the reasons that Lorentzian LQG would be more attractive (as Livine says this is closely related to BC Spinfoams...)f-h, have you heard any reaction

- #1

- 14,115

- 6,614

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc?papernum=0608135

more appealing than the usual LQG approach.

What the experts think?

Physics news on Phys.org

- #2

Staff Emeritus

Gold Member

Dearly Missed

- 6,894

- 11

- #3

- 272

- 0

Most people these days work on Spinfoams anyways, for precisely the reasons that Lorentzian LQG would be more attractive (as Livine says this is closely related to BC Spinfoams...)

- #4

Science Advisor

Gold Member

Dearly Missed

- 24,775

- 792

- #5

Staff Emeritus

Gold Member

Dearly Missed

- 6,894

- 11

f-h said:

Most people these days work on Spinfoams anyways, for precisely the reasons that Lorentzian LQG would be more attractive (as Livine says this is closely related to BC Spinfoams...)

Just reading the first part of the paper, it seems that covariant LQG is the familiar case of trading a theory that is "bad" in some theoretical sense bu sweet to calculate in, with one that is "purer" but tough to get numbers in. Cue the theme music for AQFT.

Working with spin foams as if LQG didn't exists doesn't eliminate the Immirzi problem, and the fact that CLQG has spin foams as its quantum states should suggest some motivations for pursuing it. But note that as Livine states, after several years of work it is still limited to kinematic physics, because nobody can figure out how to make dynamics work with the noncommutative inner product.

- #6

Science Advisor

Gold Member

Dearly Missed

- 24,775

- 792

Major new CLQG paper

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0612071

**Plebanski Theory and Covariant Canonical Formulation**

Sergei Alexandrov, Eric Buffenoir, Philippe Roche

18 pages

"We establish an equivalence between the Hamiltonian formulation of the Plebanski action for general relativity and the covariant canonical formulation of the Hilbert-Palatini action. This is done by comparing the symplectic structures of the two theories through the computation of Dirac brackets. We also construct a shifted connection with simplified Dirac brackets, playing an important role in the covariant loop quantization program, in the Plebanski framework. Implications for spin foam models are also discussed."

Alexandrov got his PhD in Paris around 2003 and went to Utrecht, now he seems to have moved to Montpellier.

Alexandrov has been the main pusher for CLQG. He has collaborated some with Etera Livine and, IIRC, Freidel.

Roche was the co-organizer with Carlo Rovelli of the Loops '04 conference at Marseille.

Roche and Buffenoir have both been at Montpellier for a long time and have collaborated a lot, IIRC. They have impressed me as smart and especially sharp mathematically. Karim Noui was a young collaborator with them for a while and then went to Penn State. Having Alexandrov collaborate with Roche and Buffenoir on CLQG seems to me to put it on the map in a new way----it establishes the probable importance of CLQG.

(Which the people on this PF thread seemed to have suspected already )

============================

BTW Kirill Krasnov recently posted a paper employing the Plebanski formulation. Here is something about it

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1177248&postcount=544

there is a video in the Perimeter archive PIRSA #06110041

and there is a preprint

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0611182

**Renormalizable Non-Metric Quantum Gravity?**

Here is the abstract. I think it is the same abstract for the video seminar talk and for the preprint:

"We argue that four-dimensional quantum gravity may be essentially**renormalizable** provided one

relaxes the assumption of metricity of the theory. We work with Plebanski formulation of general

relativity in which the metric (tetrad), the connection as well as the curvature are all independent

variables and the usual relations among these quantities are only on-shell. One of the Euler-Lagrange

equations of this theory guarantees its metricity. We show that quantum corrections generate a

counterterm that destroys this metricity property, and that there are no other counterterms, at

least at the one-loop level. There is a new coupling constant that controls the non-metric character

of the theory. Its beta-function can be computed and is negative, which shows that the non-metricity

becomes important in the infra red. The new IR-relevant term in the action is akin to a curvature

dependent cosmological 'constant' and may provide a mechanism for naturally small 'dark energy'."

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0612071

Sergei Alexandrov, Eric Buffenoir, Philippe Roche

18 pages

"We establish an equivalence between the Hamiltonian formulation of the Plebanski action for general relativity and the covariant canonical formulation of the Hilbert-Palatini action. This is done by comparing the symplectic structures of the two theories through the computation of Dirac brackets. We also construct a shifted connection with simplified Dirac brackets, playing an important role in the covariant loop quantization program, in the Plebanski framework. Implications for spin foam models are also discussed."

Alexandrov got his PhD in Paris around 2003 and went to Utrecht, now he seems to have moved to Montpellier.

Alexandrov has been the main pusher for CLQG. He has collaborated some with Etera Livine and, IIRC, Freidel.

Roche was the co-organizer with Carlo Rovelli of the Loops '04 conference at Marseille.

Roche and Buffenoir have both been at Montpellier for a long time and have collaborated a lot, IIRC. They have impressed me as smart and especially sharp mathematically. Karim Noui was a young collaborator with them for a while and then went to Penn State. Having Alexandrov collaborate with Roche and Buffenoir on CLQG seems to me to put it on the map in a new way----it establishes the probable importance of CLQG.

(Which the people on this PF thread seemed to have suspected already )

============================

BTW Kirill Krasnov recently posted a paper employing the Plebanski formulation. Here is something about it

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1177248&postcount=544

there is a video in the Perimeter archive PIRSA #06110041

and there is a preprint

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0611182

Here is the abstract. I think it is the same abstract for the video seminar talk and for the preprint:

"We argue that four-dimensional quantum gravity may be essentially

relaxes the assumption of metricity of the theory. We work with Plebanski formulation of general

relativity in which the metric (tetrad), the connection as well as the curvature are all independent

variables and the usual relations among these quantities are only on-shell. One of the Euler-Lagrange

equations of this theory guarantees its metricity. We show that quantum corrections generate a

counterterm that destroys this metricity property, and that there are no other counterterms, at

least at the one-loop level. There is a new coupling constant that controls the non-metric character

of the theory. Its beta-function can be computed and is negative, which shows that the non-metricity

becomes important in the infra red. The new IR-relevant term in the action is akin to a curvature

dependent cosmological 'constant' and may provide a mechanism for naturally small 'dark energy'."

Last edited:

Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity is a quantum theory of gravity that aims to unify the principles of general relativity and quantum mechanics. It proposes that space and time are quantized at the smallest scale, and that the gravitational force is a result of the interactions between these quantized units.

Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity differs from other theories of quantum gravity, such as string theory, in its approach to quantizing space and time. It also puts a strong emphasis on the concept of loops, which represent the paths that particles take through space.

One of the main challenges in developing Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity is the issue of background independence. Unlike other theories, it does not rely on a fixed background structure, such as a flat space-time, which makes it difficult to apply traditional methods of quantization.

Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity has the potential to provide a better understanding of the behavior of matter at the smallest scales and the nature of black holes. It could also lead to a more complete and unified theory of physics that can explain the behavior of the universe at both the macro and micro levels.

The theory is still in its early stages of development, and there is ongoing research and debate among experts in the field. Some promising results have been obtained, but more work is needed to fully understand the implications and predictions of the theory.

Share:

- Replies
- 13

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 317

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 317

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 40

- Views
- 4K

- Replies
- 24

- Views
- 3K