Does the Einstein -Hilbert Lagrangian has a potential term?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian, specifically whether it includes a potential term that could facilitate quantum mechanics applications. Participants explore the implications of the Lagrangian in the context of gravitational interactions and field theories.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian has a potential term for quantum mechanics applications.
  • Another participant asserts that the Lagrangian appears purely kinetic initially, but a perturbative expansion suggests an infinite series related to the graviton coupling constant, which could be interpreted as potential terms.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that while quantum mechanics can be applied, the theory is not renormalizable, complicating its use.
  • One participant challenges the relevance of the stress tensor, focusing instead on the series expansion of the Lagrangian around a flat spacetime metric, proposing that higher-order terms can be viewed as self-interaction terms akin to potential energy in scalar field theory.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that the Lagrangian could represent a "free field" scenario without a generating source for the gravitational field, suggesting that additional fields could be incorporated into the Lagrangian.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian, particularly regarding the presence of potential terms and the implications for quantum mechanics. No consensus is reached on these points.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various mathematical expansions and theoretical constructs, indicating a reliance on specific assumptions about the nature of gravitational fields and interactions. The discussion highlights the complexities of integrating quantum mechanics with general relativity.

Karlisbad
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
If you can derive the Eisntein equations from:

[tex]L=\int_{V} d^{4}x\sqrt (-g)R[/tex] but does L has a potential term so we can do Qm with it?..:confused: :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nope, the lagrangian is purely kinetic at first sight. However, perturbative expansion reveals an infinite series in the (self)coupling constant for the graviton, [itex]\kappa[/itex]. So you can think of the Pauli-Fierz lagrangian as the purely kinetic term and the rest of the lagrangian (depending on powers of [itex]\kappa[/itex] from 1 to infinity) as the potential one.

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
Yes you can to QM with it, Feyman derived the rules for the expansion. The problem is that it is not renormalisable

So you can think of the Pauli-Fierz lagrangian as the purely kinetic term and the rest of the lagrangian as the potential one.

This does not make sense. The 00 component of the stress tensor will give the energy density, integrted to give the energy. The expansion will give corrections to the interactions, however as said, these are not renormalisable. The first thing one is required to do is construct an interacting theory from gauge symmetry arguments, as these are renormalisable and at present is the only theoretically consistent way of non-empirically including interactions. This has not been done for gravitation.
 
Who said anything about the stress tensor of the field? I was merely talking about a series expansion of the [itex]\sqrt{|g|} \ R[/itex] aroud a flat spacetime metric, the usual Minkowski metric.

The cubic term, the quartic term, etc. can all be viewed as self-interaction terms, hence can be considered potential energy, just like the [itex]\frac{\lambda}{4!}\varphi^{4}[/itex] can be considered that way for the scalar field theory.

Daniel.
 
Hi, I am not sure, but your Lagrangian would give "free field", where there is no generating source for the gravitational field (you would have "R-gR/2=0") - like for gravitation waves. Actually, any field can be added as "second" term to you Lagrangian (even QM Lagrangian), which would end up on right side of Einstein equations as the "field source".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K