Lisa Randall's relaxation principle

  • Thread starter straycat
  • Start date
185
0
Hello all,

I recently came across Karch and Randall's 2005 paper ``Relaxing to three dimensions''
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0506053 that uses brane theory to propose an explanation for why we see 3+1 dimensions, assuming we begin with the 10 of string theory. From the abstract:

``We show that under conventional (but higher-dimensional) FRW evolution, a universe filled with equal NUMBERS of branes and antibranes will naturally come to be dominated by 3-branes and 7-branes.'' (caps mine)

The basic idea is the relaxation principle, which states:

``that the branes with the biggest filling fraction in the end-point of the universe's cosmological evolution are the most likely branes to be relevant to the state in which we live''

My question is this: what is the definition of ``filling fraction'', and what does ``most likely'' mean? It seems to me that she is saying that 3-branes are simply more numerous than other branes, and defining the likelihood of p-branes as being proportional to the number of p-branes (well, I suppose measure might be more appropriate than number). This definition of `likeliness' of branes makes no reference to, say, the wavefunction of a brane, so she is using a classical (not quantum) concept of probability.

OTOH, I might be completely missing something. Comments?
 

Want to reply to this thread?

"Lisa Randall's relaxation principle" You must log in or register to reply here.

Related Threads for: Lisa Randall's relaxation principle

  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
745
  • Posted
Replies
16
Views
7K
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
658
  • Posted
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
15K
Replies
4
Views
2K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top