Undergrad Loop Quantum Cosmology: Explained in Layman's Terms

Click For Summary
Martin Bojowald, a founder of Loop Quantum Cosmology (LQC), has expressed critical views regarding the theory, particularly concerning the breakdown of mathematical models at the "bounce" due to inhomogeneities in the universe. His criticism highlights that small overdense regions collapse during the universe's contraction, leading to a lack of homogeneity that complicates the bounce calculations. Additionally, he raises concerns about infrared renormalization, suggesting that the mathematics falters at varying energy scales, and covariance issues, indicating that the solutions may not align with the symmetries of General Relativity. There is ongoing uncertainty about how LQC can reconcile with General Relativity, raising questions about its viability as a theory of gravity. Overall, these challenges underscore the complexities in developing a coherent framework for quantum gravity.
windy miller
Messages
306
Reaction score
28
I have heard that one of the of the founders of LQC, Martin Bojowald is now rather critical of it. And sample of his criticism can be found here:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.00238.pdf
I would be really grateful if someone could explain this in more laymen language . Any thoughts on the issues also welcome.
 
Space news on Phys.org
It sounds like what he's saying here is that inhomogeneities make the math break down at the "bounce" of loop quantum cosmology. Basically, before the bounce, when the universe is contracting, any small overdense regions will collapse, making the universe less and less homogeneous as the collapse continues. This makes the math at the "bounce" break down, requiring some really careful fine-tuning of the parameters to make the universe smooth at the bounce (as is required).
 
  • Like
Likes windy miller
Thanks KImbyd, much appreciated. He seems to refer to issues with infrared renormalisation and covariance. Am I right to interpret the former as saying that as one gets to different energy scales the maths breaks down and the latter as implying the solutions don't respect the symmetries of GR?
 
windy miller said:
Thanks KImbyd, much appreciated. He seems to refer to issues with infrared renormalisation and covariance. Am I right to interpret the former as saying that as one gets to different energy scales the maths breaks down and the latter as implying the solutions don't respect the symmetries of GR?
My understanding is that a continuing problem with loop quantum gravity is that they don't know how to make it match General Relativity in the right limits. So there's uncertainty over whether or not it's even a viable theory of gravity, let alone quantum gravity.
 
I always thought it was odd that we know dark energy expands our universe, and that we know it has been increasing over time, yet no one ever expressed a "true" size of the universe (not "observable" universe, the ENTIRE universe) by just reversing the process of expansion based on our understanding of its rate through history, to the point where everything would've been in an extremely small region. The more I've looked into it recently, I've come to find that it is due to that "inflation"...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K