Suggestion to discuss arXiv 0804.0252

  • Thread starter Thread starter marcus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Arxiv Suggestion
marcus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
24,753
Reaction score
794
http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.0252

I would appreciate hearing some comment on this one. It joins up CDT (causal dynamical triangulations, Renate Loll's approach) with noncritical string (field) theory.

"A novel continuum theory of two-dimensional quantum gravity, based on a version of Causal Dynamical Triangulations which incorporates topology change, has recently been formulated as a genuine string field theory in zero-dimensional target space (arXiv:0802.0719). Here we show that the Dyson-Schwinger equations of this string field theory are reproduced by a cubic matrix model. This matrix model also appears in the so-called Dijkgraaf-Vafa correspondence if the superpotential there is required to be renormalizable. In the spirit of this model, as well as the original large-N expansion by 't Hooft, we need no special double-scaling limit involving a fine tuning of coupling constants to obtain the continuum quantum-gravitational theory. Our result also implies a matrix model representation of the original, strictly causal quantum gravity model."

Points to notice are that noncritical string does not require extra dimensions, and that the Ambjorn-Loll collaboration has considerable experience with getting results in 2 dimensions (one spatial) and then extending to 4 dimensions using numerical techniques.

Their December paper has already been published in PRL and the February paper they refer to here has been accepted for publication in JHEP. Currently on a roll. Possibly an important bridge.
 
Last edited:
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia). My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like...

Similar threads

Back
Top