Understanding Randall Sundrum Model: Weakness of Gravity

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter robousy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Model
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Randall-Sundrum model, specifically focusing on the metric proposed to address the hierarchy problem, which relates to the perceived weakness of gravity. Participants explore the implications of the model, its components, and the physical reasoning behind the effects of the metric on gravitational strength.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the metric and expresses confusion about how it relates to the weakness of gravity, referencing the overlap of the graviton wavefunction in the fifth dimension.
  • Another participant requests more information about the model, suggesting that the metric alone does not sufficiently indicate a solution to the hierarchy problem.
  • A participant explains that in the Randall-Sundrum theory, the graviton wave function arises from closed string excitations, while other bosons come from open strings fixed on branes, leading to a weaker gravitational force due to the graviton's partial presence in the higher dimension.
  • One participant questions their understanding of the model, specifically whether their mental picture of the branes and the extra dimension is correct, and discusses the significance of the warp factor in relation to the metric.
  • Another participant reiterates the need for additional context or references to fully engage with the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and seek clarification on the model, indicating that there is no consensus on the implications of the metric or the physical reasoning behind the weakness of gravity.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of additional information and references to fully grasp the model's implications, highlighting potential limitations in the current discussion.

robousy
Messages
332
Reaction score
1
Hi I wanted to ask about the following metric:


[tex]ds^2=e^{-2 kr_c \: \phi} \: \eta_{\mu \nu} dx^\mu dx^\nu + r_c^2 d\phi^2<br /> [/tex]


It is a proposed solution to the hierachy problem i.e the weakness of gravity.

when [tex]\phi =0[/tex] the exponential factor goes to 1 and that corresponds to our physical brane, and when it goes to [tex]\phi = \pi[/tex] then we have the exponential supression of the spacetime separation and that corresponds to the metric of the hidden brane.

I would like to understand why this has the effect of making gravity weaker.

I have read the paper but don't really understand the physical reasoning.

The paper says 'the weakness of gravity arises because of the small overlap of the graviton wavefunction in the 5th dimension with our brane.'

I don't really get this and would love to hear from someone who understands this.

Looking forward to hearing from someone!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think we need more information about the model to say anything sensible. What is the reference for this? Giving that metric by itself doesn't indicate a solution to the hierarchy problem in any meaningful way without more information.
 
In the Randall-Sundrum theory the graviton wave function is produced from rxcitations of a closed string; this is standard string theory. The other bosons are produced from some construction of open strings with their endpoints fixed on branes. Again this is a standard approach. Randall-Sundrum assumes the the branes are, or are within, our four dimensional universe, which is the boundary of a five dimensional brane. Thus the graviton's string can move into the fifth dimension, while the other bosons' strings cannot. Quantally, this means the graviton wave function is at least partially in the higher space, which boils down to less probability of finding the boson in our universe, which translates into a weaker force.
 
David said:
I think we need more information about the model to say anything sensible. What is the reference for this? Giving that metric by itself doesn't indicate a solution to the hierarchy problem in any meaningful way without more information.


Yes, sorry I should have provided the paper reference:

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9905221
 
selfAdjoint said:
In the Randall-Sundrum theory the graviton wave function is produced from rxcitations of a closed string; this is standard string theory. The other bosons are produced from some construction of open strings with their endpoints fixed on branes. Again this is a standard approach. Randall-Sundrum assumes the the branes are, or are within, our four dimensional universe, which is the boundary of a five dimensional brane. Thus the graviton's string can move into the fifth dimension, while the other bosons' strings cannot. Quantally, this means the graviton wave function is at least partially in the higher space, which boils down to less probability of finding the boson in our universe, which translates into a weaker force.


Thanks for your response.

I think my mental picture may be incorrect here.

I was picturing two x (3d+1) branes separated by the extra (compact) dimension in which only gravity can propagate. Is this the right mental picture?

Also, I find the warp factor quite interesting. The extra dimension takes the form [tex]S_1 \times Z_2[/tex].

Now, this means the warp factor goes to 1 when [tex]\phi[/tex] is zero which is supposed to correspond to the hidden brane and on the 'other side' of the 5th dimension [tex]\phi[/tex] goes to [tex]\pi[/tex] and the warp factor becomes (very) significant as the [tex]kr_c[/tex] is said to be about 50 so we get something on the order of [tex]e^{-150}[/tex] and this corresponds to 'our' universe.

Now, the metric is the separation between 2 points - so the warp factor physically translates to space being 'smaller' or 'crunched up' in one universe compared to the other (I think) and I wander if this has any bearing on the picture?

Maybe you help me obtain some insight here?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
anyone else maybe?

:)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
9K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
18K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K