Graduate Vacuum Transitions and Lorentz Symmetry Breaking

Click For Summary
Bumblebee models suggest that Lorentz invariance can be violated due to local vector or tensor fields acquiring nonzero vacuum expectation values. There is uncertainty about whether the universe exists in a true vacuum state or a false/metastable vacuum that could decay. Theoretical scenarios propose that energetic events could alter the vacuum state, potentially leading to changes in particle physics and fundamental forces. Discussions also touch on the implications of vacuum phase transitions for Lorentz-symmetry violating theories, such as those proposed by Holger Nielsen. The conversation raises questions about the testability of these theories and the possibility of infinite false vacuums existing alongside a true vacuum.
Suekdccia
Messages
352
Reaction score
30
TL;DR
Vacuum Transitions and Lorentz Symmetry Breaking
There are several "bumblebee" models [1], [2] where Lorentz invariance is violated usually resulting from a local vector or tensor field acquiring a nonzero vacuum expectation value

We do not know whether we are in the true vacuum state or in a "false"/metastable vacuum state that could decay. Even if we were in a true vacuum state, there could be (theoretically speaking) highly energetic events in the universe that would "inject" energy to the vacuum, changing its ground state into an excited/unstable/false vacuum state (this was confirmed by Gian Francesco Giudice, a particle physicist from CERN working in vacuum decay models, who told me this was possible in an email). Then this "new" metastable vacuum could decay into a lower vacuum state or even return to the initial true vacuum state. But then, even if we found that the Standard Model was complete (or that at least it was in a true vacuum state), would these vacuum phase transitions (from the true vacuum into a false one and then decaying) change the particle physics we know (changing the fundamental forces, fields and particles or even replacing them with totally different ones)?

And if that would be possible, then, since physics could change depending on the energy and the characteristics of the vacuum, could one of these vacuum phase transitions result in a specific configuration of particles, forces, fields, symmetries and groups that would be compatible with a vacuum from a Lorentz-symmetry violating theory that are cited in [2] (e.g Holger Nielsen's random dynamics: so in that vacuum one would find no fundamental symmetries in the smallest scales, as Nielsen proposes)?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumblebee_models
[2]: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0035-001X2010000600006
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First you need to observe this Lorentz symmetry breaking in an experiment.
How do those theorists propose to observe this symmetry breaking?
 
  • Like
Likes physika
Could there be an infinite number of false vacuums and no true vacuum?

Just an idea.
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Just an idea.
Is it even an idea?

What does it mean? How would you test such a thing - even in principle?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Is it even an idea?

What does it mean? How would you test such a thing - even in principle?
Is string theory testable?
:oldbiggrin:
 
Actually, yes. String theory says the universe is supersymmetric. Thus far, it appears not to be supported by data.

Now, let me contradict myself. "String theory" is not a physical theory, but a mathematical toolkit used to construct physical theories. These theories can be supported or not, nut the toolkit is as valid as its mathematics.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Actually, yes. String theory says the universe is supersymmetric. Thus far, it appears not to be supported by data.

Now, let me contradict myself. "String theory" is not a physical theory, but a mathematical toolkit used to construct physical theories. These theories can be supported or not, nut the toolkit is as valid as its mathematics.
As far as I know, not all string theories are supersymmetric.
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Could there be an infinite number of false vacuums and no true vacuum?

Just an idea.
So if there were infinitely many false vacua, we would find in at least one of these vacua, a vacuum described by bumblebee models (like those cited in the article [2], like Holger Nielsen's model)?
 
Suekdccia said:
So if there were infinitely many false vacua, we would find in at least one of these vacua, a vacuum described by bumblebee models (like those cited in the article [2], like Holger Nielsen's model)?
I don't know, I haven't read his paper. And I am not so sure I have the right knowledge to understand it right now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K