Weak gravity conjecture and strings vs loops

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the weak gravity conjecture and its implications for string theory and loop quantum gravity. Participants explore the nature of gravity in different theoretical frameworks, particularly in relation to the strength of gravity compared to other fundamental forces, and the potential existence of stable micro black holes.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the weak gravity conjecture posits that gravity must always be the weakest force in any universe, which could challenge loop quantum gravity as proposed by Nima Arkani-Hamed.
  • Others argue that string theory suggests gravity can be the same strength as other forces in certain scenarios, particularly in braneworld models, but is generally weaker due to its closed string nature.
  • A participant discusses the implications of the weak gravity conjecture in the context of micro black holes and their relationship to elementary particles, suggesting that stable micro black holes should not exist if the conjecture holds true.
  • There is a mention of the Randall-Sundrum model, which presents a scenario where gravity can be stronger on one brane than another due to their positions in a warped fifth dimension.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the compatibility of loop quantum gravity with the weak gravity conjecture, citing the need for a model that describes interactions involving gravitons and other particles.
  • One participant raises questions about the implications for string theory if stable micro black holes were to exist and be identified as dark matter.
  • Another participant challenges the understanding of the weak gravity conjecture, suggesting that some claims made in the discussion are based on misinterpretations of technical concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the weak gravity conjecture for loop quantum gravity and string theory. There is no consensus on whether string theory can accommodate both the conjecture and scenarios where gravity is as strong as other forces.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions involve complex technical concepts related to coupling constants and renormalization flow, which may not be fully understood by all participants. The interplay between black hole thermodynamics and quantum gravity remains a contentious topic.

kodama
Messages
1,086
Reaction score
144
“If the weak gravity conjecture is right, loop quantum gravity is definitely wrong,” said Nima Arkani-Hamed, a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study who co-discovered the weak gravity conjecture.

source https://www.quantamagazine.org/where-gravity-is-weak-and-naked-singularities-are-verboten-20170620/

which also goes into detail weak gravity conjecture, which states that gravity must always be the weakest force in any universe.

I was of the understanding in certain braneworld scenarios, string theory "predicts" that gravity is the same strength as the other forces, including electromagnetism and strong force, but gravity - gravitons, are closed loops and its strength can be "diluted" by traveling to other higher dimensional branes, whereas electromagnetism and strong force consists of open ended strings suck on our 3-brane

so string theory "predicts" gravity is the same strength as the other forces, but is diluted as it is the only force consisting of closed strings, but string theory also "predicts" weak gravity conjecture that gravity must always be weaker than the other forces.

and this somehow disproves loop quantum gravity

can anyone elaborate?

why in string theory can't there be a universe whereby gravity and the other forces have the same strength, and other where gravity is the stronger force, and any combination in between

why does Nima Arkani-Hamed say weak gravity conjecture if true disproves loop quantum gravity when string theory predicts that in some universes gravity is the same strength as the other forces, but in others, it is weaker?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe the weak gravity conjecture comes from thinking about elementary particles and micro black holes. For example, there has been some discussion of whether an electron could be a micro black hole. However, the repulsion due to its charge is always stronger than the attraction due to its mass, so there is no distance at which gravitational attraction overpowers electromagnetic repulsion, no gravitational "point of no return", no event horizon, and so it is not a black hole.

This is an example of the sense in which "gravity is the weakest force" - of the fundamental forces exerted by the electron, the electromagnetic force is stronger than the gravitational force. One meaning of the weak gravity conjecture, is that this is true for all elementary entities (including soliton-like objects like monopoles). The motivating idea is that there should be no stable micro black holes - micro black holes should always be able to decay further, into objects that aren't black holes.

This comes from thinking about the interplay between black hole entropy and the possible gauge field charges of a black hole - if there could be stable charged micro black holes, they would come in too many possible masses to be consistent with the black hole entropy formula. I haven't gone through the reasoning myself, but I can see that this is what it's all about.

So: it's thought that any theory which successfully combines general relativity and quantum field theory, will contain black holes obeying the space-time thermodynamics figured out by Bekenstein and Hawking, because they deduced it through very general arguments, rather than by assuming a specific theory of everything. And it's now also thought that quantum gravity cannot coexist with an extremely weak gauge interaction, because it would imply too many black hole microstates to be consistent with the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy formula.

String theory seems to be consistent with the entropy formula, and it also seems to be consistent with the weak gravity conjecture. Arkani-Hamed is saying that loop quantum gravity is not consistent with the weak gravity conjecture, because the electromagnetic coupling can be made as weak as you want. Smolin says, maybe it can't. I will care about that debate, when loop quantum gravity produces a model that can actually describe interactions of gravitons, photons, and charged matter.

You mention the Randall-Sundrum model, as a string theory model in which gravity is strong. Randall-Sundrum has two braneworlds, and gravity is stronger on one than on the other, because of their relative positions in a warped fifth dimension. I think the idea must be that gravity on the four-dimensional brane is weakened by a leakage of graviton wavefunction into the fifth dimension, and that there is a greater fifth-dimensional volume around the brane with weak gravity.

In any case, the paper which introduced the weak gravity conjecture addresses something like this scenario when it discusses a "Planck brane" (top of page 8). Then some other branes are introduced, and a version of the weak gravity inequality (equation 13) is deduced, that must apply to massive W-boson-like strings that are attached to these probe branes. They argue that in this example, what matters is the size of the five remaining dimensions, and that they cannot find a way to reduce their volume, while simultaneously maintaining the warp radius, that would violate the conjecture.

The aspect of the weak gravity conjecture that is of most interest to me, is mentioned in the abstract, and again on page 3: "extrapolating the Standard Model to high energies, there must be new scale Λ beneath the Planck scale with Λ ∼√αGUT/GN ∼1017 GeV"... since I am interested in scenarios where the standard model is valid to high energies, and the Higgs boson mass is determined by some sort of critical boundary condition, at the energy scale where the standard model as effective theory, must give way to a new theory that includes gravity.

This deduction of a new scale beneath the Planck scale might be problematic for asymptotic safety, but then asymptotic safety is already believed to be inconsistent with the black hole thermodynamics that motivate the weak gravity conjecture in the first place. However, if some other mechanism to produce a critical Higgs can be found, then it shouldn't matter if it comes into play just one or two orders of magnitude away from the Planck scale; which could also be the scale where larger symmetries like supersymmetry or grand unification are broken.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kodama and Spinnor
string theory seems to be consistent with BOTH weak gravity conjecture AND gravity is same strength, or even stronger, than the other forces, but its strength is spread out over multiple dimensions

what would be the implications to string theory if there are stable micro black holes, and they are in fact, dark matter
 
kodama said:
string theory seems to be consistent with BOTH weak gravity conjecture AND gravity is same strength, or even stronger, than the other forces, but its strength is spread out over multiple dimensions

what would be the implications to string theory if there are stable micro black holes, and they are in fact, dark matter

As usual your premise is wildly incorrect, so it makes everything difficult to answer. You are badly mixing up very different technical concepts that don't have any obvious connections and likely have come because you have misinterpreted some abstract of a paper that you didn't read properly. Orange + Apple doesn't tell you anything about lemon...

The weak gravity conjecture is very interesting and is about a constraint of nature that is invisible to the naive effective field theorist, it involves statements about the maximal size of coupling constants undergoing renormalization flow. If those words don't mean anything to you, please consider going back and learning the basics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K