Other interesting things in ArXiv (11 Jun 2009)
ASTRO, COND-MAT, HEP-TH/PH — By Dmitry Podolsky on June 12, 2009 at 10:47 am
Save This Post as PDF
Basically, there were so many interesting and useful papers (or at least they were useful for me) – lecture notes, reviews – that it will give me hard time posting reviews of all of them here – since I am lazy, I’ll just try to list some of them.
Umut Gursoy et al. “Thermal Transport and Drag Force in Improved Holographic QCD“. Umut with collaborators have shown that bulk viscosity of strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma does not exceed shear viscosity, although grows in the vicinity of the phase transition. Also, if you want to know what exactly people mean by “improved holographic QCD”, a good minireview of it is contained in the beginning of the paper.
Gavin Salam, “Towards Jetography” – everything you need to know about jets in QCD.
Charlotte Gils et al., “Topology driven quantum phase transitions in time-reversal invariant anyonic quantum liquids“. A new type of phase transition in anyonic quantum liquids is discovered – it is driven by quantum fluctuations of topology. I think it is amazingly cool result and the paper definitely deserves to be called the best paper on cond-mat on the day of publication.
C. Germani et al., “Relativistic Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point“. I was not able to go through the paper thoroughly yet, but it seems that they were able to relate Horava gravity to relativistic vector-tensor theory in some particular gauge – in other words, one can derive a kind of full Einstein-Hilbert action from the non-relativistic Horava gravity. If this is indeed so (I still have my doubts), then result is definitely a strong one. Did anybody check out this paper? If yes, what’s your opinion?
2 Comments
Regarding C. Germani et al., ?Relativistic Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point?, well, *any* field theory can be made generally covariant if you are willing to go to enough trouble: even Newtonian gravity has a generally covariant description, as you can see in an early chapter of the book by Misner Thorne and Wheeler. And of course Special Relativity is generally covariant already: consider a spacetime with vanishing curvature tensor, etc etc etc. [Amazingly, there are still some people who don't know this....]The only question is whether the resulting formulation is so incredibly ugly that you just want to throw it away and replace it by something nicer looking [eg general relativity....]. Looking at this paper I would say personally that Horava gravity in its generally covariant form is a lot less ugly than I would have expected. But it’s still pretty ugly. Your mileage, as the Americans say, may vary.
Dear Pope,
Ok, fair enough, that’s exactly what they did – covariantized Horava gravity. There was also an issue whether you can really easily couple matter with this “gravity” (in the regime where it seems to be relativistic), and as they show, you actually can, so one can now try to analyze perturbations at non-linear level (to find, say, how LSS gets developed in this theory).
Cheers and thanks!
Dmitry.
Trackback responses to this post