NEQNET: The world of theoretical physics

For physicts by physicists

  • Archives
  • Best posts
  • Contact us
  • How to subscribe
  • Newcomer?
  • Open problems
  • Home
  • APPLIED
  • ASTRO
  • COND-MAT
  • HEP-TH/PH

Subscribe via email

or connect via

69. Happy Halloween!

ASTRO, HEP-TH/PH — By Dmitry Podolsky on October 31, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Print This Post Print This Post   Save This Post as PDF

Dmitry Podolsky has got his PhD from Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics. He currently works as postdoc at Case Western Reserve University. He is also one of the editors of NEQNET.

Since it is Halloween, today’s story is about ghosts…

69. Happy Halloween!

Let us follow the analysis of massive gravity theory in de Sitter background by Izumi and Tanaka.

The action of the theory is given by

69. Happy Halloween!,

and if the graviton is sufficiently light (69. Happy Halloween!), the helicity 0 mode is the ghost. Naively, this fact implies that the theory is badly defined. Indeed, recall what happens with theories admitting ghosts in Minkowski spacetime. The energy of the ghost mode is negative, so that if ghosts interact with ordinary matter, pair production of matter quanta takes place (the energy taken from the ghost condensate is transferred to the excitations of the ordinary matter). One would argue that non-linearities may stop the particle production at some moment due to the backreaction, however, this argument is wrong. If the initial |in> vacuum state is Lorentz invariant, the probability of pair creation is the same for all processes boosted by Lorentz transformation w.r.t. each other. The full creation rate is given by the integral over momentum p and is divergent in UV, that makes ghosts so dangerous creatures.

Note that UV divergence of this kind is not what we expect in theories with physically relevant instabilities leading to particle production. Indeed, we expect from a healthy theory that the UV vacuum structure remains intact (in other words, there is good Minkowski limit for the pair correlation functions, when one takes the splitting between two points to zero). It is therefore necessary to have the following condition satisfied:

69. Happy Halloween! 69. Happy Halloween!,

where 69. Happy Halloween! is the Bogolyubov coefficient for the mode with momentum 69. Happy Halloween! (its square gives the number of particles in the given mode), i.e., we expect that there is no particle production in the UV for a healthy theory.

Let us return to ghosts in de Sitter. Do these considerations automatically imply that a theory with ghost in de Sitter background is sick? My naive expection for the correct answer to this question is to be certainly positive, but Izumi and Tanaka argue that my expectation is wrong: all one can conclude is that theories with ghosts do not admit de Sitter invariant vacuum state. (Note: Hmm, so what? Light scalar field with 69. Happy Halloween! also does not allow for a de Sitter invariant vacuum state.)

Trying to exploit this idea, the authors calculate the number and energy density of produced particles and find of course that both diverge in the UV. To make them convergent, they introduce the UV cutoff in three-dimensional momentum space – the step I do not feel to be very reasonable: the limit of adjacent points for the pair Green function in de Sitter should be still the usual Minkowski limit, and cutoff in 3d momentum space does not make much sense in this limit.

So, I have to conclude that no ghosts exist in Nature, even in de Sitter space. Unless, of course, I shall see one of these ghosts visiting me tonight 69. Happy Halloween!

Happy Halloween!

1 Comment

  1. Dmitry says:
    November 3, 2008 at 9:00 pm

    And yet another piece of poetry from James Kotsybar:

    Hodge-podge of religious superstition
    And pagan ritual to raise the dead
    Lasts malingeringly into our age
    Like some cadaverous apparition
    Or revenant, confused and full of dread,
    Without a sense of purpose, drunk with rage,
    Eternally lost in poor rendition,
    Ever mocked by grimacing pumpkin-head,
    Not laid to rest, but dressed as for the stage.

    ;-)

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Click here to cancel reply.


For LaTeX in your comment, please use tags [tex] and [/tex]. Also, you may use the following HTML tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> .

Login with Facebook:

or subscribe me to comments RSS feed

Trackback responses to this post

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
  • Comments
  • Login
  • Search
  • Large non-Gaussianity from axion inflation Large non-Gaussianity from axion inflation
    January 31, 2012 14:01
  • On strong disorder renormalization On strong disorder renormalization
    March 18, 2011 20:03
  • Relaunching NEQNET
    January 20, 2011 21:01
  • Saturday’s photoguess: what does this monkey symbolize?
    June 20, 2009 19:06
  • Dynamics of space storm
    June 19, 2009 12:06
  • Micro: Can 2 question provide a common solution? Black holes, information loss paradox and Ultra high energy cosmic rays. ...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: SAGITTARIUS A* -- James Ph. Kotsybar Mysteriously cloaked, obscure despite Interior illuminating glare, Long ...
  • cad: The presentation can be found in several formats at http://pirsa.org/08110051/...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: COMMENTS FOR THIS ENTRY ARE CLOSED -- James Ph. Kotsybar When the general public hears about A breakthrough in...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: FEARFUL SYMMETRY (from Songs Of Experiments) -- James Ph. Kotsybar Beyond notice, out of sight in dimensions c...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: OFF THE SCALE -- James Ph. Kotsybar The young lady known simply as Bright, who could travel at speeds f...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: COSMIC PREDICTION -- James Ph. Kotsybar Betelgeuse is gonna blow! It?s just a matter of time It?s only ten...
  • Leo: Ok I have a question: if a black hole is supermassive, say 100 billion solar mass, let's suppose Alice fells int...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: HIGHER DIMENSIONS -- James Ph. Kotsybar From point to line to plane to sphere there?s only three dimensi...
  • superkuh: I am glad you are back! No more disapointing weekly refreshings of that monkey....
  • Dmitry: Thank you James, beautiful and inspiring as usual :)...
  • Dmitry: Yes, renormalization group should still be applicable, but crit. exponents have to be different. By the way, if we ...
  • James Ph. Kotsybar: UNIQUE PARAMETERS -- James Ph. Kotsybar There is only one answer to creation. Though we don?t nearly understan...
  • Ariel Amir: Very interesting, thanks. It indeed seems to be very close to what we discuss here. I wonder whether the distributi...
  • Dmitry: Hi Ariel, thanks for the explanation! Let me now discuss a bit the application I had in mind. It has to do w...
    Register,
    login with your NEQNET profile
    or login with Facebook:

    • 226. Top ten open problems in physics
      • 33 comments
    • 353. Vortex line representation. Cauchy invariant
      • 33 comments
    • The very meaning of socialism
      • 26 comments
    • 377. Temporal and spatial dependence of quantum entanglement
      • 26 comments
    • Biocentrism: book review
      • 24 comments

Facebook: Community

Facebook: Your Friends

Google Friend Connect

Links: Journals

Links: Resources

Links: Blogs

  • Lubos Motl's Reference Frame
Copyright © NEQNET: The world of theoretical physics 2008-2011. All Rights Reserved.