12.07.2015 Views

Approaches to Quantum Gravity

Approaches to Quantum Gravity

Approaches to Quantum Gravity

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

160 Questions and answers3. You mention that the results of the ERG seem <strong>to</strong> point out that spacetimestructure cannot be described in terms of a single metric for any momentumscale. How would one notice, in the RG approach, that it cannot be describedby a metric field at all, but that a description in terms of connections or even anonlocal one would be more appropriate, say, at the Planck scale?4. Can you please comment on the possibility of extending the ERG approach<strong>to</strong> the Lorentzian signature or <strong>to</strong> the case of dynamical space <strong>to</strong>pology?– A - R. Percacci:1. First of all it should be said that the renormalization group can be realizedboth in continuum and discrete formulations and is likely <strong>to</strong> play a role in<strong>Quantum</strong> <strong>Gravity</strong> in either case. It should describe the transition from physicsat the “lattice” or UV cu<strong>to</strong>ff scale down <strong>to</strong> low energies.Then, one has <strong>to</strong> bear in mind that when one formulates a <strong>Quantum</strong> FieldTheory in the continuum but with a cu<strong>to</strong>ff , it is impossible <strong>to</strong> resolve pointscloser that 1/, so the continuum should be regarded as a convenient kinematicalframework that is devoid of physical reality. If the asymp<strong>to</strong>tic safetyprogram could be carried through literally as described, it would provide aconsistent description of physics down <strong>to</strong> arbitrarily short length scales, andin this sense the continuum would become, at least theoretically, a reality.Of course, it would be impossible <strong>to</strong> establish experimentally the continuityof spacetime in the mathematical sense, so this is not a well-posed physicalquestion. What is in principle a meaningful physical question, and maybecome answerable sometimes in the future, is whether spacetime is continuousdown <strong>to</strong>, say, one tenth of the Planck length. But even then, the answermay require further qualification. Recall that in order <strong>to</strong> define a distance onehas <strong>to</strong> specify a unit of length. Units can ultimately be traced <strong>to</strong> some combinationof the couplings appearing in the action. For example, in Planck unitsone takes the square root of New<strong>to</strong>n’s constant as a unit of length. Becausethe couplings run, when the cu<strong>to</strong>ff is sent <strong>to</strong> infinity the distance between twogiven points could go <strong>to</strong> zero, <strong>to</strong> a finite limit or <strong>to</strong> infinity depending on theasymp<strong>to</strong>tic behaviour of the unit. In principle it seems possible that spacetimelooks discrete in certain units and continuous in others. Then, even ifasymp<strong>to</strong>tic safety was correct, it need not be in conflict with models wherespacetime is discrete.2. Writing the connection as the sum of the Levi–Civita connection and athree-index tensor , one can always decompose an action for independentconnection and metric in<strong>to</strong> the same action written for the Levi–Civita connection,plus terms involving . The effects due <strong>to</strong> will be similar <strong>to</strong>those of a matter field. In the case when the action is linear in curvature,and possibly quadratic in <strong>to</strong>rsion and non-metricity, up <strong>to</strong> a surface term

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!