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.

184 G. Horowitz and J. Polchinskican be unders<strong>to</strong>od as a conflict between quantum mechanics and locality. In thecontext of emergent spacetime it is not surprising that it is locality that yields, butwe would like <strong>to</strong> understand the precise manner in which it does so.A big open question is how <strong>to</strong> extend all this from AdS boundary conditions <strong>to</strong>spacetimes that are more relevant <strong>to</strong> nature; we did find some generalizations, butthey all have a causal structure similar <strong>to</strong> that of AdS. Again, the goal is a preciselydefined nonperturbative construction of the theory, presumably with the same featuresof emergence that we have found in the AdS/CFT case. A natural next stepmight seem <strong>to</strong> be de Sitter space. There were some attempts along these lines, forexample [37; 44], but there are also general arguments that this idea is problematic[39]. In fact, this may be the wrong question, as constructions of de Sittervacua in string theory (beginning with [36; 23]) always seem <strong>to</strong> produce statesthat are only metastable (see [14], for further discussion, and [3], for an alternateview). As a result, cosmology will produce a chaotic state with bubbles of all possiblemetastable vacua [8]. The question is then the nonperturbative construction ofstates of this kind. The only obvious spacetime boundaries are in the infinite future,in eternal bubbles of zero cosmological constant (and possibly similar boundariesin the infinite past). By analogy these would be the location of the holographic dualvariables [39].In conclusion, the embedding of <strong>Quantum</strong> <strong>Gravity</strong> in ordinary gauge theory isa remarkable and unexpected property of the mathematical structures underlyingtheoretical physics. We find it difficult <strong>to</strong> believe that nature does not make use ofit, but the precise way in which it does so remains <strong>to</strong> be discovered.AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported in part by NSF grants PHY99-07949, PHY02-44764, andPHY04-56556.References[1] O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri & Y. Oz, Large N fieldtheories, string theory and gravity. Phys. Rept. 323 (2000) 183[arXiv:hep-th/9905111].[2] F. An<strong>to</strong>nuccio, A. Hashimo<strong>to</strong>, O. Lunin & S. Pinsky, Can DLCQ test the Maldacenaconjecture? JHEP 9907 (1999) 029 [arXiv:hep-th/9906087].[3] T. Banks, More thoughts on the quantum theory of stable de Sitter space (2005)arXiv:hep-th/0503066.[4] G. Baskaran & P. W. Anderson, Gauge theory of high temperature superconduc<strong>to</strong>rsand strongly correlated Fermi systems. Phys. Rev. B 37 (1988) 580.[5] D. Berenstein, J. M. Maldacena & H. Nastase, Strings in flat space and pp wavesfrom N = 4 super Yang Mills. JHEP 0204 (2002) 013 [arXiv:hep-th/0202021].

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!