Cosmological constant problem

Last updated
Unsolved problem in physics:

Why is the vacuum energy density much smaller than a zero-point energy suggested by quantum field theory?

Contents

(more unsolved problems in physics)

In cosmology, the cosmological constant problem or vacuum catastrophe is the substantial disagreement between the observed values of vacuum energy density (the small value of the cosmological constant) and the much larger theoretical value of zero-point energy suggested by quantum field theory.

Depending on the Planck energy cutoff and other factors, the quantum vacuum energy contribution to the effective cosmological constant is calculated to be between 50 and as much as 120 orders of magnitude greater than observed, [1] [2] a state of affairs described by physicists as "the largest discrepancy between theory and experiment in all of science" [1] and "the worst theoretical prediction in the history of physics". [3]

History

The basic problem of a vacuum energy producing a gravitational effect was identified as early as 1916 by Walther Nernst. [4] [5] [6] He predicted that the value had to be either zero or very small. In 1926, Wilhelm Lenz concluded that "If one allows waves of the shortest observed wavelengths λ ≈ 2 × 10−11 cm, ... and if this radiation, converted to material density (u/c2 ≈ 106), contributed to the curvature of the observable universe – one would obtain a vacuum energy density of such a value that the radius of the observable universe would not reach even to the Moon." [7] [6]

After the development of quantum field theory in the 1940s, the first to address contributions of quantum fluctuations to the cosmological constant was Yakov Zeldovich in the 1960s. [8] [9] In quantum mechanics, the vacuum itself should experience quantum fluctuations. In general relativity, those quantum fluctuations constitute energy that would add to the cosmological constant. However, this calculated vacuum energy density is many orders of magnitude bigger than the observed cosmological constant. [10] Original estimates of the degree of mismatch were as high as 120 to 122 orders of magnitude; [11] [12] however, modern research suggests that, when Lorentz invariance is taken into account, the degree of mismatch is closer to 60 orders of magnitude. [12] [13]

With the development of inflationary cosmology in the 1980s, the problem became much more important: as cosmic inflation is driven by vacuum energy, differences in modeling vacuum energy lead to huge differences in the resulting cosmologies. Were the vacuum energy precisely zero, as was once believed, then the expansion of the universe would not accelerate as observed, according to the standard Λ-CDM model. [14]

Cutoff dependence

The calculated vacuum energy is a positive, rather than negative, contribution to the cosmological constant because the existing vacuum has negative quantum-mechanical pressure, while in general relativity, the gravitational effect of negative pressure is a kind of repulsion. (Pressure here is defined as the flux of quantum-mechanical momentum across a surface.) Roughly, the vacuum energy is calculated by summing over all known quantum-mechanical fields, taking into account interactions and self-interactions between the ground states, and then removing all interactions below a minimum "cutoff" wavelength to reflect that existing theories break down and may fail to be applicable around the cutoff scale. Because the energy is dependent on how fields interact within the current vacuum state, the vacuum energy contribution would have been different in the early universe; for example, the vacuum energy would have been significantly different prior to electroweak symmetry breaking during the quark epoch. [12]

Renormalization

The vacuum energy in quantum field theory can be set to any value by renormalization. This view treats the cosmological constant as simply another fundamental physical constant not predicted or explained by theory. [15] Such a renormalization constant must be chosen very accurately because of the many-orders-of-magnitude discrepancy between theory and observation, and many theorists consider this ad-hoc constant as equivalent to ignoring the problem. [1]

Estimated values

The vacuum energy density of the Universe based on 2015 measurements by the Planck collaboration is ρvac = 5.96×10−27 kg/m3 ≘ 5.3566×10−10 J/m3 = 3.35 GeV/m3 [16] [note 1] or about 2.5×10−47 GeV4 in geometrized units.

One assessment, made by Jérôme Martin of the Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris in 2012, placed the expected theoretical vacuum energy scale around 108 GeV4, for a difference of about 55 orders of magnitude. [12]

Proposed solutions

Some proposals involve modifying gravity to diverge from general relativity. These proposals face the hurdle that the results of observations and experiments so far have tended to be extremely consistent with general relativity and the ΛCDM model, and inconsistent with thus-far proposed modifications. In addition, some of the proposals are arguably incomplete, because they solve the "new" cosmological constant problem by proposing that the actual cosmological constant is exactly zero rather than a tiny number, but fail to solve the "old" cosmological constant problem of why quantum fluctuations seem to fail to produce substantial vacuum energy in the first place. Nevertheless, many physicists argue that, due in part to a lack of better alternatives, proposals to modify gravity should be considered "one of the most promising routes to tackling" the cosmological constant problem. [17]

Bill Unruh and collaborators have argued that when the energy density of the quantum vacuum is modeled more accurately as a fluctuating quantum field, the cosmological constant problem does not arise. [18] Going in a different direction, George F. R. Ellis and others have suggested that in unimodular gravity, the troublesome contributions simply do not gravitate. [19] [20] . Recently, a fully diffeomorphism-invariant action principle that gives the equations of motion for trace-free Einstein gravity has been proposed, where the cosmological costant emerges as an integration constant. [21]

Another argument, due to Stanley Brodsky and Robert Shrock, is that in light front quantization, the quantum field theory vacuum becomes essentially trivial. In the absence of vacuum expectation values, there is no contribution from quantum electrodynamics, weak interactions, and quantum chromodynamics to the cosmological constant. It is thus predicted to be zero in a flat spacetime. [22] [23] From light front quantization insight, the origin of the cosmological constant problem is traced back to unphysical non-causal terms in the standard calculation, which lead to an erroneously large value of the cosmological constant. [24]

In 2018, a mechanism for cancelling Λ out has been proposed through the use of a symmetry breaking potential in a Lagrangian formalism in which matter shows a non-vanishing pressure. The model assumes that standard matter provides a pressure which counterbalances the action due to the cosmological constant. Luongo and Muccino have shown that this mechanism permits to take vacuum energy as quantum field theory predicts, but removing the huge magnitude through a counterbalance term due to baryons and cold dark matter only. [25]

In 1999, Andrew Cohen, David B. Kaplan and Ann Nelson proposed that correlations between the UV and IR cutoffs in effective quantum field theory are enough to reduce the theoretical cosmological constant down to the measured cosmological constant due to the Cohen–Kaplan–Nelson (CKN) bound. [26] In 2021, Nikita Blinov and Patrick Draper confirmed through the holographic principle that the CKN bound predicts the measured cosmological constant, all while maintaining the predictions of effective field theory in less extreme conditions. [27]

Some propose an anthropic solution, [28] and argue that we live in one region of a vast multiverse that has different regions with different vacuum energies. These anthropic arguments posit that only regions of small vacuum energy such as the one in which we live are reasonably capable of supporting intelligent life. Such arguments have existed in some form since at least 1981. Around 1987, Steven Weinberg estimated that the maximum allowable vacuum energy for gravitationally-bound structures to form is problematically large, even given the observational data available in 1987, and concluded the anthropic explanation appears to fail; however, more recent estimates by Weinberg and others, based on other considerations, find the bound to be closer to the actual observed level of dark energy. [29] [30] Anthropic arguments gradually gained credibility among many physicists after the discovery of dark energy and the development of the theoretical string theory landscape, but are still derided by a substantial skeptical portion of the scientific community as being problematic to verify. Proponents of anthropic solutions are themselves divided on multiple technical questions surrounding how to calculate the proportion of regions of the universe with various dark energy constants. [29] [17]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Calculated based on the Hubble constant and the dark energy density parameter ΩΛ.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Physical cosmology</span> Branch of cosmology which studies mathematical models of the universe

Physical cosmology is a branch of cosmology concerned with the study of cosmological models. A cosmological model, or simply cosmology, provides a description of the largest-scale structures and dynamics of the universe and allows study of fundamental questions about its origin, structure, evolution, and ultimate fate. Cosmology as a science originated with the Copernican principle, which implies that celestial bodies obey identical physical laws to those on Earth, and Newtonian mechanics, which first allowed those physical laws to be understood.

In physical cosmology, cosmic inflation, cosmological inflation, or just inflation, is a theory of exponential expansion of space in the early universe. The inflationary epoch is believed to have lasted from 10−36 seconds to between 10−33 and 10−32 seconds after the Big Bang. Following the inflationary period, the universe continued to expand, but at a slower rate. The re-acceleration of this slowing expansion due to dark energy began after the universe was already over 7.7 billion years old.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quantum gravity</span> Description of gravity using discrete values

Quantum gravity (QG) is a field of theoretical physics that seeks to describe gravity according to the principles of quantum mechanics. It deals with environments in which neither gravitational nor quantum effects can be ignored, such as in the vicinity of black holes or similar compact astrophysical objects, such as neutron stars as well as in the early stages of the universe moments after the Big Bang.

A wormhole is a hypothetical structure connecting disparate points in spacetime, and is based on a special solution of the Einstein field equations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cosmological constant</span> Constant representing stress–energy density of the vacuum

In cosmology, the cosmological constant, alternatively called Einstein's cosmological constant, is the constant coefficient of a term that Albert Einstein temporarily added to his field equations of general relativity. He later removed it, however much later it was revived and reinterpreted as the energy density of space, or vacuum energy, that arises in quantum mechanics. It is closely associated with the concept of dark energy.

The ultimate fate of the universe is a topic in physical cosmology, whose theoretical restrictions allow possible scenarios for the evolution and ultimate fate of the universe to be described and evaluated. Based on available observational evidence, deciding the fate and evolution of the universe has become a valid cosmological question, being beyond the mostly untestable constraints of mythological or theological beliefs. Several possible futures have been predicted by different scientific hypotheses, including that the universe might have existed for a finite and infinite duration, or towards explaining the manner and circumstances of its beginning.

The Big Bounce hypothesis is a cosmological model for the origin of the known universe. It was originally suggested as a phase of the cyclic model or oscillatory universe interpretation of the Big Bang, where the first cosmological event was the result of the collapse of a previous universe. It receded from serious consideration in the early 1980s after inflation theory emerged as a solution to the horizon problem, which had arisen from advances in observations revealing the large-scale structure of the universe.

In particle physics, the hypothetical dilaton particle is a particle of a scalar field that appears in theories with extra dimensions when the volume of the compactified dimensions varies. It appears as a radion in Kaluza–Klein theory's compactifications of extra dimensions. In Brans–Dicke theory of gravity, Newton's constant is not presumed to be constant but instead 1/G is replaced by a scalar field and the associated particle is the dilaton.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hierarchy problem</span> Unsolved problem in physics

In theoretical physics, the hierarchy problem is the problem concerning the large discrepancy between aspects of the weak force and gravity. There is no scientific consensus on why, for example, the weak force is 1024 times stronger than gravity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quantum field theory in curved spacetime</span> Extension of quantum field theory to curved spacetime

In theoretical physics, quantum field theory in curved spacetime (QFTCS) is an extension of quantum field theory from Minkowski spacetime to a general curved spacetime. This theory uses a semi-classical approach; it treats spacetime as a fixed, classical background, while giving a quantum-mechanical description of the matter and energy propagating through that spacetime. A general prediction of this theory is that particles can be created by time-dependent gravitational fields (multigraviton pair production), or by time-independent gravitational fields that contain horizons. The most famous example of the latter is the phenomenon of Hawking radiation emitted by black holes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flatness problem</span> Cosmological fine-tuning problem

The flatness problem is a cosmological fine-tuning problem within the Big Bang model of the universe. Such problems arise from the observation that some of the initial conditions of the universe appear to be fine-tuned to very 'special' values, and that small deviations from these values would have extreme effects on the appearance of the universe at the current time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quantum cosmology</span> Attempts to develop a quantum mechanical theory of cosmology

Quantum cosmology is the attempt in theoretical physics to develop a quantum theory of the universe. This approach attempts to answer open questions of classical physical cosmology, particularly those related to the first phases of the universe.

In string theory, the string theory landscape is the collection of possible false vacua, together comprising a collective "landscape" of choices of parameters governing compactifications.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Physics beyond the Standard Model</span> Theories trying to extend known physics

Physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM) refers to the theoretical developments needed to explain the deficiencies of the Standard Model, such as the inability to explain the fundamental parameters of the standard model, the strong CP problem, neutrino oscillations, matter–antimatter asymmetry, and the nature of dark matter and dark energy. Another problem lies within the mathematical framework of the Standard Model itself: the Standard Model is inconsistent with that of general relativity, and one or both theories break down under certain conditions, such as spacetime singularities like the Big Bang and black hole event horizons.

In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy that affects the universe on the largest scales. Its primary effect is to drive the accelerating expansion of the universe. Assuming that the lambda-CDM model of cosmology is correct, dark energy is the dominant component of the universe, contributing 68% of the total energy in the present-day observable universe while dark matter and ordinary (baryonic) matter contribute 26% and 5%, respectively, and other components such as neutrinos and photons are nearly negligible. Dark energy's density is very low: 7×10−30 g/cm3, much less than the density of ordinary matter or dark matter within galaxies. However, it dominates the universe's mass–energy content because it is uniform across space.

In mathematical physics, de Sitter invariant special relativity is the speculative idea that the fundamental symmetry group of spacetime is the indefinite orthogonal group SO(4,1), that of de Sitter space. In the standard theory of general relativity, de Sitter space is a highly symmetrical special vacuum solution, which requires a cosmological constant or the stress–energy of a constant scalar field to sustain.

Hořava–Lifshitz gravity is a theory of quantum gravity proposed by Petr Hořava in 2009. It solves the problem of different concepts of time in quantum field theory and general relativity by treating the quantum concept as the more fundamental so that space and time are not equivalent (anisotropic) at high energy level. The relativistic concept of time with its Lorentz invariance emerges at large distances. The theory relies on the theory of foliations to produce its causal structure. It is related to topologically massive gravity and the Cotton tensor. It is a possible UV completion of general relativity. Also, the speed of light goes to infinity at high energies. The novelty of this approach, compared to previous approaches to quantum gravity such as Loop quantum gravity, is that it uses concepts from condensed matter physics such as quantum critical phenomena. Hořava's initial formulation was found to have side-effects such as predicting very different results for a spherical Sun compared to a slightly non-spherical Sun, so others have modified the theory. Inconsistencies remain, though progress was made on the theory. Nevertheless, observations of gravitational waves emitted by the neutron-star merger GW170817 contravene predictions made by this model of gravity. Some have revised the theory to account for this.

Raphael Bousso is a theoretical physicist and cosmologist. He is a professor at the Berkeley Center for Theoretical Physics in the Department of Physics, UC Berkeley. He is known for the Bousso bound on the information content of the universe. With Joseph Polchinski, Bousso proposed the string theory landscape as a solution to the cosmological constant problem.

In particle physics and physical cosmology, Planck units are a system of units of measurement defined exclusively in terms of four universal physical constants: c, G, ħ, and kB. Expressing one of these physical constants in terms of Planck units yields a numerical value of 1. They are a system of natural units, defined using fundamental properties of nature rather than properties of a chosen prototype object. Originally proposed in 1899 by German physicist Max Planck, they are relevant in research on unified theories such as quantum gravity.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Adler, Ronald J.; Casey, Brendan; Jacob, Ovid C. (1995). "Vacuum catastrophe: An elementary exposition of the cosmological constant problem". American Journal of Physics. 63 (7): 620–626. Bibcode:1995AmJPh..63..620A. doi: 10.1119/1.17850 . ISSN   0002-9505.
  2. ↑ Bengochea, Gabriel R.; León, Gabriel; Okon, Elias; Sudarsky, Daniel (11 January 2020). "Can the quantum vacuum fluctuations really solve the cosmological constant problem?". The European Physical Journal C. 80 (18): 18. arXiv: 1906.05406 . Bibcode:2020EPJC...80...18B. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7554-1. S2CID   189762342 . Retrieved 21 October 2022.
  3. ↑ MP Hobson, GP Efstathiou & AN Lasenby (2006). General Relativity: An introduction for physicists (Reprint ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 187. ISBN   978-0-521-82951-9.
  4. ↑ W Nernst (1916). "Über einen Versuch von quantentheoretischen Betrachtungen zur Annahme stetiger Energieänderungen zurückzukehren". Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft (in German). 18: 83–116.
  5. ↑ H Kragh (2011). "Preludes to dark energy: Zero-point energy and vacuum speculations". arXiv: 1111.4623 [physics.hist-ph].
  6. 1 2 H Kragh (2012). "Walther Nernst: grandfather of dark energy?". Astronomy & Geophysics. 53 (1): 1.24–1.26. Bibcode:2012A&G....53a..24K. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4004.2012.53124.x .
  7. ↑ W Lenz (1926). """". Physikalische Zeitschrift (in German). 27: 642–645.
  8. ↑ Zel'Dovich, Ya. B. (1967). "Cosmological Constant and Elementary Particles". JETP Letters. 6: 316–317.
  9. ↑ Zel'dovich, Ya. B (31 March 1968). "The Cosmological Constant and the Theory of Elementary Particles". Soviet Physics Uspekhi. 11 (3): 381–393. doi:10.1070/PU1968v011n03ABEH003927.
  10. ↑ Cho, Adrian (10 January 2017). "A simple explanation of mysterious space-stretching 'dark energy?'". Science. doi:10.1126/science.aal0603.
  11. ↑ Weinberg, Steven (1989-01-01). "The cosmological constant problem". Reviews of Modern Physics. 61 (1): 1–23. Bibcode:1989RvMP...61....1W. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.61.1. hdl: 2152/61094 . ISSN   0034-6861. S2CID   122259372.
  12. 1 2 3 4 Martin, Jérôme (July 2012). "Everything you always wanted to know about the cosmological constant problem (but were afraid to ask)". Comptes Rendus Physique. 13 (6–7): 566–665. arXiv: 1205.3365 . Bibcode:2012CRPhy..13..566M. doi:10.1016/j.crhy.2012.04.008. S2CID   119272967.
  13. ↑ Straumann, Norbert (2002). "The history of the cosmological constant problem". arXiv: gr-qc/0208027 .
  14. ↑ Weinberg, Steven (1989-01-01). "The cosmological constant problem". Reviews of Modern Physics. 61 (1): 1–23. Bibcode:1989RvMP...61....1W. doi:10.1103/revmodphys.61.1. hdl: 2152/61094 . ISSN   0034-6861. S2CID   122259372.
  15. ↑ Rugh, S.E.; Zinkernagel, H. (2002). "The quantum vacuum and the cosmological constant problem". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. 33 (4): 663–705. arXiv: hep-th/0012253 . Bibcode:2002SHPMP..33..663R. doi:10.1016/S1355-2198(02)00033-3. S2CID   9007190.
  16. ↑ Planck Collaboration; Ade, P. A. R.; Aghanim, N.; Arnaud, M.; Ashdown, M.; Aumont, J.; Baccigalupi, C.; Banday, A. J.; Barreiro, R. B.; Bartlett, J. G.; Bartolo, N.; Battaner, E.; Battye, R.; Benabed, K.; Benoît, A. (2016). "Planck 2015 results: XIII. Cosmological parameters". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 594: A13. arXiv: 1502.01589 . Bibcode:2016A&A...594A..13P. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525830. ISSN   0004-6361.
  17. 1 2 Bull, Philip; et al. (June 2016). "Beyond ΛCDM: Problems, solutions, and the road ahead". Physics of the Dark Universe. 12: 56–99. arXiv: 1512.05356 . Bibcode:2016PDU....12...56B. doi:10.1016/j.dark.2016.02.001. S2CID   118450389.
  18. ↑ Wang, Qingdi; Zhu, Zhen; Unruh, William G. (2017). "How the huge energy of quantum vacuum gravitates to drive the slow accelerating expansion of the Universe". Physical Review D . 95 (10): 103504. arXiv: 1703.00543 . Bibcode:2017PhRvD..95j3504W. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.103504. S2CID   119076077.
  19. ↑ Ellis, George F. R. (2014). "The trace-free Einstein equations and inflation". General Relativity and Gravitation . 46: 1619. arXiv: 1306.3021 . Bibcode:2014GReGr..46.1619E. doi:10.1007/s10714-013-1619-5. S2CID   119000135.
  20. ↑ Percacci, R. (2018). "Unimodular quantum gravity and the cosmological constant". Foundations of Physics . 48 (10): 1364–1379. arXiv: 1712.09903 . Bibcode:2018FoPh...48.1364P. doi:10.1007/s10701-018-0189-5. S2CID   118934871.
  21. ↑ Montesinos, Merced; Gonzalez, Diego (2023). "Diffeomorphism-invariant action principles for trace-free Einstein gravity". Phys. Rev. D. 108 (12): 124013. arXiv: 2312.03062 . doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.124013.
  22. ↑ Brodsky, Stanley J.; Roberts, Craig D.; Shrock, Robert; Tandy, Peter C. (2010). "New perspectives on the quark condensate". Physical Review C. 82 (2): 022201. arXiv: 1005.4610 . Bibcode:2010PhRvC..82b2201B. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.82.022201.
  23. ↑ Brodsky, Stanley J.; Roberts, Craig D.; Shrock, Robert; Tandy, Peter C. (2012). "Confinement contains condensates". Physical Review C. 85 (6): 065202. arXiv: 1202.2376 . Bibcode:2012PhRvC..85f5202B. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.85.065202. S2CID   118373670.
  24. ↑ Brodsky, Stanley J.; Deur, Alexandre; Roberts, Craig D. (2022). "Artificial dynamical effects in quantum field theory". Nature Rev. Phys. 4 (7): 489. arXiv: 2202.06051 . doi:10.1038/s42254-022-00453-3.
  25. ↑ Luongo, Orlando; Muccino, Marco (2018-11-21). "Speeding up the Universe using dust with pressure". Physical Review D. 98 (10): 2–3. arXiv: 1807.00180 . Bibcode:2018PhRvD..98j3520L. doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.103520. ISSN   2470-0010. S2CID   119346601.
  26. ↑ Cohen, Andrew; Kaplan, David B.; Nelson, Ann (21 June 1999). "Effective Field Theory, Black Holes, and the Cosmological Constant". Physical Review Letters. 82 (25): 4971–4974. arXiv: hep-th/9803132 . Bibcode:1999PhRvL..82.4971C. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.4971. S2CID   17203575.
  27. ↑ Nikita Blinov; Patrick Draper (7 July 2021). "Densities of States and the CKN Bound". arXiv: 2107.03530 [hep-ph].
  28. ↑ Totani, Tomonori; Omiya, Hidetoshi; Sudoh, Takahiro; Kobayashi, Masakazu A. R.; Nagashima, Masahiro (2 January 2019). "Lethal Radiation from Nearby Supernovae Helps Explain the Small Cosmological Constant". Astrobiology. 19 (1): 126–131. arXiv: 1804.10395 . Bibcode:2019AsBio..19..126T. doi:10.1089/ast.2018.1895. PMID   30129784. S2CID   133086904 . Retrieved 21 October 2022.
  29. 1 2 Linde, Andrei (1 February 2017). "A brief history of the multiverse". Reports on Progress in Physics. 80 (2): 022001. arXiv: 1512.01203 . Bibcode:2017RPPh...80b2001L. doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aa50e4. PMID   28071600. S2CID   5221573.
  30. ↑ Martel, Hugo; Shapiro, Paul R.; Weinberg, Steven (January 1998). "Likely Values of the Cosmological Constant". The Astrophysical Journal. 492 (1): 29–40. arXiv: astro-ph/9701099 . Bibcode:1998ApJ...492...29M. doi:10.1086/305016. S2CID   119064782.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.