Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- 1 The problem with quantum gravity
- 2 A dialogue on the nature of gravity
- 3 Effective theories and modifications of gravity
- 4 The small-scale structure of spacetime
- 5 Ultraviolet divergences in supersymmetric theories
- 6 Cosmological quantum billiards
- 7 Progress in RNS string theory and pure spinors
- 8 Recent trends in superstring phenomenology
- 9 Emergent spacetime
- 10 Loop quantum gravity
- 11 Loop quantum gravity and cosmology
- 12 The microscopic dynamics of quantum space as a group field theory
- 13 Causal dynamical triangulations and the quest for quantum gravity
- 14 Proper time is stochastic time in 2D quantum gravity
- 15 Logic is to the quantum as geometry is to gravity
- 16 Causal sets: discreteness without symmetry breaking
- 17 The Big Bang, quantum gravity and black-hole information loss
- 18 Conversations in string theory
- Index
- References
11 - Loop quantum gravity and cosmology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2012
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- 1 The problem with quantum gravity
- 2 A dialogue on the nature of gravity
- 3 Effective theories and modifications of gravity
- 4 The small-scale structure of spacetime
- 5 Ultraviolet divergences in supersymmetric theories
- 6 Cosmological quantum billiards
- 7 Progress in RNS string theory and pure spinors
- 8 Recent trends in superstring phenomenology
- 9 Emergent spacetime
- 10 Loop quantum gravity
- 11 Loop quantum gravity and cosmology
- 12 The microscopic dynamics of quantum space as a group field theory
- 13 Causal dynamical triangulations and the quest for quantum gravity
- 14 Proper time is stochastic time in 2D quantum gravity
- 15 Logic is to the quantum as geometry is to gravity
- 16 Causal sets: discreteness without symmetry breaking
- 17 The Big Bang, quantum gravity and black-hole information loss
- 18 Conversations in string theory
- Index
- References
Summary
“It would be permissible to look upon the Hamiltonian form as the fundamental one, and there would then be no fundamental four-dimensional symmetry in the theory. One would have a Hamiltonian built up from four weekly [sic] vanishing functions, given by [the Hamiltonian and diffeomorphism constraints]. The usual requirement of four-dimensional symmetry in physical laws would then get replaced by the requirement that the functions have weakly vanishing P.B.'s, so that they can be provided with arbitrary coefficients in the equations of motion, corresponding to an arbitrary motion of the surface on which the state is defined.” P. A. M. Dirac, in “The theory of gravitation in Hamiltonian form,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A 246 (1958) 333–43.
Introduction
In its different incarnations, quantum gravity must face a diverse set of fascinating problems and difficulties, a set of issues best seen as both challenges and opportunities. One of the main problems in canonical approaches, for instance, is the issue of anomalies in the gauge algebra underlying space-time covariance. Classically, the gauge generators, given by constraints, have weakly vanishing Poisson brackets with each other: they vanish when the constraints are satisfied. After quantization, the same behavior must be realized for commutators of quantum constraints (or for Poisson brackets of effective constraints), or else the theory becomes inconsistent due to gauge anomalies. If and how canonical quantum gravity can be obtained in an anomaly-free way is an important question, not yet convincingly addressed in full generality.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Foundations of Space and TimeReflections on Quantum Gravity, pp. 211 - 256Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2012
References
[1] , and 2009. Loop quantum cosmology corrections to inflationary models. JCAP, 0901, 004.Google Scholar
[2] 1987. New Hamiltonian formulation of general relativity. Phys. Rev. D, 36(6), 1587–602.Google Scholar
[3] and 1997. Quantum theory of geometry I: Area operators. Class. Quantum Grav., 14, A55–A82.Google Scholar
[4] and 1998. Quantum theory of geometry II: Volume operators. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 1, 388–429.Google Scholar
[5] and 2004. Background independent quantum gravity: A status report. Class. Quantum Grav., 21, R53–R152.Google Scholar
[6] , , , and 1995. Quantization of diffeomorphism invariant theories of connections with local degrees of freedom. J. Math. Phys., 36(11), 6456–93.Google Scholar
[7] , , and 1998. Quantum geometry and black hole entropy. Phys. Rev. Lett., 80, 904–7.Google Scholar
[8] , and 2003. Mathematical structure of loop quantum cosmology. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 7, 233–68.Google Scholar
[9] , and 2006. Quantum nature of the Big Bang: An analytical and numerical investigation. Phys. Rev. D, 73, 124038.Google Scholar
[10] and 2009a. Breaking and restoring of diffeomorphism symmetry in discrete gravity.
[11] and 2009b. Improved and perfect actions in discrete gravity.
[12] and 2005. Discreteness corrections to the effective Hamiltonian of isotropic loop quantum cosmology. Class. Quant. Grav., 22, 2017–33.Google Scholar
[13] 1995. Real Ashtekar variables for Lorentzian signature space-times. Phys. Rev. D, 51(10), 5507–10.Google Scholar
[15] and 2009. Cosmological footprint of loop quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. Lett., 102, 081301.Google Scholar
[18] 2001a. Absence of a singularity in loop quantum cosmology. Phys. Rev. Lett., 86, 5227–30.Google Scholar
[19] 2001b. Inverse scale factor in isotropic quantum geometry. Phys. Rev. D, 64, 084018.Google Scholar
[20] 2001c. Loop quantum cosmology IV: Discrete time evolution. Class. Quantum Grav., 18, 1071–88.Google Scholar
[22] 2002b. Quantization ambiguities in isotropic quantum geometry. Class. Quantum Grav., 19, 5113–30.Google Scholar
[23] 2004. Spherically symmetric quantum geometry: states and basic operators. Class. Quantum Grav., 21, 3733–53.Google Scholar
[25] 2007a. Dynamical coherent states and physical solutions of quantum cosmological bounces. Phys. Rev. D, 75, 123512.Google Scholar
[26] 2007b. Large scale effective theory for cosmological bounces. Phys. Rev. D, 75, 081301(R).Google Scholar
[30] 2008c. Loop quantum cosmology. Living Rev. Relativity, 11, 4. http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2008-4.Google Scholar
[32] and 2008. Fermions in loop quantum cosmology and the role of parity. Class. Quantum Grav., 25, 195006.Google Scholar
[33] and 2007. Cosmological vector modes and quantum gravity effects. Class. Quantum Grav., 24, 4801–16.Google Scholar
[34] and 2008. Quantum gravity corrections to gravitational wave dispersion. Phys. Rev.D, 77, 023508.Google Scholar
[35] and 2006. Singularities in isotropic non-minimal scalar field models. Class. Quantum Grav., 23, 4983–90.Google Scholar
[36] and 2000. Symmetry reduction for quantized diffeomorphism invariant theories of connections. Class. Quantum Grav., 17, 3009–43.Google Scholar
[37] and 2009. Dilaton gravity, Poisson sigma models and loop quantum gravity. Class. Quantum Grav., 26, 035018.Google Scholar
[38] and 2006. Effective equations of motion for quantum systems. Rev. Math. Phys., 18, 713–45.Google Scholar
[39] and 2008. Effective theory for the cosmological generation of structure. Adv. Sci. Lett., 1, 92–8.Google Scholar
[40] and 2003. Poisson geometry in constrained systems. Rev. Math. Phys., 15, 663–703.Google Scholar
[41] and 2008. Recollapsing quantum cosmologies and the question of entropy. Phys. Rev.D, 78, 023515.Google Scholar
[42] and 2009. Effective constraints for relativistic quantum systems. Phys. Rev. D, to appear.
[43] , and 2006. Perturbative degrees of freedom in loop quantum gravity: Anisotropies. Class. Quantum Grav., 23, 3491–516.Google Scholar
[44] , and 2007a. Effective equations for isotropic quantum cosmology including matter. Phys. Rev.D, 76, 063511.Google Scholar
[45] , , , and 2007b. Formation and evolution of structure in loop cosmology. Phys. Rev. Lett., 98, 031301.Google Scholar
[46] , and 2007c. Lattice refining loop quantum cosmology, anisotropic models and stability. Phys. Rev.D, 76, 064018.Google Scholar
[47] , , and 2008. Anomaly freedom in perturbative loop quantum gravity. Phys. Rev.D, 78, 063547.Google Scholar
[48] , , and 2009a. Effective constraints for quantum systems. Rev. Math. Phys., 21, 111–54.Google Scholar
[49] , , and 2009b. Gauge invariant cosmological perturbation equations with corrections from loop quantum gravity. Phys. Rev.D, 79, 043505.Google Scholar
[50] , and 2009c. Non-marginal LTB-like models with inverse triad corrections from loop quantum gravity. Phys. Rev.D, 80, 084002.Google Scholar
[52] , and 1992. Cosmological perturbations and the physical meaning of gauge invariant variables. Astrophys. J., 395, 34–53.Google Scholar
[53] and 2007. On the configuration spaces of homogeneous loop quantum cosmology and loop quantum gravity.
[54] , , and 2000. Comparison between quantum and classical dynamics in the effective action formalism. Pages 431–48 of: Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”, Course CXLIII. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
[55] , , and 2006. Uniform discretizations: a new approach for the quantization of totally constrained systems. Phys. Rev.D, 74, 124012.Google Scholar
[56] , and 2007. Loop quantization of spherically symmetric midi-superspaces. Class. Quantum Grav., 24, 3649.Google Scholar
[57] , , and 2009. The gravitational wave background from super-inflation in Loop Quantum Cosmology. Phys. Rev.D, 79, 023508.Google Scholar
[58] , , and 2009. Hamiltonian formulation of f(Riemann) theories of gravity.
[59] 1958. The theory of gravitation in Hamiltonian form. Proc. Roy. Soc.A, 246, 333–43.Google Scholar
[60] 2006. Partial and complete observables for canonical general relativity. Class. Quant. Grav., 23, 6155–84.Google Scholar
[61] 2007. Partial and complete observables for Hamiltonian constrained systems. Gen. Rel. Grav., 39, 1891–927.Google Scholar
[62] and 2004. Black hole entropy from quantum geometry. Class. Quantum Grav., 21, 5233–43.Google Scholar
[63] and 1989. Covariant and gauge invariant approach to cosmological density fluctuations. Phys. Rev.D, 40, 1804–18.Google Scholar
[64] and 2004. The emergent universe: inflationary cosmology with no singularity. Class. Quant. Grav., 21, 223–32.Google Scholar
[65] , and 2004. The emergent universe: An explicit construction. Class. Quant. Grav., 21, 233–50.Google Scholar
[66] and 2008. Phase space quantization and loop quantum cosmology: A Wigner function for the Bohr-compactified real line. Class. Quantum Grav., 25, 225015.Google Scholar
[67] 2009. Representations of the Weyl algebra in quantum geometry. Commun. Math. Phys., 285, 67–140.Google Scholar
[68] , , and 2007a. Manifestly gaugeinvariant general relativistic perturbation theory: I. Foundations.
[69] , , and 2007b. Manifestly gaugeinvariant general relativistic perturbation theory: II. FRW Background and first order.
[70] , and 2009. LTB spacetimes in terms of Dirac observables.
[71] , , and 2009a. Fully LQC-corrected propagation of gravitational waves during slow-roll inflation.
[72] , and 2009b. Inverse volume corrections from loop quantum gravity and the primordial tensor power spectrum in slow-roll inflation. Phys. Rev.D, 79, 084015.Google Scholar
[74] 1997. Real and complex connections for canonical gravity. Class. Quantum Grav., 14, L177–L181.Google Scholar
[75] 2000. Trans-Planckian redshifts and the substance of the space-time river.
[80] , , and 2006. Uniqueness of diffeomorphism invariant states on holonomy-flux algebras. Commun. Math. Phys., 267, 703–33.Google Scholar
[81] , and 2008. Hybrid quantum Gowdy cosmology: Combining loop and Fock quantizations. Phys. Rev.D, 78, 083516.Google Scholar
[82] 2004. Black hole entropy in loop quantum gravity. Class. Quantum Grav., 21, 5245–51.Google Scholar
[84] 2009. The observational implications of loop quantum cosmology.
[85] and 2007a. Lattice refining loop quantum cosmology and inflation. Phys. Rev.D, 76, 044015.Google Scholar
[86] and 2007b. Lattice refining LQC and the matter Hamiltonian. Phys. Rev.D, 76, 104003.Google Scholar
[87] and 2008. Numerical techniques for solving the quantum constraint equation of generic lattice-refined models in loop quantum cosmology. Phys. Rev.D, 78, 024030.Google Scholar
[88] 2009. Ph.D. thesis, University of Warsaw.
[89] 2009. Spherically Symmetric Loop Quantum Gravity: Connections to 2-Dimensional Models and Applications to Gravitational Collapse. Ph.D. thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
[91] 1991b. What is observable in classical and quantum gravity?Class. Quantum Grav., 8, 297–316.Google Scholar
[92] 2004. Quantum Gravity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[93] and 1990. Loop space representation of quantum general relativity. Nucl. Phys. B, 331, 80–152.Google Scholar
[94] and 1994. The physical Hamiltonian in nonperturbative quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. Lett., 72, 446–9.Google Scholar
[95] and 1995. Discreteness of area and volume in quantum gravity. Nucl. Phys.B, 442, 593–619.Google Scholar
Erratum: Nucl. Phys.B 456 (1995) 753.
[96] and 2008. Stepping out of homogeneity in loop quantum cosmology. Class. Quantum Grav., 25, 225024.Google Scholar
[97] and 2008. Numerical solutions to lattice-refined models in loop quantum cosmology. Class. Quantum Grav., 25, 085009.Google Scholar
[98] 2009. This volume.
[99] and 2009. Observational constraints of a power spectrum from super-inflation in loop quantum cosmology.
[100] 2006. Loop cosmological dynamics and dualities with Randall–Sundrum braneworlds. Phys. Rev.D, 73, 063508.Google Scholar
[101] and 2005. Semi-classical states, effective dynamics and classical emergence in loop quantum cosmology. Phys. Rev.D, 72, 084004.Google Scholar
[102] 2008. Corrections to the Friedmann equations from LQG for a universe with a free scalar field. Phys. Rev.D, 78, 064072.Google Scholar
[104] 1998b. QSD V: Quantum gravity as the natural regulator of matter quantum field theories. Class. Quantum Grav., 15, 1281–314.Google Scholar
[105] 2007. Introduction to Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[106] 1997. Time, Gravity, and Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–94.
[107] 1985. Constraints on Hamiltonian lattice formulations of field theories in an expanding universe. Phys. Rev.D, 32, 3228–32.Google Scholar