Regularizing (Away) Vacuum Energy

Koberinski, Adam

doi:10.1007/s10701-021-00442-z

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent critical discussions of the CCP (e. g. , Saunders 2002;Koberinski 2017Koberinski , 2021Schneider 2020) have generally presented the problem quite differently, as relying on multiple conceptual assumptions and speculations about as-yetundeveloped physics. On this approach, we first have to establish that the zero-point energy is real at all, perhaps by consideration of the Casimir effect; then we have to argue that it gravitates; then we have to argue that the way it gravitates is via the semiclassical equation.…”

Section: The Cosmological Constant Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(That calculation can itself be challenged. Koberinski (2021) argues that the calculated value of the zero-point energy, depending sensitively on the cutoff as it does, cannot be treated as a physical prediction of the theory; Koberinski and Smeenk (in forthcoming work) also raise concerns about the applicability 35 The relationships between bare and observed parameters in particle physics are not generally fine-tuned in this way; the exception is the Higgs mass, where fine-tuning concerns constitute the closely-related hierarchy problem of the Standard model. 36 The literature on the CCP is too vast to systematically reference here.…”

Section: The Cosmological Constant Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantum Gravity at Low Energies

Wallace¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I provide a conceptually-focused presentation of 'low-energy quantum gravity' (LEQG), the effective quantum field theory obtained from general relativity and which provides a well-defined theory of quantum gravity at energies well below the Planck scale. I emphasize the extent to which some such theory is required by the abundant observational evidence in astrophysics and cosmology for situations which require a simultaneous treatment of quantum-mechanical and gravitational effects, contra the often-heard claim that all observed phenomena can be accounted for either by classical gravity or by non-gravitational quantum mechanics, and I give a detailed account of the way in which a treatment of the theory as fluctuations on a classical background emerges as an approximation to the underlying theory rather than being put in by hand. I discuss the search for a Planck-scale quantum-gravity theory from the perspective of LEQG and give an introduction to the Cosmological Constant problem as it arises within LEQG.

show abstract

Section: The Cosmological Constant Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Cosmological Constant Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantum Gravity at Low Energies

Wallace¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3.2, a certain way of interpreting analogies between high-energy and condensed matter theory has facilitated the notion that for every EFT there exists single physically preferred regulator and bare parametrizationeven despite widespread acceptance of the manifestly opposing principle that the physical content of a QFT should be regularization and renormalization scheme independent. But, as [18] have emphasized in the context of Wilson's analysis of the renormalization group, it is one thing to recognize points of mathematical analogy between two domains of physics, and another thing entirely to carry over aspects of the physical interpretation of corresponding elements from one side of the analogy to the other. In this subsection, I will briefly reiterate, and then expand upon, the argument of [23]-namely, that supposing the existence of some set of real fundamental bare parameters is an interpretational step that goes well beyond what is justified by empirical evidence, and beyond what is needed to ensure that the theory is mathematically well-defined.…”

Section: The Case For Abandoning a Physically Preferred Parametrizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The cosmological constant problem, which is often thought to arise from an unnatural delicate cancellation involving the bare vacuum energy and quartic quantum corrections, is often likened to the Higgs naturalness problem. While this problem is outside the scope of the present discussion, a point of view on the cosmological constant problem analogous in important respects to the one advocated here in the context of the Higgs naturalness problem has been defended in [6,17,18].…”

Section: Implications For the Naturalness Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Dogmas of Effective Field Theory: Scheme Dependence, Fundamental Parameters, and the Many Faces of the Higgs Naturalness Principle

Rosaler

2021

Found Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The earliest formulation of the Higgs naturalness argument has been criticized on the grounds that it relies on a particular cutoff-based regularization scheme. One response to this criticism has been to circumvent the worry by reformulating the naturalness argument in terms of a renormalized, regulator-independent parametrization. An alternative response is to deny that regulator dependence poses a problem for the naturalness argument, because nature itself furnishes a particular, physically correct regulator for any effective field theory (EFT) in the form of that EFT’s physical cutoff, together with an associated set of bare parameters that constitute the unique physically preferred “fundamental parameters” of the EFT. Here, I argue that both lines of defense against the initial worry about regulator dependence are flawed. I argue that reformulation of the naturalness argument in terms of renormalized parameters simply trades dependence on a particular regularization scheme for dependence on a particular renormalization scheme, and that one or another form of scheme dependence afflicts all formulations of the Higgs naturalness argument. Concerning the second response, I argue that the grounds for suspending the principle of regularization or renormalization scheme independence in favor of a physically preferred parametrization are thin; the assumption of a physically preferred parametrization, whether in the form of bare “fundamental parameters” or renormalized “physical parameters,” constitutes a theoretical idle wheel in generating the confirmed predictions of established EFTs, which are invariably scheme-independent. I highlight certain features of the alternative understanding of EFTs, and the EFT-based approach to understanding the foundations of QFT, that emerges when one abandons the assumption of a physically preferred parametrization. I explain how this understanding departs from several dogmas concerning the mathematical formulation and physical interpretation of EFTs in high-energy physics.

show abstract

“…For operators relevant at low energies, the assumption of naturalness is harder to justify, and the Higgs mass and cosmological constant problems highlight the apparent failure of naturalness (cf Williams (2015). andRosaler and Harlander (2019) for discussion of the Higgs mass, and Schneider (2020a),Schneider (2020b),Koberinski (2021b),Koberinski (2021c), andKoberinski and Smeenk (2022) for philosophical discussion of the cosmological constant problem).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%