4.7 Article

Disorder averaging and its UV discontents

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 105, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.086021

关键词

-

资金

  1. DOE (HEP) [DE-SC0013528]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a detailed realization of the quantum field theory ensembles in D < 4 spacetime dimensions, allowing for a random averaging of coupling constants. The resulting volume, when each member of the ensemble is a conformal field theory with a standard semiclassical holographic dual, can be interpreted as an asymptotically anti-de Sitter space geometry with a distribution of boundary components joined by wormhole configurations. This construction provides a UV completion of the proposal for a high-dimensional Hilbert space for baby universes, while remaining consistent with the proposed swampland constraints.
We present a stringy realization of quantum field theory ensembles in D < 4 spacetime dimensions, thus realizing a disorder averaging over coupling constants. When each member of the ensemble is a conformal field theory with a standard semiclassical holographic dual of the same radius, the resulting bulk can be interpreted as a single asymptotically anti???de Sitter space geometry with a distribution of boundary components joined by wormhole configurations, as dictated by the Hartle???Hawking wave function. This provides a UV completion of a recent proposal by Marolf and Maxfield that there is a high-dimensional Hilbert space for baby universes, but one that is compatible with the proposed swampland constraints of McNamara and Vafa. This is possible because our construction is really an approximation that breaks down both at short distances, but also at low energies for objects with a large number of microstates. The construction thus provides an explicit set of counterexamples to various claims in the literature that holographic and effective field theory considerations can be reliably developed without reference to any UV completion.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据