4.7 Article

Reduced phase space quantization of black holes: Path integrals and effective dynamics

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 104, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.126003

关键词

-

资金

  1. Polish Narodowe Centrum Nauki [2018/30/Q/ST2/00811]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this research, the loop quantum theory is applied to the spherically symmetric model of gravity coupled to Gaussian dust fields to study the quantum features of black holes. By utilizing the path integral formulation, the quantum dynamics are investigated and an effective action is obtained to describe the continuous description of the quantum lattice system. The derived Hamiltonian in this study differs from the classical Hamiltonian with the holonomy correction for macro black holes, requiring a sufficiently fine lattice structure.
We consider the loop quantum theory of the spherically symmetric model of gravity coupled to Gaussian dust fields, where the Gaussian dust fields provide a material reference frame of the space and time to deparametrize gravity. This theory, used to study the quantum features of the spherically symmetric BH, is constructed based on a 1-dimensional lattice gamma subset of R. Taking advantage of the path integral formulation, we investigate the quantum dynamics and obtain an effective action. With this action, we get an effective continuous description of this quantum lattice system which is not the same as the one described by the effective Hamiltonian used in [M. Han and H. Liu, Improved effective dynamics of loop-quantum-gravity black hole and Nariai limit], i.e., the classical Hamiltonian with the holonomy correction. It turns out that, the Hamiltonian derived in this paper can return to that used in [M. Han and H. Liu] only for macro black holes, since the lattice gamma is required to be sufficiently fine. Indeed, it is necessary to propose this finegrained lattice structure in order to well describe the underlying lattice theory by the continuous description.

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