• FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017

  • Using Klauder’s Enhanced Quantization to set a bound to the Cosmological constant, in Pre Planckian space- as a way to ascertain the most important fundamental physics question. by Andrew Beckwith

much appreciated Peter

I.e. the reply window as far as fqxi is really short, and I have the same problem!

Andrew

... there is no need for a bounce (cyclic in radius and time) when you have ralpha'/R. The universe is cyclic in mass and time.

Andrew wanted me to post something I wrote on my essay blog area. This concerns a difficulty I see with Klauder's quantization. I do this with some trepidation I must confess, for I have noticed that when I point to a problem with some claimed physics this results in down votes.

Here is the problem with Klauder's idea. I have to use parentheses for langle and rangle or bra-ket stuff because this system snags up on those. If we have quantum states П€(p,r,t) = (П€(t)|p,r) then the operators bf p and bf r (bf before letter stands for operators) act on the wave function

bf pbf rП€(p,r,t) = (П€(t) bf |pbf r|p,r) = (П€(t)| bf pr|p,r) = pr(П€(t)|p,r)

and similarly I can write

bf rbf pП€(p,r,t) = (П€(t)| bf rbf p|p,r) = (П€(t)| bf rp|p,r) =rp(П€(t)|p,r)

where r and p are just eigenvalues or numbers and so rp = pr. We can then conclude [bf p, bf r] = 0, which is a big oopsie. I hinted at this problem and he responded in a way that was a bit testy. There is a problem with pointing out a possible error in somebody's paper in that they can one-bomb you.

Klauder maintains we can have a position and momentum representation of QM simultaneously. This is generally not admitted. In your paper you use the Schrödinger equation i∂ψ/∂t =Hψ to get under "langle rangle" pdq - Hdt in the classical setting. This turns out to be alright in general.

Quantum mechanics has only one representation at once. Either one has the position or momentum configurations. This hearkens back to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The operators used in a representation act on the variables of that representation. Unfortunately Klauder is trying to do QM in incommensurate variables or operators.

Cheers LC

    Andrew,

    I agree that certainly the cosmological constant is a fundamental metric... and very constant.

    I have read somewhat about the severe difficulties in computing it from theory, so I appreciate that you are searching out and testing new methods.

    To be sure, I am not expert in this aspect. But to my thinking it would help a lot if GR theorists treated the temporal curvature as an imaginary quantity. That certainly eliminates the cosmological coincidence problem... so perhaps both problems resolve together?

    Anyway, I am sure that there is more "what" to that which is "fundamental". For certain one must account for quantum algebra.

    More to the point, our universe is merely the sum of its particles. So for the respective formulae to be consistent, both must have the SAME form!

    Given that, and my assertion of a foundational formula, I'd suggest that you also read Sabine Hossenfelder's paper. It discusses some of the issues you responded to in Sec 6 at length.

    Wayne

    THANKS FOR THE REPLY. I AM SEEKING A REAL DISCUSSION OF THE PHYSICS BASICS IN THIS ENDEAVOR.

    Dear Andrew,

    Thank you very much for reading and for commenting the ideas from my essay.

    You wrote "I would like it very much if you reviewed and commented on my essay, December 21, using this analogy to rate and review why I used John Klauders enhanced quantization. Awaiting your reply. i.e. this is a very relevant insight."

    You seem to approach inflation and the problem of the cosmological constant using Klauder's quantization to obtain a bound on the cosmological constant. You seem to get this by equating Klauder's action and that of Padmabhan for inflation. You derive from this a bounce to avoid the cosmic singularity in pre-Plankian regime. I'm happy for your result on what you consider to be "THE outstanding problem and question of physics today", congratulations! I say this as a humble spectator of inflation and Klauder quantization, not being actively involved in either, so I don't know how useful my comments are to you, but I hope they help. I hope you'll get more relevant comments from Klauder himself. Success with your work and the contest!

    Best regards,

    Cristi

    Wayne, you mean T-duality provides the bounce. That is quite possible.

    12 days later

    Hello Mr Beckwith,

    What a wonderful general essay.I loved how you take the problem of this quantum gravitationa and how you link with the pre planckian era and this inflation.One of my favorite.I asked me if you have already thought about the spherical coordinates and the lagrange euler method and also in considering the motions orbital and spinal.In all case your essay is relevant, I am wishing you all the best in this contest.

    Best Regards

      The kinetic and potential énergies also can converge with the diagrams of Feynman, and if this Dark matter exists and that we insert it also in this puzzle, we can have a relevant road to quantize this quantum weakest force.It seems that this force is not electromagntic.It is hypothetical but this DM seems an important piece of puzzle even at this pre planckian era where all was one.I consider even that aether is gravitational and correlatede with this reasoning.If the action is an important piece of puzzle and that this DM does not interact with our ordinary barynic matter, so it is a big puzzle all this and how to find these particles? The potential and kinetic énergies and the motions can be better understood in superimposing this gravitation to our standard model, but how ? In all case thanks for your relevant essay, I learn in the same time also,

      Best Regards

      Hi, Steve

      I appreciate your kind words, I am merely trying to outline a theory which takes into account having a non singular, spherical geometry ( or roughly that) in initial configurations.

      Here is an update as to the intentions

      Using Klauder's Enhanced Quantization for a Bound to the Cosmological Constant, to Obtain a Nonzero Graviton Mass, in the Early Universe, and Generation of (Heavy) Gravity Which is Consistent from Cycle to Cycle.

      Authors: Andrew Beckwith

      We are looking at comparison of two action integrals and we identify the Lagrangian multiplier as setting up a constraint equation (on cosmological expansion). What we have done is to replace the Hamber Quantum gravity reference-based action integral with a result from John Klauder's "Enhanced Quantization" . In doing so, with Padamabhan's treatment of the inflaton, we then initiate an explicit bound upon the cosmological constant. The other approximation is to use the inflaton results and conflate them with John Klauder's Action principle for a way to, if we have the idea of a potential well, generalized by Klauder, with a wall of space time in the Pre Planckian-regime to ask what bounds the Cosmological constant prior to inflation. And, get an upper bound on the mass of a graviton. We conclude with a re do of a multiverse version of the Penrose cyclic conformal cosmology to ascertain how this mass of a heavy graviton is consistent from cycle to cycle.

      Comments: 7 Pages. for possible submission to Marcel Grossman 15, as an entry

        Hello Mr Beckwith,

        Thanks for sharing.It seems a good road to better understand this inflation and this gravitation. I asked me if the gravitons which are bosons can be considered for this quantum weakest force.The problemm seems that they are bosons and that if this QG is not baryonic, so these gravitons are not the answer.This dark matter intrigues me a lot, I prefer to consider it instead of considering the MOND of Milgrom.Your works are relevant Mr Beckwith, a real pleasure to read these lines of reasoning, general.

        Best Regards

        see if this is informative

        http://vixra.org/abs/1802.0305

        Using "Enhanced Quantization" to Bound the Cosmological Constant, (For a Bound-on Graviton Mass), by Comparing Two Action Integrals(one Being from General Relativity) at the Start of Inflation

        Authors: Andrew Beckwith

        We are looking at comparison of two action integrals and we identify the Lagrangian multiplier as setting up a constraint equation (on cosmological expansion). This is a direct result of the fourth equation of our manuscript which unconventionally compares the action integral of General relativity with the second derived action integral, which then permits equation 5, which is a bound on the Cosmological constant. What we have done is to replace the Hamber Quantum gravity reference-based action integral with a result from John Klauder's "Enhanced Quantization" . In doing so, with Padamabhan's treatment of the inflaton, we then initiate an explicit bound upon the cosmological constant. The other approximation is to use the inflaton results and conflate them with John Klauder's Action principle for a way to, if we have the idea of a potential well, generalized by Klauder, with a wall of space time in the Pre Planckian-regime to ask what bounds the Cosmological constant prior to inflation. And, get an upper bound on the mass of a graviton. We conclude with a redo of a multiverse version of the Penrose cyclic conformal cosmology to show how this mass of a heavy graviton is consistent from cycle to cycle. All this is possible due to equation 4. And we compare all this with results of reference [1] in the conclusion.

        Comments: 10 Pages. For possible inclusion into FFP 15, pending acceptance by Jesus Cancier, of Alicante, Spain, and the FFP 15 committee

        Download: PDF

        Submission history

        [v1] 2018-02-21 22:20:41

        Unique-IP document downloads: 0 times

        Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

        Thanks for sharing, all this is very relevant,best regards ,

        I wish to protest what was a case of rate bombing of my essay which knocked it from 6.8 to 6.4. This sort of bombing should not be allowed and I will contact FQXI and make my protest official.

          I have already emailed Foster, with the following complaint

          quote

          I am extremely angry

          My essay on the last 24 hours was rate bombed and kicked from 6.8 to 6.4

          This should NOT be allowed.

          Please find out who did it. I am furious,.

          End of quote

          Cease and desist

          I did not rate bomb other essays, please have the decency required

          to stop this behavior.

          To the person who did it, what you did is dishonorable.

          Andrew Beckwith, PhD

          Put in as a follow up comment

          quote

          I have put it as a comment on the end of my topic essay

          I did not rate bomb other essays, i.e. those whom have

          issues should refrain from doing it.

          Completely dishonorable.

          end of quote

          If further rate bombing occurs, I will say this. you whom are doing it are abusing this system and you are cowards.

          For your information, an abbreviated version of this essay, with a different orientation has been submitted to the Gravity foundation contest, and so you whom have done rate bombing have only led me to have my voice heard in a different forum.

          I did not expect to win this contest. I did not expect this last minute cowwardly behavior.

          It is too bad for you who did this cowardly behavior, but my essay has been already accepted by George Rideout of the gravity foundation as an entry.

          IMO you failed to shut me up

          In addition, a variant of this essay will be put up in Rencontres de Moriond.,

          Take that for what it is worth, you rate bombing coward

          Andrew Beckwith, PhD

          http://moriond.in2p3.fr/cosmo/2018/participants.php

          Dear rate bombing coward.

          Please observe that I have a spot on this list

          Also, coward the following will be presented in

          Moriond

          YOU LOOSE

          Using "Enhanced Quantization" to Bound the Cosmological Constant, (For a Bound-on Graviton Mass), by Comparing Two Action Integrals(one Being from General Relativity) at the Start of Inflation

          Authors: Andrew Beckwith

          We are looking at comparison of two action integrals and we identify the Lagrangian multiplier as setting up a constraint equation (on cosmological expansion). This is a direct result of the fourth equation of our manuscript which unconventionally compares the action integral of General relativity with the second derived action integral, which then permits equation 5, which is a bound on the Cosmological constant. What we have done is to replace the Hamber Quantum gravity reference-based action integral with a result from John Klauder's "Enhanced Quantization" . In doing so, with Padamabhan's treatment of the inflaton, we then initiate an explicit bound upon the cosmological constant. The other approximation is to use the inflaton results and conflate them with John Klauder's Action principle for a way to, if we have the idea of a potential well, generalized by Klauder, with a wall of space time in the Pre Planckian-regime to ask what bounds the Cosmological constant prior to inflation. And, get an upper bound on the mass of a graviton. We conclude with a redo of a multiverse version of the Penrose cyclic conformal cosmology to show how this mass of a heavy graviton is consistent from cycle to cycle. All this is possible due to equation 4. And we compare all this with results of reference [1] in the conclusion.

          Comments: 10 Pages. For possible inclusion into FFP 15, pending acceptance by Jesus Cancier, of Alicante, Spain, and the FFP 15 committee

          Download: PDF