Cited by 312Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational TheoryBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics

Lorentz Invariance and Quantum Gravity: An Additional Fine-Tuning Problem?

Open access
Collins, John, Perez, Alejandro, Sudarsky, Daniel, Urrutia, Luis, Vucetich, Héctor·2004·Physical Review Letters

Abstract

Trying to combine standard quantum field theories with gravity leads to a breakdown of the usual structure of space time at around the Planck length, 1.6x10(-35) m, with possible violations of Lorentz invariance. Calculations of preferred-frame effects in quantum gravity have further motivated high precision searches for Lorentz violation. Here, we explain that combining known elementary particle interactions with a Planck-scale preferred frame gives rise to Lorentz violation at the percent level, some 20 orders of magnitude higher than earlier estimates, unless the bare parameters of the theory are unnaturally strongly fine tuned. Therefore an important task is not just the improvement of the precision of searches for violations of Lorentz invariance, but also the search for theoretical mechanisms for automatically preserving Lorentz invariance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevlett.93.191301

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Effective field theory strongly limits the possibility that LIV stays small once interactions in QFT are included.

    “However, it was soon realized [115] that the framework of effective field theories severely restricts the possibility that LIV remains small when interactions in QFT are taken into account.”

    From The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity (2013) · cites this paper as [115]

  • Unless a fundamental protecting mechanism exists, dimension-five or higher LIV terms will generically generate dimension-four and lower LIV terms.

    “In fact, dimension five or higher LIV terms will generically (in the absence of some fundamental protecting mechanism) generate dimension four and lower LIV terms (with factors in front that are at best quadratic in standard model coupling constants).”

    From The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity (2013) · cites this paper as [115]

  • The absence of lower dimension operators implies that either there is a fine tuning in the Lorentz violating sector, some other symmetry is present that protects the lower dimension operators, or Lorentz invariance is an exact symmetry.

    “The absence of lower dimension operators implies that either there is a fine tuning in the Lorentz violating sector [91], some other symmetry is present that protects the lower dimension operators, or Lorentz invariance is an exact symmetry.”

    From Modern Tests of Lorentz Invariance (2005) · cites this paper as [91]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [4]V.A. Kosteleck´ y and S. Samuel, Phys. Rev. D 39 , 683 (1989). G. Amelino-Camelia, J.R. Ellis, N.E. Mavromatos and D.V. Nanopoulos, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 12 , 607 (1997). J.R. Ellis, N.E. Mavromatos, and D.V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Rev. D 61 , 027503 (2000). J.R. Ellis, K. Farakos, N.E. Mavromatos, V.A. Mitsou, and D.V. Nanopoulos, Astrophys. J. 535 , 139 (2000). J. Alfaro, H.A. Morales-Tecotl, and L.F. Urrutia, Phys. Rev. D 66 , 124006 (2002). H. Sahlmann and T. Thiemann, arXiv:grqc/0207031.
  2. [9]J. Polchinski, 'String Theory,' Vols. I and II, Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collins, J., Perez, A., Sudarsky, D., Urrutia, L., & Vucetich, H.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
  • Universidad Nacional de La Plata (AR)
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Published
2004-11-05
Volume
93
Issue
19
Pages
191301-191301
ISSN
  • 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1079-7114
OpenAlex
W2009830847
Cited by
312
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 25
FWCI
11.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
Keywords
Lorentz violation, quantum gravity, Planck length, preferred frame, fine-tuning problem, quantum field theory of gravity, Planck-scale physics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review