De Sitter Space Without Dynamical Quantum Fluctuations
Open accessAbstract
We argue that, under certain plausible assumptions, de Sitter space settles into a quiescent vacuum in which there are no dynamical quantum fluctuations. Such fluctuations require either an evolving microstate, or time-dependent histories of out-of-equilibrium recording devices, which we argue are absent in stationary states. For a massive scalar field in a fixed de Sitter background, the cosmic no-hair theorem implies that the state of the patch approaches the vacuum, where there are no fluctuations. We argue that an analogous conclusion holds whenever a patch of de Sitter is embedded in a larger theory with an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, including semiclassical quantum gravity with false vacua or complementarity in theories with at least one Minkowski vacuum. This reasoning provides an escape from the Boltzmann brain problem in such theories. It also implies that vacuum states do not uptunnel to higher-energy vacua and that perturbations do not decohere while slow-roll inflation occurs, suggesting that eternal inflation is much less common than often supposed. On the other hand, if a de Sitter patch is a closed system with a finite-dimensional Hilbert space, there will be Poincare recurrences and dynamical Boltzmann fluctuations into lower-entropy states. Our analysis does not alter the conventional understanding of the origin of density fluctuations from primordial inflation, since reheating naturally generates a high-entropy environment and leads to decoherence, nor does it affect the existence of non-dynamical vacuum fluctuations such as those that give rise to the Casimir effect.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Quantum fluctuations in de Sitter space do not actually bring into existence decohered branches of the wave function containing freak observers.
“As argued in [27], however, quantum fluctuations in de Sitter space don't actually bring into existence decohered branches of the wave function containing such freak observers.”
From In What Sense Is the Early Universe Fine-Tuned? (2014) · cites this paper as [27]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 8
- Authors
- Boddy, K. K., Carroll, S. M., & Pollack, J.
- Affiliations
- California Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2014
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1405.0298
- OpenAlex
- W2950589815
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (acceptedVersion)
- CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (acceptedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Energy
- Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
- Keywords
- de Sitter space, cosmic no-hair theorem, massive scalar field, quantum gravity, complementarity, Poincaré recurrence, decoherence, slow-roll inflation, eternal inflation, vacuum decay, Casimir effect, reheating, primordial density fluctuations
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