Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Violations of the Null Energy Condition in QFT and their Implications

Krommydas, Dimitrios·2018·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1806.00107arXiv 1806.00107
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We study violations of the Null Energy Condition (NEC) in Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and their implications. For the first part of the project, we examine these violations for classes of already known and novel (first discussed here) QFT states. Next, we discuss the implications of these violations focusing on the example of Wormhole Traversability. After reviewing the current literature on the existing restrictions on these violations, we conjecture that NEC violating states are incompatible with the Semi-Classical Gravity approximation. We argue that this conjecture provides the only way out of the problems introduced by the violations of NEC in this regime. Building on this, we propose a bound that should hold for all QFT states. Finally, we show that both our conjecture and bound hold for some relevant classes of QFT states.

Overview

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1806.00107

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 (Taken from [76]) A 2-D picture of the geodesic sphere. k is a null vector along a null geodesic, and the green curves portray both the focusing and shearing of the null congruence.
Figure 1 (Taken from [76]) A 2-D picture of the geodesic sphere. k is a null vector along a null geodesic, and the green curves portray both the focusing and shearing of the null congruence.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 (Taken from [25]) Causal diamond on a 4-D Minkowski spacetime, where one spatial dimension has been omitted : starting with a null congruence B on a fixed time slice, we draw the light-cones at each point. Four null hypersurfaces arise, from which F 1 and F 3 form the causal diamond. The expansion of B along hypersurface F 1 is negative (ingoing rays) and along F 2 positive (outgoing rays).
Figure 2 (Taken from [25]) Causal diamond on a 4-D Minkowski spacetime, where one spatial dimension has been omitted : starting with a null congruence B on a fixed time slice, we draw the light-cones at each point. Four null hypersurfaces arise, from which F 1 and F 3 form the causal diamond. The expansion of B along hypersurface F 1 is negative (ingoing rays) and along F 2 positive (outgoing rays).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 (Taken from [24]) The evolution of a Null congruence in 4-D spacetimes, where one spatial dimension is omitted : the first diagram depicts this evolution for a stationary spacetime. An initial null congruence (yellow circle) will either expand (blue circle) or contract (orange circle), depending on whether light is ingoing or outgoing (fig. 2). However, if spacetime is contracting fast enough, the congruence on a later slice will contract in both the ingoing and outgoing case.
Figure 3 (Taken from [24]) The evolution of a Null congruence in 4-D spacetimes, where one spatial dimension is omitted : the first diagram depicts this evolution for a stationary spacetime. An initial null congruence (yellow circle) will either expand (blue circle) or contract (orange circle), depending on whether light is ingoing or outgoing (fig. 2). However, if spacetime is contracting fast enough, the congruence on a later slice will contract in both the ingoing and outgoing case.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 (Taken from [7])In these diagram T is the vertical and R the horizontal axis. Because the angular directions are suppressed, one should think of each point on this diagram as a 2-sphere of radius the value of coordinate r at that point.
Figure 4 (Taken from [7])In these diagram T is the vertical and R the horizontal axis. Because the angular directions are suppressed, one should think of each point on this diagram as a 2-sphere of radius the value of coordinate r at that point.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 (Taken from [7]) The spacelike slices of (fig. 4); Snap-shots of space, which show the formation and vanishing of the Schwarzschild dynamical wormhole.
Figure 5 (Taken from [7]) The spacelike slices of (fig. 4); Snap-shots of space, which show the formation and vanishing of the Schwarzschild dynamical wormhole.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 (Taken from [11]) A wormhole connecting two asymptotically flat regions of spacetime. The diagram depicts this geometry for constant time t = t 0 and θ = π/ 2
Figure 6 (Taken from [11]) A wormhole connecting two asymptotically flat regions of spacetime. The diagram depicts this geometry for constant time t = t 0 and θ = π/ 2CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 〈 T ++ 〉 plotted against the conformal weight of O 2 .
Figure 7 〈 T ++ 〉 plotted against the conformal weight of O 2 .CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 〈 T ++ 〉 , when the conformal weight of O 2 is h 2 = 0 . 2, plotted against σ -τ ( x -in light-cone coordinates).
Figure 8 〈 T ++ 〉 , when the conformal weight of O 2 is h 2 = 0 . 2, plotted against σ -τ ( x -in light-cone coordinates).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 9 (Taken from [69])Assuming the 4-D case and omitting one spatial dimension, one obtains the above figure. The null hypersurface N is in green, in yellow we see the 'outside' half of the Cauchy surface M and the black line is co-dim 2 surface Σ. The deformation of Σ, and hence the variation, is performed along a 'pencil' of infinitesimal area A , which contains point p . After deforming Σ once more in the neighborhood of p , we obtain the second variation of the entanglement entropy of the fields living on half of M: δ 2 S out δλ ( p ) δλ ( p ) .
Figure 9 (Taken from [69])Assuming the 4-D case and omitting one spatial dimension, one obtains the above figure. The null hypersurface N is in green, in yellow we see the 'outside' half of the Cauchy surface M and the black line is co-dim 2 surface Σ. The deformation of Σ, and hence the variation, is performed along a 'pencil' of infinitesimal area A , which contains point p . After deforming Σ once more in the neighborhood of p , we obtain the second variation of the entanglement entropy of the fields living on half of M: δ 2 S out δλ ( p ) δλ ( p ) .CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 10
CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 71

  1. M. Parikh and J. P. van der Schaar, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) no.8, 084002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.084002 [arXiv:1406.5163 [hep-th]]. · DOI
  2. M. Parikh, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24 (2015) 1544030 doi:10.1142/S0218271815440307 [arXiv:1512.03448 [hep-th]]. · DOI
  3. Amalkumar Raychaudhuri, Phys. Rev. 98, 1123 (1955), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.98.1123 · DOI
  4. C. I. Kuo and L. H. Ford, Phys. Rev. D 47 (1993) 4510 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.47.4510 [gr-qc/9304008]. · DOI
  5. N.D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space. Cambridge University Press, 1982.
  6. S. M. Carroll, San Francisco, USA: Addison-Wesley (2004) 513 p
  7. B. S. DeWitt, Phys. Rept. 19 (1975) 295. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(75)90051-4 · DOI
  8. D. Tong, arXiv:0908.0333 [hep-th]. · arXiv
  9. Philippe Di Francesco, Pierre Mathieu, David Senechal, Conformal Field The- ory. Springer, New York 1997.
  10. M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, Am. J. Phys. 56 (1988) 395. doi:10.1119/1.15620 · DOI
  11. M. J. Pfenning, gr-qc/9805037. · arXiv
  12. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. 51 (1948) 793] [Front. Phys. 65 (1987) 342] [
  13. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. 100N3-4 (1997) 61].
  14. L. M. Butcher, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) no.2, 024019 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.024019 [arXiv:1405.1283 [gr-qc]]. · DOI
  15. Homer G. Ellis, J. Math. Phys. 14, 104 (1973), doi:10.1063/1.1666161. · DOI
  16. J. R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder, Phys. Rev. 56 (1939) 455. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.56.455 · DOI
  17. Ludvwig Flamm, Physik Z. 17, 448 (1916)
  18. Penrose R., Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 57 , 1965, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.14.57 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Penrose, R., Gravitational collapse: The role of general relativity, 1969, doi:10.1023/A:1016534604511. · DOI
  20. Wald, R., General Relativity, 1984, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  21. B. Carter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 26 (1971) 331. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.26.331 · DOI
  22. J. D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D 5 (1972) 1239. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.5.1239 · DOI
  23. S. A. Hayward, gr-qc/9303006. · arXiv
  24. R. Bousso, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 825 (2002) doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.74.825 [hep-th/0203101]. · DOI · Paper page
  25. F. J. Tipler, Phys. Rev. D 17 (1978) 2521. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.17.2521 · DOI
  26. E. Curiel, arXiv:1405.0403 [physics.hist-ph]. · arXiv
  27. D. Gannon , J. Math. Phys. 16 (1975) 2364 . doi:10.1063/1.522498 · DOI
  28. C. Lee, Comm. Math. Phys. 51 (1976) p.157-162. doi:10.1007/BF01609346. · DOI
  29. S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. Lett. 26 (1971) 1344. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.26.1344 · DOI
  30. R. M. Wald and U. Yurtsever, Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 403. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.44.403 · DOI
  31. P. T. Chrusciel and R. M. Wald, Class. Quant. Grav. 11 (1994) L147 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/11/12/001 [gr-qc/9410004]. · DOI
  32. G.J. Galloway, Commun. Math. Phys. 151 (1993) 53. doi:10.1007/BF02096748 · DOI
  33. G.J. Galloway, Class. Quant. Grav. 12 (1995) L99-L101. doi:10.1088/0264- 9381/12/10/002. · DOI
  34. W. Israel, Phys. Rev. 164 (1967) 1776. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.164.1776 · DOI
  35. W. Israel, Comm. Math. Phys. Volume 8 (1968) p. 245-260. doi:10.1007/BF01645859 · DOI
  36. C. Teitelboim, Lett. Nuovo Cimento (1972) 3: 397. doi:10.1007/BF02826050 · DOI
  37. C. Teitelboim, Phys. Rev. D 5 (1972) 2941. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.5.2941 · DOI
  38. R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D 6 (1972) 1476. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.6.1476 · DOI
  39. R. M. Wald, J. Math. Phys. 14 (1973) 1453. doi:10.1063/1.1666203 · DOI
  40. Hagen, H.M.Z., Robinson, D.C. & Seifert, H.J. Gen Relat Gravit (1973) 4: 53. doi:10.1007/BF00769760 · DOI
  41. D. C. Robinson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 34 (1975) 905. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.34.905 · DOI
  42. Robinson, D.C. Gen Relat Gravit (1977) 8: 695. doi:10.1007/BF00756322 · DOI
  43. P. O. Mazur, 1982 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 15 3173. doi:10.1088/0305- 4470/15/10/021 · DOI
  44. S. A. Hayward, gr-qc/9405055. · arXiv
  45. E. E. Flanagan, D. Marolf and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 084035 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.084035 [hep-th/9908070]. · DOI
  46. M. Visser, B. Bassett and S. Liberati, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 88 (2000) 267 doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(00)00782-9 [gr-qc/9810026]. · DOI
  47. S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 603. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.603 · DOI
  48. H. Lee, S.W. Kin, Phys. Lett. B 593 (2004) 17-24. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.05.003 · DOI
  49. Glauber, Roy J., Phys. Rev. 131 (1963) 2766. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.131.2766 · DOI
  50. S. V. Krasnikov, gr-qc/0003092. · arXiv
  51. C. Armendariz-Picon, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 104010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.104010 [gr-qc/0201027]. · DOI
  52. P. K. F. Kuhfittig, Fund. J. Mod. Phys. 7 (2014) 111 [arXiv:1409.8534 [gr-qc]]. · arXiv
  53. E. A. Kontou, arXiv:1507.06299 [gr-qc]. · arXiv
  54. L. H. Ford, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 364 (1978) 227. doi:10.1098/rspa.1978.0197 · DOI
  55. M. Visser, S. Kar and N. Dadhich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 201102 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.201102 [gr-qc/0301003]. · DOI
  56. J. Maldacena and L. Susskind, Fortsch. Phys. 61 (2013) 781 doi:10.1002/prop.201300020 [arXiv:1306.0533 [hep-th]]. · DOI · Paper page
  57. A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski and J. Sully, JHEP 1302 (2013) 062 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2013)062 [arXiv:1207.3123 [hep-th]]. · DOI · Paper page
  58. L. H. Ford and T. A. Roman, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 104018 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.104018 [gr-qc/9901074]. · DOI
  59. M. Van Raamsdonk, Gen. Rel. Grav. 42 (2010) 2323 [Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 19 (2010) 2429] doi:10.1007/s10714-010-1034-0, 10.1142/S0218271810018529 [arXiv:1005.3035 [hep-th]]. · DOI · Paper page
  60. E. P. Verlinde, arXiv:1611.02269 [hep-th]. · arXiv
  61. L. H. Ford and C. H. Wu, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 42 (2003) 15 doi:10.1023/A:1023322904365 [gr-qc/0102063]. · DOI
  62. B. L. Hu and N. G. Phillips, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 39 (2000) 1817 doi:10.1023/A:1003689630751 [gr-qc/0004006]. · DOI
  63. S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975) 199 Erratum: [Commun. Math. Phys. 46 (1976) 206]. doi:10.1007/BF02345020 · DOI · Paper page
  64. R. Bousso, Z. Fisher, S. Leichenauer and A. C. Wall, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) no.6, 064044 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.064044 [arXiv:1506.02669 [hep-th]]. · DOI · Paper page
  65. R. Bousso, Z. Fisher, J. Koeller, S. Leichenauer and A. C. Wall, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) no.2, 024017 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.024017 [arXiv:1509.02542 [hep-th]]. · DOI · Paper page
  66. R. Bousso, JHEP 9907 (1999) 004 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1999/07/004 [hep- th/9905177]. · DOI · Paper page
  67. A. C. Wall, Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 165003 Erratum: [Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 199501] doi:10.1088/0264-9381/30/19/199501, 10.1088/0264- 9381/30/16/165003 [arXiv:1010.5513 [gr-qc]]. · DOI
  68. R. C. Myers, R. Pourhasan and M. Smolkin, JHEP 1306 (2013) 013 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2013)013 [arXiv:1304.2030 [hep-th]]. · DOI
  69. J. D. Bekenstein, Lett. Nuovo Cim. 4 (1972) 737. doi:10.1007/BF02757029 · DOI · Paper page
  70. B. L. Hu, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38 (1999) 2987 doi:10.1023/A:1026664317157 [gr-qc/9902064]. · DOI
  71. C. H. Wu and L. H. Ford, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 104013 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.104013 [gr-qc/9905012]. · DOI

Cited by

See all 1

Metadata

Authors
Krommydas, D.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1806.00107
arXiv
1806.00107
References
6
Type
Preprint
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.