Working PaperPDF Available

Fully Classical Quantum Gravity

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

ABSTRACTIt’s an experimental fact that quantum objects in the ground state do not radiateelectromagnetic energy, but what are the limits on our knowledge of the gravitationalequivalent of this? In semiclassical gravity it is the expectation values of quantumparticle positions that form the source for the Einstein equations, thus a particle oratom in a ground state emits no gravitational radiation. Here we instead assumea fully classical quantum gravity - the internal components of objects in a purequantum state are assumed to classically radiate gravitational waves. The effects ofthis theory of microscopic gravity on the measured properties of the hydrogen atom,along with possibilities to experimentally measure the effects of atomic or nuclearscale gravitational radiation are explored. Fully Classical Quantum Gravity. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316977065_Fully_Classical_Quantum_Gravity [accessed Apr 07 2018].
Content may be subject to copyright.
Fully Classical Quantum Gravity
Thomas C Andersen*
NSCIR - Ontario, Canada
(Dated: May 16, 2017)
ABSTRACT
It’s an experimental fact that quantum objects in the ground state do not radiate
electromagnetic energy, but what are the limits on our knowledge of the gravitational
equivalent of this? In semiclassical gravity it is the expectation values of quantum
particle positions that form the source for the Einstein equations, thus a particle or
atom in a ground state emits no gravitational radiation. Here we instead assume
a fully classical quantum gravity - the internal components of objects in a pure
quantum state are assumed to classically radiate gravitational waves. The effects of
this theory of microscopic gravity on the measured properties of the hydrogen atom,
along with possibilities to experimentally measure the effects of atomic or nuclear
scale gravitational radiation are explored.
Essay written for the Gravity Research Foundation 2017 Awards for Essays on Gravitation.
NSCIR 8 Bruce St. Bx 841 Thornbury Ontario, N0H 2P0, Canada
*tandersen@nscir.ca
2
INTRODUCTION
The quantum gravity problem remains unsolved in physics today. There are many pos-
sible solutions proposed, but almost all of them suppose the existence of the graviton. The
graviton should have the same energy relation as the photon:
Egraviton =~ν(1)
There not only exists no experimental confirmation of this relationship for gravity, it
is also widely known that an experiment to detect a single graviton is well beyond the
capabilities of any present or future realizable experiment. Gravity may simply be a non
quantum effect. Rosenfeld in 1963 is still very much relevant[10]
There is no denying that, considering the universality of the quantum of
action, it is very tempting to regard any classical theory as a limiting case to some
quantal theory. In the absence of empirical evidence, however, this temptation
should be resisted. The case for quantizing gravitation, in particular, far from
being straightforward, appears very dubious on closer examination.
OTHER CLASSICAL GRAVITY THEORIES
Semiclassical gravity can be summarized as a classical gravitational field coupled to quan-
tum matter fields. While semiclassical gravity is widely thought of as a workable limiting
approximation until a quantum theory of gravity is discovered, there are researchers who
treat semiclassical gravity as a real possibility and hence in need of experimental tests[7].
The semiclassical equations for quantum gravity are as from Møller[8] and Rosenfeld[10]:
gµν Rµν 1
2gµν gµν R=8πG
c4gµν hΨ|Tµν |Ψi(2)
While seemingly straightforward, semiclassical gravity has subtleties, especially in deter-
mining the quantum expectation value (see Appendix A of Bahrami[2]).
Another classical treatment of quantum gravity comes from Roger Penrose with the
Gravitization of Quantum Mechanics[9] where he posits that gravity connects not to the
expectation value, but rather directly to each superposed quantum state. Gravitation causes
collapse as the gravitational field of multiple superposed states becomes too energetic.
3
FULLY CLASSICAL QUANTUM GRAVITY
Fully classical quantum gravity (FCQG) uses Einstein’s equations as given,
gµν Rµν 1
2gµν gµν R=8πG
c4gµν Tµν (3)
with the coupling to microscopic matter being on some assumed sub-quantum level,
where particle positions always have a definite value, as in for instance de Broglie - Bohm
mechanics[3]. Of course if one uses Bohmian mechanics in its entirety, then gravitation is
also quantized, and particles will not radiate from their ground states. We thus assume here
that quantization does not apply to gravity at all, that particle trajectories are real and that
they interact directly and classically using the laws of Einstein’s general relativity. In many
ways it is similar to the program of stochastic electrodynamics(SED)[5], in that classical
fields couple directly to sub - quantum particle motions. Indeed if one is to assume a SED
like explanation of quantum behavoir, then gravity should also be treated classically.
GRAVITATIONAL RADIATION FROM ATOMS AND NUCLEONS
Ashtekar[1] for example elucidates the need for a quantum theory of gravity by citing
Einstein in 1916:
...Nevertheless, due to the inner-atomic movement of electrons, atoms would
have to radiate not only electro-magnetic but also gravitational energy, if only in
tiny amounts. As this is hardly true in Nature, it appears that quantum theory
would have to modify not only Maxwellian electrodynamics, but also the new
theory of gravitation.
Using instead Rosenfeld’s position that we must rely on experiment to show the need for
quantum gravity, consider the energy loss rate of a circa 1916 style Bohr planetary hydrogen
atom in the ground state, using Eddington’s[6] formula for the gravitational energy radiated
by a two body system (in the approximation that one mass is much heavier):
dE/dt(atom) = 32Gm2
er4
hω6
5c5=1043eV /s (4)
Which even over the age of the universe amounts to an energy loss due to gravitational
waves for a hydrogen atom in the ground state of only 1025eV . Why was Einstein worried
4
about such a small rate of gravitational energy loss for a hydrogen atom? In contrast the
electromagnetic lifetime of the classical hydrogen atom is about 1011swhich of course
helped lead to the discovery of quantum mechanics.
As a comparison to the above estimate, a quantum mechanical prediction of the lifetime
of the 3p1sstate for emitting a graviton is about 1.9×1039s[13] [4], which is within a
few orders of magnitude of the fully classical estimate above.
This energy loss is of no experimental significance. So we can conclude that the stability
of atomic orbitals is not an experimental indication of a need for quantum gravity. In other
words we cannot experimentally determine if atoms radiate gravitational waves continuously
or not.
Gravitational Radiation from Within Nuclei
The Sivram - Arun paper Thermal Gravitational Waves[12] is an expansion of Wein-
berg’s results in his 1972 book[13]. Both calculate the gravitational wave (GW) emission
from nuclei passing each other thermally in an astrophysical hot plasma (stars). In fully
classical quantum gravity we make the additional assumption that gravitational waves are
also produced by nucleon motion inside each individual nucleus, even in the ground state,
greatly increasing GW emission and making it happen at any temperature, since it arises
from internal nucleon movements within each nucleus. Calculating an estimate for the GW
emission would depend on the model one uses for the nucleus. The Fermi gas model of the
nucleus assumes that the nucleons are free to move inside the potential well of the nucleus.
Since we are assuming that gravity is fully classical, we can use the same calculations as
that of Weinberg and Sivram to arrive at an estimate of gravitational wave emission from
nucleons inside nuclei.
A GW Nuclear Emission/Absorption Model
Taking the calculation of Weinberg to nuclear material, Sivaram finds a rate of 1016eV /s
per neutron[12] (using their neutron star calculation). Fully classical quantum gravity would
then suggest that the Sun emits about 1022 watts of 1022 Hz gravitational wave energy, as
opposed to the 109watts at a lower atomic frequency that Weinberg calculates from plasma
5
conditions only.
Another way to arrive an estimate for GW emission in nuclei is to treat a nucleus as having
several nucleons moving in it at some typical internal velocity. The speed of nucleons is given
by their kinetic energy in the Fermi gas model with a peak momentum of about 250M eV/c.
Using only one pair of these peak energy nucleons and setting r= 1fm, Eddington’s formula
for a bar of mass 2 nucleons, spinning at a nuclear 1023hz, predicts an emission rate of about
109eV/s.
While these two approaches to calculate the GW emission of a nucleus in the fully classical
model differ by several orders of magnitude, GW emission rates near these levels hint that
such effects (or perhaps more likely a lack of effect) might be measurable in the lab.
Experiments might need to use differential absorption effects to arrive at results. Ab-
sorption models are harder to quantify, as the cross section estimate is quite uncertain due
to unknown detailed information on particle substructure.
Within this fully classical quantum model each nucleon will have its own characteristic
spectrum of nucleon - frequency gravitational waves, depending on the structure and size
of the atomic nucleus. Experiments similar to those done to look for ’big G’ could use
dissimilar materials for the masses whose force of attraction is to be measured. It’s notable
that experiments to determine Newton’s constant G have had great difficulty obtaining
consistent results. Most measurements of G do not agree with each other to within the
errors carefully determined by the experimenters[11].
Another experimental avenue would be to search for GW interaction effects between the
bulk of the earth and masses in a lab of dissimilar materials.
EMISSION/ABSORPTION PARAMETER SPACE
FIG. 1 is a sketch of allowed emission and absorption parameters. Some - but not all -
combinations of emission and absorption parameters are ruled out by experiment. Towards
the upper left of the image limited absorption combined with higher emission would mean
that the stochastic background of gravitational waves would be too energetic, having for
example energy greater than the baryonic mass in the universe. The phrase ’stability of
nuclei’ refers to the experimental fact that nuclei live for billions of years. On the right a
ruled out region exists where absorption cross sections are not physically likely. The top
6
FIG. 1. Nuclear frequency gravitational wave emission and absorption. The elusive nature of grav-
itational wave detection means that even fully classical quantum gravity cannot be experimentally
ruled out. The frequency of the gravitational waves is that of nucleons (ω1022 Hz ).
line shows a calculation for the gravitational wave emission rate of a proton due to parton
(quark) motion. ’Nuclear emission (high)’ refers to the Eddington emission rate for a heavy
nucleus, while the lower nucleus emission rate is calculated assuming thermal Coulomb GW
emission inside each nucleus.
DISCUSSION
Due to the weak nature of gravitational effects on subatomic particles, even fully classical
gravity cannot be experimentally ruled out at this time. Quantum gravity experiments that
are possible with today’s technology are very rare, this proposal represents an opportunity
to test one of the tenants of quantum gravity.
Null results from experiments as described here will be able to constrain the allowed
parameter space of a fully classical theory of microscopic gravity, thus suggesting that gravity
needs to be quantized.
These tests are also a test of the ubiquity of quantum mechanics. With a non null result
the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics would be in question, as gravity might
7
then be determined to be outside of the realm of quantum mechanics.
[1] Abhay Ashtekar, Martin Reuter, and Carlo Rovelli. From General Relativity to Quantum
Gravity. arXiv:1408.4336 [gr-qc], 2014.
[2] Mohammad Bahrami, André Großardt, Sandro Donadi, and Angelo Bassi. The
Schrödinger–Newton equation and its foundations. arXiv:1407.4370 [quant-ph], 2014.
[3] David Bohm. A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of "hidden" variables.
I. Physical Review, 85(2):166–179, 1952.
[4] Stephen Boughn and Tony Rothman. Aspects of graviton detection: graviton emission and
absorption by atomic hydrogen. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 23(20):5839–5852, 2006.
[5] Luis de la Peña, Ana María Cetto, and Andrea Valdés Hernández. The Emerging Quantum.
2015.
[6] Arthur S. Eddington. The Propagation of Gravitational Waves. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 102(716):268–282,
1922.
[7] André Großardt. Newtonian self-gravity in trapped quantum systems and experimental tests.
arXiv:1702.04309 [quant-ph].
[8] C. Møller. Les theories relativistes de la gravitation. Colloques Internationaux CNRS, Paris,
91, 1962.
[9] R Penrose. On the Gravitization of Quantum Mechanics 1: Quantum State Reduction. Found
Phys, 44:557–575, 2014.
[10] L ROSENFELD. ON QUANTIZATION OF FIELDS. Physics, Nuclear Co, North-holland
Publishing, (February):353–356, 1963.
[11] G Rosi, F Sorrentino, L Cacciapuoti, M Prevedelli, and G M Tino. Precision measurement of
the Newtonian gravitational constant using cold atoms. Nature, 510(7506):518–21, jul 2014.
[12] C. Sivaram. Thermal Gravitational Waves. arXiv:0708.3343, 2007.
[13] Steven Weinberg. Gravitation and cosmology : principles and applications of the general theory
of relativity. Wiley, 1972.
... Despite all of these developments, the Hamiltonian constraints still having difficulties until the papers by Thiemann of Refs. [44][45][46]. In the practical dealing point of view, the theory (via the framework of Ref. [47]) reproduces the entropy of black holes, see for instance Ref. [48]. ...
... The stage now is to solve the Hamiltonian constraints. The well known solution in the literature is the one given by Thiemann [44][45][46]. The result in that construction (for the Euclidean HamiltonianĤ) is that the action ofĤ on spin network state ...
... taking the volume of tetrahedra as playing the role of the Hamiltonian generating classical orbits reproduces the right spectrum of the volume found in loop gravity. Even canonically [44][45][46], it was shown that the Hamiltonian constraints affect the spacetime structure by adding a quanta of space, or simply a volume. Thus, a density for space is not something to worry about, it is like assigning a density for the energy. ...
... (22) * While here I make the theory linear by relaxing the constraints (1) and (2), the authors of [14] have taken the complementary approach of trying to reconcile the quantum theory with the nonlinearity implicit in the constraints. ...
Article
The Higgs phenomenon occurs in theories of gravity in which the connection is an independent dynamical variable. The role of order parameters is played by the soldering form and a fiber metric. The breaking of the original gauge symmetry is linked to the appearance of geometrical structures on space-time. These facts suggest certain modifications and generalizations of the theory. We propose a Higgs-like model which provides a dynamical explanation for the nondegeneracy of the metric and a framework for the unification of gravity ewith the other interactions.
Article
Full-text available
No experimental evidence exists, to date, whether or not the gravitational field must be quantised. Theoretical arguments in favour of quantisation are inconclusive. The most straightforward alternative to quantum gravity, a coupling between classical gravity and quantum matter according to the semi-classical Einstein equations, yields a nonlinear modification of the Schr\"odinger equation. Here, effects of this so-called Schr\"odinger-Newton equation are discussed, which allow for technologically feasible experimental tests.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Estimates are made of high frequency thermal gravitational waves (GW) from compact objects. This is large for hot neutron stars. Again GRBs and evaporating black holes are possible sources as also the earliest phases of the universe. The integrated thermal gravitational flux is estimated.
Article
Full-text available
In general relativity (GR), spacetime geometry is no longer just a background arena but a physical and dynamical entity with its own degrees of freedom. We present an overview of approaches to quantum gravity in which this central feature of GR is at the forefront. However, the short distance dynamics in the quantum theory are quite different from those of GR and classical spacetimes and gravitons emerge only in a suitable limit. Our emphasis is on communicating the key strategies, the main results and open issues. In the spirit of this volume, we focus on a few avenues that have led to the most significant advances over the past 2-3 decades.
Article
Full-text available
The necessity of quantising the gravitational field is still subject to an open debate. In this paper we compare the approach of quantum gravity, with that of a fundamentally semi-classical theory of gravity, in the weak-field non-relativistic limit. We show that, while in the former case the Schr\"odinger equation stays linear, in the latter case one ends up with the so-called Schr\"odinger-Newton equation, which involves a nonlinear, non-local gravitational contribution. We further discuss that the Schr\"odinger-Newton equation does not describe the collapse of the wave-function, although it was initially proposed for exactly this purpose. Together with the standard collapse postulate, semi-classical gravity gives rise to superluminal effects. A consistent semi-classical theory of gravity can therefore only be achieved together with a suitable prescription of the wave-function collapse. We further discuss, how collapse models avoid such a causality violation and compare the nonlinearities appearing in these models with those in the Schr\"odinger-Newton equation.
Article
Full-text available
This paper argues that the case for "gravitizing" quantum theory is at least as strong as that for quantizing gravity. Accordingly, the principles of general relativity must influence, and actually change, the very formalism of quantum mechanics. Most particularly, an "Einsteinian", rather than a "Newtonian" treatment of the gravitational field should be adopted, in a quantum system, in order that the principle of equivalence be fully respected. This leads to an expectation that quantum superpositions of states involving a significant mass displacement should have a finite lifetime, in accordance with a proposal previously put forward by Diósi and the author.
Article
Full-text available
Graviton absorption cross sections and emission rates for hydrogen are calculated by both semi-classical and field theoretic methods. We point out several mistakes in the literature concerning spontaneous emission of gravitons and related phenomena, some of which are due to a subtle issue concerning gauge invariance of the linearized interaction Hamiltonian. Comment: 19 pages, no figures
Article
The usual interpretation of the quantum theory is self-consistent, but it involves an assumption that cannot be tested experimentally, viz., that the most complete possible specification of an individual system is in terms of a wave function that determines only probable results of actual measurement processes. The only way of investigating the truth of this assumption is by trying to find some other interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of at present "hidden" variables, which in principle determine the precise behavior of an individual system, but which are in practice averaged over in measurements of the types that can now be carried out. In this paper and in a subsequent paper, an interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of just such "hidden" variables is suggested. It is shown that as long as the mathematical theory retains its present general form, this suggested interpretation leads to precisely the same results for all physical processes as does the usual interpretation. Nevertheless, the suggested interpretation provides a broader conceptual framework than the usual interpretation, because it makes possible a precise and continuous description of all processes, even at the quantum level. This broader conceptual framework allows more general mathematical formulations of the theory than those allowed by the usual interpretation. Now, the usual mathematical formulation seems to lead to insoluble difficulties when it is extrapolated into the domain of distances of the order of 10-13 cm or less. It is therefore entirely possible that the interpretation suggested here may be needed for the resolution of these difficulties. In any case, the mere possibility of such an interpretation proves that it is not necessary for us to give up a precise, rational, and objective description of individual systems at a quantum level of accuracy.
Article
About 300 experiments have tried to determine the value of the Newtonian gravitational constant, G, so far, but large discrepancies in the results have made it impossible to know its value precisely. The weakness of the gravitational interaction and the impossibility of shielding the effects of gravity make it very difficult to measure G while keeping systematic effects under control. Most previous experiments performed were based on the torsion pendulum or torsion balance scheme as in the experiment by Cavendish in 1798, and in all cases macroscopic masses were used. Here we report the precise determination of G using laser-cooled atoms and quantum interferometry. We obtain the value G = 6.67191(99) × 10(-11) m(3) kg(-1) s(-2) with a relative uncertainty of 150 parts per million (the combined standard uncertainty is given in parentheses). Our value differs by 1.5 combined standard deviations from the current recommended value of the Committee on Data for Science and Technology. A conceptually different experiment such as ours helps to identify the systematic errors that have proved elusive in previous experiments, thus improving the confidence in the value of G. There is no definitive relationship between G and the other fundamental constants, and there is no theoretical prediction for its value, against which to test experimental results. Improving the precision with which we know G has not only a pure metrological interest, but is also important because of the key role that G has in theories of gravitation, cosmology, particle physics and astrophysics and in geophysical models.
Article
Scitation is the online home of leading journals and conference proceedings from AIP Publishing and AIP Member Societies