1 / 14

Cosmological Constant as a Manifestation of the Hierarchy

Cosmological Constant as a Manifestation of the Hierarchy. 3rd Biennial Leopoldina Conference on Dark Energy, Munich, Oct. 7-11, 2008. Pisin Chen Leung Center for Cosmology and Particle Astrophysics National Taiwan University & Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology

jamuna
Télécharger la présentation

Cosmological Constant as a Manifestation of the Hierarchy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cosmological Constant as a Manifestation of the Hierarchy 3rd Biennial Leopoldina Conference on Dark Energy, Munich, Oct. 7-11, 2008 Pisin Chen Leung Center for Cosmology and Particle Astrophysics National Taiwan University & Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology Stanford University PC, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.173, 137 (2007). PC and J-A. Gu, Mod. Phys. Lett. A22, 1995 (2007); arXiv:0712.2441

  2. Where we Stand now SN Ia (SNLS, Higher-Z, Essence, low-Z stuff) + WMAP5 +BAO(SDSS)+ HST H0 Brian Schmidt’s talk If it looks like an apple and tastes like an apple, then it must be an apple! - PC Kowalski et al 08 w+ =1

  3. Smallness of Dark Energy • Combination of recent data from WMAP3 + SDSS • determines w = − 0.94 ± 0.09 • for dark energy (DE) equation of state p = wρ. • SNLS gives w = −1.023 ± 0.090 (stat) ± 0.54(sys). DE likely a bone fide CC: w = − 1. If DE never changes in space and time, then it must be associated with fundamental properties of spacetime. • Observations Why much smaller than standard model scale? ρDE1/4 ~ 10-15! MSM

  4. Another Hierarchy in Physics • Gravityis much weaker, or Planck scale (1019 GeV), • much larger, than that of SM gauge interactions: • MPl • MSM ~ 1016. Two well-known solutions: ADD : large (but flat) extra dimensions RS : warped geometry in x-d

  5. A Numerical Coincidence A remarkable numerical coincidence, Perhaps not accidental but implies a deeper connection: Caution: Unlike the 1st hierarchy that links 4 fundamental interaction strengths, DE must be a secondary, derived quantity.

  6. Bohr atom Fundamental energy scale in Schrödinger equation: me Ground state energy suppressed by 2 powers of fine structure constant Dark energy Fundamental energy scale in quantum gravity: MPl Dark energy suppressed by 2 powers of “gravity fine structure constant” Analogy in Atomic Physics

  7. Randall-Sundrum Warped Geometry Gravity lives in the bulk while gauge interactions live on the brane. dxν dxμ Visible brane Hidden brane Y=π Y=0

  8. Casimir Effect QED vacuum fluctuations

  9. Casimir Energy casimir = vac (||) vac(a  ) ∞ a-4 a (a  )

  10. Casimir Energy vs. Vacuum Energy • Casimir energy:px = ‒ρ, py > 0. • py cannot be tuned away. • Conventional vacuum energy (brane tension): • px = ‒ρ, py = 0. • pycan in principle be tuned away. px py

  11. Strategy for the Smallness of Dark Energy = 0 + vac: fermion boson only on the brane BUT SUSY Brane World Supersymmetry vac(4)~ (mn - mn-1)2mn2

  12. By definition, the Casimir energy under SUSY breaking is which is The KK mass shift can be shown to scale as • The SUSY-KK graviton/gravitino energy spectrum, on the other hand, goes like

  13. Casimir Energy under SUSY-Breaking Putting all these together, we find

  14. Summary • Dark energy may very well be a cosmological • constant. • The numerical coincidence between the SM-Planck • and the SM-DE hierarchies suggests a deeper • connection between the two. • This approach does not attempt to solve the “old” • CC problem, i.e., the problem of 10120. Assuming • that this old CC problem will be resovled someday, • our model seems able to solve the “new” CC • problem, i.e., the smallness of CC as inferred by • observations.

More Related