Saturday, January 23, 2010

Verlinde's thermal origin of gravitation from TGD view point of view

Eric Verlinde has posted an interesting eprint titled On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton to arXiv.org. Lubos has commented the article here and also here. What Linde heuristically derives is Newton's F=ma and gravitational force F= GMm/R2 from thermodynamical considerations plus something else which I try to clarify (at least to myself!) in the following.

1. Verlinde's argument for F=ma

The idea is to deduce Newton's F=ma and gravitational force from thermodynamics by assuming that space-time emerges in some sense. There are however various assumptions involved which more or less impy that both special and general relativity has been feeded in besides quantum theory and thermodynamics.

1. Time translation invariance is required in order to have the notions of conserved energy and thermodynamics. This assumption requires not only require time but also symmetry with respect to time translations. This is quite a powerful assumption and time translation symmetry not hold true in General Relativity- this was actually the basic motivation for quantum TGD.

2. Holography is assumed. Information stored on surfaces, or screens and discretization is assumed. Again this means in practice the assumption of space-time since otherwise the notion of holography does not make sense. One could of course say that one considers the situation in the already emerged region of space-time but this idea does not look very convincing to me.

Comment: In TGD framework holography is an essential piece of theory: light-like 3-surfaces code for the physics and space-time sheets are analogous to Bohr orbits fixed by the light-like 3-surfaces defining the generalized Feynman diagrams.

3. The first law of thermodynamics in the form

dE= TdS-Fdx

Here F denotes generalized force and x some coordinate variable. In usual thermodynamics pressure P would appear in the role of F and volume V in the role of x. Also chemical potential and particle number form a similar pair. If energy is conserved for the motion one has

Fdx= TdS.

This equation is basic thermodynamics and is used to deduce Newton's equations.

After this some quantum tricks -a rather standard game with Uncertainty Principle and quantization when nothing concrete is available- are needed to obtain F=ma which as such does not involve hbar nor Boltzmann constant kB. What is needed are thermal expression for acceleration and force and identifying these one obtains F=ma.

1. Δ S= 2π kB states that entropy is quantized with a unit of 2π appearing as a unit. log(2) would be more natural unit if bit is the unit of information.

2. The identification Δ x =hbar/mc involves Uncertainty principle for momentum and position. The presence of light velocity c in the formula means that Minkowski space and Special Relativity creeps in. At this stage I would not speak about emergence of space-time anymore.

This gives T= FΔ x/Δ S= F×hbar/[2π×mc×kB]

F has been exressed in terms of thermal parameters and mass.

3. Next one feeds in something from General Relativity to obtain expression for acceleration in terms of thermal parameters. Unruh effect means that in an accelerted motion system measures temperate proportional to acceleration :

kBT= hbar a/2π .

This quantum effect is known as Unruh effect. This temperature is extremely low for accelerations encountered in everyday life - something like 10-16 K for free fall near Earth's surface.

Using this expression for T in previous equation one obtains the desired F=ma, which would thus have a thermodynamical interpretation.

At this stage I have even less motivations for talking about emergence of space-time. Essentially the basic conceptual framework of Special and General Relativities, of wave mechanics and of thermodynamics are introduced by the formulas containing the basic parameters involved.

2. Verlinde's argument for F= GMm/R2

The next challenge is to derive gravitational force from thermodynamic consideration. Now holography with a very specially chosen screen is needed.

Comment: In TGD framework light-like 3-surfaces (or equivalently their space-like duals) represent the holographic screens and in principle there is a slicing of space-time surface by equivalent screens. Also Verlinde introduces a slicing of space-time surfaces by holographic screens identified as surfaces for which gravitational potential is constant. Also I have considered this kind of identification.

1. The number of bits for the information represented on the holographic screen is assumed to be proportional to area.

N =A/Ghbar.

This means bringing in blackhole thermodynamics and general relativity since the notion of area requires geometry.

Comment: In TGD framework the counterpart for the finite number of bits is finite measurement resolution meaning that the 2-dimensional partonic surface is effectively replaced with a set of points carrying fermion or antifermion number or possibly purely bosonic symmetry generator. The orbits of these points define braid giving a connection with topological QFTs for knots, links and braids and also with topological quantum computation.

2. It is assumed that A=4π R2, where R is the distance between the masses. This means a very special choice of the holographic screen.

Comment: In TGD framework the counterpart of the area would be the symplectic area of partonic 2-surfaces. This is invariant under symplectic transformations of light-cone boundary. These "partonic" 2-surfaces can have macroscopic size and the counterpart for blackhole horizon is one example of this kind of surface. Anyonic phases are second example of a phase assigned with a macroscopic partonic 2-surface.

3. Special relativity is brought in via the bomb formula

E=mc2.

One introduces also other expression for the rest energy. Thermodynamics gives for non-relativistic thermal energy the expression

E= 1/2N kBT.

This thermal energy is identified with the rest mass. This identification looks to me completely ad hoc and I think that kind of holographic duality is assumed to justify it. The interpretation is that the points/bits on the holographic screen behave as particles in thermodynamical equilibrium and represent the mass inside the spherical screen. What are these particles on the screen? Do they correspond to gravitational flux?

Comment: In TGD framework p-adic thermodynamics replaces Higgs mechanism and identify particle's mass squared as thermal conformal weight. In this sense inertia has thermal origin in TGD framework. Gravitational flux is mediated by flux tubes with gigantic value of gravitational Planck constant and the intersections of the flux tubes with sphere could be TGD counterparts for the points of the screen in TGD. These 2-D intersections of flux tubes should be in thermal equilibrium at Unruh temperature. The light-like 3-surfaces indeed contain the particles so that the matter at this surface represents the system. Since all light-like 3-surfaces in the slicing are equivalent means that one can choose the reresentation of the system rather freely .

4. Eliminating the rest energy E from these two formulas one obtains NT= 2mc2 and using the expression for N in terms of area identified as that of a sphere with radius equal to the distance R between the two masses, one obtains the standard form for gravitational force.

It is difficult to say whether the outcome is something genuinely new or just something resulting unavoidably by feeding in basic formulas

from general thermodynamics, special relativity, and general relativity and using holography principle in highly questionable and ad hoc manner.

3. In TGD quantum classical correspondence predicts that thermodynamics has space-time correlates

From TGD point of view entropic gravity is a misconception. On basis of quantum classical correspondence - the basic guiding principle of quantum TGD - one expects that all quantal notions have space-time correlates. If thermodynamics is a genuine part of quantum theory, also temperature and entropy should have the space-time correlates and the analog of Verlinde's formula could exist. Even more, the generalization of this formula is expected to make sense for all interactions.

Zero energy ontology makes thermodynamics an integral part of quantum theory.

1. In zero energy ontology quantum states become zero energy states consisting of pairs of the positive and negative energy states with opposite conserved quantum numbers and interpreted in the usual ontology as physical events. These states are located at opposite light-like boundaries of causal diamond (CD) defined as the intersection of future and past directed light-cones. There is a fractal hierarchy of them. M-matrix generalizing S-matrix defines time-like entanglement coefficients between positive and negative energy states. M-matrix is essentially a "complex" square root of density matrix expressible as positive square root of diagonalized density matrix and unitary S-matrix. Thermodynamics reduces to quantum physics and should have correlate at the level of space-time geometry. The failure of the classical determinism in standard sense of the word makes this possible in quantum TGD (special properties of Kähler action (Maxwell action for induced Kahler form of CP2) due to its vacuum degeneracy analogous to gauge degeneracy). Zero energy ontology allows also to speak about coherent states of bosons, say of Cooper pairs of fermions- without problems with conservation laws and the undeniable existence of these states supports zero energy ontology.

2. Quantum classical correspondence is very strong requirement. For instance, it requires also that electrons traveling via several routes in double slit experiment have classical correlates. They have. The light-like 3-surfaces describing electrons can branch and the induced spinor fields at them "branch" also and interfere again. Same branching occurs also for photons so that electrodynamics has hydrodynamical aspect too emphasize in recent empirical report about knotted light beams. This picture explains the findings of Afshar challenging the Copenhagen interpretation.

These diagrams could be seen as generalizations of stringy diagrams but do not describe particle decays in TGD framework. In TGD framework stringy diagrams are replaced with a direct generalization of Feynman diagrams in which the ends of 3-D lightlike lines meet along 2-D partonic surfaces at their ends. The mathematical description of vertices becomes much simpler since the 2-D manifolds describing vertices are not singular unlike the 1-D manifolds associated with string diagrams ("eyeglass" in fusion of closed strings).

3. If entropy has a space-time correlate then also first and second law should have such and Verlinde's argument that gravitational force attraction follows from first law assuming energy correlation might identify this correlate. This of course applies only to the classical gravitation. Also other classical forces should allow analogous interpretation as space-time correlates for something quantal.

4. The simplest identification of thermodynamical correlates in TGD framework

The first questions that pop up are following. Inertial mass emerges from p-adic thermodynamics as thermal conformal weight. Could the first law for p-adic thermodynamics, which allows to calculate particle masses in terms of thermal conformal weights, allow to deduce also other classical forces? One could think that by adding to the Hamiltonian defining partition function chemical potential terms characterizing charge conservation it might be possible to obtain also other forces.

In fact, the situation might be much simpler. The basic structure of quantum TGD allows a very natural thermodynamical interpretation.

1. The basic structure of quantum TGD suggests a thermodynamic interpretation. The basic observation is that the vacuum functional identified as the exponent of Kähler function is analogous to a square root of partition function and Kähler coupling strength is analogous to critical temperature. Kähler function identified as Kähler action for a preferred extremal appears in the role of Hamiltonian. Preferred extremal property realizes holography identifying space-time surface as analog of Bohr orbit. One can interpret the exponent of Kähler function as the density of states in the world of classical worlds so that Kähler function would be analogous to entropy density. Ensemble entropy is average of Kähler function involving functional integral over the world of classical worlds. This exponent is the counterpart for the quantity Ω appearing in Verlinde's basic formula.

2. The addition of a measurement interaction term to the modified Dirac action gives rise to a coupling to conserved charges. Vacuum functional is identified as Dirac determinant and this addition is visible as an addition of an interaction term to Kähler function. The interaction gives rise to forces coupling to various charges at classical level for quantum states with fixed quantum numbers for positive energy part of the state. These terms are analogous to chemical potential terms in thermodynamics fixing the average values of various charges or particle numbers. In ordinary non-relativistic thermodynamics energy is in a special role. In the recent case there is a complete quantum number democracy very natural in a framework with coordinate invariance and with four-momentum assigned with the isometries of the 8-D imbedding space. In Verlinde's formula there is exponential factor exp(-E/T- Fx) analogous to the measurement interaction term. In TGD however conserved charges multiplied by chemical potentials defining generalized forces appear in the exponent.

3. This gives an analog of thermodynamics in the world of classical worlds (WCW) for fixed values of quantum numbers of the positive energy part of state. For zero energy states one however has also additional thermodynamics- or rather its square root. This thermodynamics is for the conserved quantum numbers whose averages are fixed. For general zero energy states one has sum over state pairs labelled by momenta and various other quantum numbers labelling the positive energy part of the state. The coefficients of the conserved quantities of the measurement interaction term linear in conserved quantum numbers define the analogs of temperature and various chemical potentials. The field equations defined by Kähler function and chemical potential terms have thermodynamical interpretation and give coupling to conserved charges and also to their thermal averages.

What is important is that temperature and various chemical potentials assigned to positive and negative energy parts of the state allow a complete geometrization in a general coordinate invariant manner and allow explicit expressions in terms of functions expressible in terms of the induced geometry.

4. The explicit expressions must be deduced from Dirac determinant defining exponent of Kähler function plus measurement interaction term, in which the conserved isometry charges of Cartan algebra (necessarily!) appearing in the exponent are contracted with the analogs of chemical potentials. One make two rather detailed educated guesses for the chemical potentials. For the modified Dirac action the measurement interaction term is 4-dimensional and essentially unique. For the Kähler action one can imagine two candidates for the measurement interaction term. For the first option the term is 4-dimensional and for the second one 3-dimensional.

5. Some details related to the measurement interaction term

As noticed, one can imagine two options for the measurement interaction term defining the chemical potentials in terms of the space-time geometry.

1. For both options the M4 part of the interaction term is proportional to n(M4)G/R and CP2 part to a dimensionless constant n(CP2), and the condition that there is no dependence of hbar excludes the dependence on the dimensionless constant Ghbar/R2.

2. One can consider two different forms of the measurement interaction part in Kähler function. For the first option the conserved Kähler current replaces fermion current in the modified Dirac action and defines a 4-dimensional interaction term highly analogous to that assigned with the modified Dirac action. The source term induced to the field equations corresponds to the variation of

[(G/R)× n(M4)pq,A gAB(M4)jA,α +n(CP2)Qq,A gABJA,α(CP2)] Jα .

Here Jα is Kähler current.

3. For the second option the measurement interaction term in Kähler action is sum over contractions of quantum Cartan charges with corresponding classical Noether charges giving the sum of the term

(G/R)× n(M4)pq,A pcl,A +n(CP2)Qq,A Qcl,A

from both ends of the space-time sheet. For a general space-time sheet the classical charges are different at its ends so that the variation gives non-trivial boundary conditions equating the normal (time-like) component of the canonical momentum current with the contraction of the variation of classical Noether charges contracted with quantum charges. By the extremal property the measurement interaction terms at the ends of the space-time sheet cancel each other so that the effect on Kähler function is only via the boundary conditions in accordance with zero energy ontology. For this option the thermodynamics for conserved charges is visible at space-time level only via the appearence of the average quantal charges and universal chemical potentials.

4. The vanishing of Kähler gauge current resp. classical Noether charges for the first resp. second option would suggest an interpretation in terms of infinite temperature limit. The fact that momenta and color charges are in completely symmetric position suggests however the vanishing of chemical potentials. One can in fact fix the value of the temperature to say T= R/G without loss of information and code thermodynamics in terms of the chemical potentials alone.

The vanishing of the measurement interaction term occurs for the vacuum extremals. For CP2 type vacuum extemals with Euclidian signature of the induced metric interpretation in terms of vanishing chemical potentials is more natural. For vacuum extremals with Minkowskian signature of the induced metric fluctuations and consequently classical non-determinism are maximal so that the interpretation in terms of high temperature phase cannot be excluded. One must however notice that CP2 projection for vacuum extremals is 2-dimensional whereas high temperature limit would suggest 4-D projection so that the interpretation in terms of vanishing chemical potentials is more natural also now.

To sum up, TGD suggests two thermodynamical interpretations. p-Adic thermodynamics gives inertial mass squared as thermal conformal weight and also the basic formulation of quantum TGD allows thermodynamical interpretation. The thermodynamical structure of quantum TGD has of course been guiding principle for two decades. In particular, quantum criticality as the counterpart of thermal criticality has been extremely useful guide line and led to a breakthrough in the understanding of the modified Dirac equation during the last year. Also p-adic thermodynamics has been in the scene for more than 15 years and makes TGD a theory able to make precise quantitative predictions.

Some conclusions drawn from Verlinde's argument is that gravitation is entropic interaction, that gravitons do not exist, and that string models and theories introducing higher-dimensional space-time are a failure. TGD view is different. Only a generalization of string model allowing to realize space-time as surface is needed and this requires fixed 8-D imbedding space. Gravitons also exist and only classical gravitation as well as other classical interactions code for thermodynamical information by quantum classical correspondence. In any case, it is encouraging that also colleagues might be finally beginning to get on the right track although the path from Verlinde's arguments to quantum TGD as it is now will be desperately long and tortuous if colleagues continually refuse to receive the helping hand.

For more details see the brief pdf file or the chapter Does the Modified Dirac Equation Define the Fundamental Action Principle? of "Quantum TGD as Infinite-dimensional Spinor Geometry".

At 9:08 AM,  Ulla said...

Verlinde has a blog for this discussion. http://staff.science.uva.nl/~erikv/page18/page18.html

What is unclear to me is why he used Lubos blog. Was it only to see if Lubos would bite? And he did, like a fish, and now he can't spit it out again :)

Verlinde says: if we investigate how individual sub-atomic particles would affect one another gravitationally, we find that the infinities are much worse, and renormalization fails here.
Just as Gerardus t’Hooft said in his Nobel lecture.

Is this the reason why p-adic thermodynamics is not accepted?

At 9:30 AM,  Matti Pitkanen said...

The infinities are the basic problem of quantized General Relativity. In TGD framework they are avoided: this became clear already two decades ago at general level. Now I have also identified detailed mechanisms.

The sole reason for why p-adic thermodynamics is not accepted is arrogance and fear materializing into the question "Could it be that I have wasted my professional lifetime with wrong theory while this non-name from almost no-where has developed a breakthrough idea to a detailed theory?" . "People from Harward" are simply refuse to consider the possibility that a person without name and position could be able to predict elementary particle mass spectrum correctly.

I discovered the mathematical analogy of quantum TGD with thermodynamics already 20 years ago and p-adic thermodynamics for 15 years ago. I have developed these visions to highly detailed level and the success of p-adic mass calculations is spectacular. No one has bothered to consider seriously these results. When a name like Verlinde represents a primitive dimensional analysis arguments to this direction it is a sensation. Theoretical physics has become pop science.

At 1:10 PM,  Ulla said...

I saw also G. tHooft had the same problem :) And he is a Nobelist.

I have commented Lubos blog now four times, every time he deletes my comment :) So I put it here, if you excuse me. Your comment is still there. On 'Not Even Wrong' is also an interesting discussion. 'Watch the Lubos-show', they say.

Verlinde says on his blog: For me this was an "eye opener". It is clear to me know that it has to be this way. There is no way to avoid it: if one does not keep track of the amount of information, one ignores the origin of motion and forces. It clarifies why gravity has something to do with entropy. It has to, it can not do otherwise.

If space is emergent, a lot more has to be explained than just the Einstein equations. Geodesic motion, or if you wish, the laws of Newton have to be re-derived. They are not fundamental.

Why are people still regarding string theory as the final theory of quantum gravity? Somehow, not everyone was convinced that these similarities mean something, or at least, people had no clear idea of what they mean.

Some people may think that when we develop string theory further that eventually we will learn about this.

I am not sure that string theory is the way to go, not if we keep our eyes closed for emergent phenomena. Graviton's can not be fundamental particles in a theory of emergent space time and gravity. End cit.

The religious war is over? He also says: no hidden dimensions. Lubos refuses francly to discuss dimensions :) Maybe I'm blacklisted?

I admit there is a lot open in this paper, but to take this kind of opinion means that there is more to come. And he admits himself that the 'inertia' is not so clear.

He does what he have to do? :) Honor to him :)

At 8:01 PM,  Matti Pitkanen said...

String models have been dead for a long time. This does not however mean that gravitons do not exist and that the extremely beautiful mathematical structures of string models would not have a generalization. They have it in TGD framework where basic mathematics is very stringy despite the fact that basic objects are light-like 3-surfaces rather than 1-D strings.

To me Verlinde's formula and its generalization to TGD framework do not mean that gravitation is deducible from thermodynamics but that everything quantal has space-time correlates. This includes also thermodynamics since quantum TGD is in well-defined sense square root of thermodynamics.

Higher dimensional space is also present in TGD framework just from the requirement that basic conservation laws are not lost. The interpretation is completely different since space-time is identified as 4-D surface rather than 8-D imbedding space, which is fixed unlike the 10-D target space of super string models (landscape problem is the outcome of this).

I do not take seriously the idea about emergence of space. It is a dream which does not make sense mathematically. The argument of Verlinde brings space-time into the picture by the formulas of special and general relativity so that the emergence is self deception. Colleagues are masters in this. Emergence makes perfect sense if one speaks about gauge bosons but not for space-time.

At 11:38 PM,  Ulla said...

If he says the graviton is virtual it means that he has a hidden dimension left, a virtual :) A virtual boson cannot be in our 'real' world. He is coming to it :) Soon he has a causal diamond :)

Maybe he thinks of the Higgs?

At 11:34 AM,  Anonymous said...

Hello,

Sorry for the off topic, but is there a book or article which presents TDG in layman's terms?
I tried to read books on TDG homepage, but it's too hard for my simple mind.

Philippe.

At 7:10 PM,  Matti Pitkanen said...

Thank you for asking Philippe. I have not had time to write any really popular representation. There are articles but probably they do not satisfy the popularity criterion. A collaboration with an artist making good visualizations would be required.

At 11:38 PM,  Ulla said...

To Philippe

It is now many years since I myself asked Matti exactly that question. I read his papers, but I couldn't understand much. But so much I knew that this was definitly something worth to study.

I must say that the problem is still there. So I thought to try to write a book that would suit more simple minds :) At least I will try. It is a most fascinating story, a real candy store :) But I will not go so much into physical facts and maths. To that you still need Mattis papers.

To Matti: I was sad to read your comment and I want to think it was simply thoughtlessness. You have spent so much time answering me, something you can't do to everyone.
This is simply something I must do.

Also a real comment: Entropy is about energy, but it is not energy, but the relations between different energies, the same as gravity. 'It takes to for tango.'
Entropy is in gradients, so also gravity? And gravity in microscale, as seen in shortlived micro black holes, is quite different from everyday life.

And time is important when we talk about change and relations. Also for an emergent space. Usually we think that time evolve, but from what? Implicit being, as I used to think earlier. Evolution.

If space would not be emergent, then time is not emergent either. And then the problem of fate and free will come against us. What directs that quantum jump? I know I have asked this many times, sorry.

You Matti say we have a free will, but also that there is a geometric, physical time, independant of our subjective time. If we have a free will we can change that physical time too. I know you say we can change our past, and maybe we can, but how the future? Here comes the Karma against us. The science done by Holger Nielsen etc.

What directs that jump? Usually we follow the most probable path, but if we decide to do something highly unprobable, and jump to the side of the lightcone? What give us such a desicion? Hardly past conscious jumps. Do that come from our (imagined?) future, as I think it must do, because the past is just pushing us.

At 11:56 PM,  Ulla said...

If we do timetravel into the future, will then something be there? Or to the past? In past, atoms, ruins, yes, but real life?

I usually think of our present 'real' being as like 'surfing the wave' of explicitness (perceptions) on an implicit Dirac Sea (possibilities). Then both past and future are implicit, or in your terms the 'other side of the light-cone', or geometric time, where also dark matter is.

Dark matter and massless extremals are EM-neutral, but they are energy, and influence gravity, as we know. This thought that gravity and entropy would be the same is still difficult. What about the magnetic body then? Is the change in Plancks constant induced by gravity/entropy? Tiller use a magnetopole. Is that an entropy too?

At 2:04 AM,  Anonymous said...

Ulla:
Thanks for you answer. I am looking forward to the day when you will release the book 'TDG for dummies' :-)

Philippe.

At 2:25 PM,  Ulla said...

TGD for dummies sounds great :) But I think Matti has another opinion :)