Search Talks

Local measurements of the expansion rate of the local universe differ from predictions of simple models fitted to large-scale cosmological measurements, at a statistically significant level. Sample variance (often called cosmic variance) is a key component of errors placed on measurements made from a small data set. For the Hubble constant, which parametrises the expansion rate, the size of the patch of the Universe covered by recent supernovae observations has a radius of 300Mpc. The smaller the patch, the larger the patch-to-patch fluctuations and the larger the error on the measured value of H0 from sample variance. Using the H0 measurement from supernovae as an example, I will consider a number of different ways to estimate sample variance using techniques developed for multiple uses, and show that they all approximately agree. The sample variance error on H0 measurements from the recent Pantheon supernovae sample is +/-1 kms^-1Mpc^-1, insufficient to explain the Hubble tension in a standard Lambda-CDM universe. This will demonstrate methods for comparing variations in expansion rate in the universe and what we mean by saying the universe is expanding (on average), or that galaxies move apart with particular velocities.

In recent work, Aganagic proposed a categorification of quantum link invariants based on a category of A-branes, which is solvable explicitly. The theory is a generalization of Heegaard-Floer theory from gl(1|1) to arbitrary Lie algebras. I will describe in the detail the two simplest cases: the su(2) theory, categorifying the Jones polynomial, and the gl(1|1) theory, categorifying the Alexander polynomial. I will give an explicit algorithm for computing link homologies in these cases. I will also briefly describe the generalization to other simple Lie algebras and to Lie superalgebras of type gl(m|n). This talk is based on work to appear with Mina Aganagic and Miroslav Rapcak.

Zoom Link: TBD

I present an unprecedented template-based search for stimulated emission of Hawking radiation (or Boltzmann echoes) by combining the gravitational wave data from 65 binary black hole merger events observed by the LIGO/Virgo collaboration. With a careful Bayesian inference approach, I found no statistically significant evidence for this signal in either of the 3 Gravitational Wave Transient Catalogs GWTC-1, GWTC-2 and GWTC-3. However, the data cannot yet conclusively rule out the presence of Boltzmann echoes either, with the Bayesian evidence ranging within 0.3-1.6 for most events, and a common (non-vanishing) echo amplitude for all mergers being disfavoured at only 2:5 odds. The only exception is GW190521, the most massive and confidently detected event ever observed, which shows a positive evidence of 9.2 for stimulated Hawking radiation. An optimal combination of posteriors yields an upper limit of A<0.42 (at 90% confidence level) for a universal echo amplitude, whereas A∼1 was predicted in the canonical model. The next generation of gravitational wave detectors such as LISA, Einstein Telescope, and Cosmic Explorer can draw a definitive conclusion on the quantum nature of black hole horizons.

It has been proposed that quantum-gravitational effects may change the near-horizon structure of black holes, e.g. firewalls or ultra-compact objects mimicking black holes. Also, a Lorentz-violating theory as a candidate of quantum gravity, e.g. the Horava-Lifshitz theory, changes the causal structure of black holes due to the superluminal propagation of excited modes. The late-time part of the gravitational wave ringdown from a black hole is significantly affected by those effects, and the emission of gravitational wave echoes may be induced. The black hole quasi-normal (QN) modes are affected by the change of the horizon structure, which results in the drastic modification of the late-time signal of the gravitational wave. In this talk, I will discuss how the gravitational wave echo can be modeled and how the echo model is reasonable from an entropic point of view by counting QN modes to estimate the black hole entropy.

A key subroutine in quantum computing, especially in quantum simulation, is to prepare thermal states or ground states of Hamiltonians. Today, I will talk about a new family of quantum algorithms for this task. Physically, our algorithms distill the essence of system-bath interaction by simulating an effective Lindbladian; computationally, our algorithms are quantum analogs of classical Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling. Given the ubiquity of thermodynamics and the triumph of classical Monte Carlo methods, we anticipate that quantum thermal state preparation will become indispensable in quantum computing. 

Joint work with Michael J. Kastoryano, Fernando G.S.L. Brandão, and András Gilyén. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.18224 

Zoom Link: https://pitp.zoom.us/j/91641127738?pwd=cExPM3Bvd3BaYnJYS0U0UlBiVTJ0QT09

Holography has profoundly transformed our understanding of quantum gravity in spacetimes with asymptotic negative curvature. Its implications for cosmology are equally profound, suggesting that time is emergent and that our universe has a dual description in terms of a three-dimensional quantum field theory. This talk will outline key features of holographic cosmology, from the perspective it offers for the cosmic singularity to the strategies it presents for computing cosmological observables. Recent results for the de Sitter wavefunction will be discussed and their interpretation in the language of three-dimensional conformal field theory.

The classical spacetime manifold of general relativity disappears in quantum gravity, with different research programs suggesting a variety of alternatives in its place. As an illustration of how philosophers might contribute to an interdisciplinary project in quantum gravity, I will give an overview of recent philosophical debates regarding how classical spacetime "emerges."  I will criticize some philosophers as granting too much weight to the intuition that a coherent physical theory must describe objects as located in space and time.  I will further argue, based in part on historical episodes, that an account of emergence needs to recover the structural features of classical GR responsible for its empirical success.  This is more demanding than it might at first appear, although the details of recovery will differ significantly among different approaches to quantum gravity.

Zoom link:  https://pitp.zoom.us/j/98331676824?pwd=VTNOakMxWWUzT2ZFZFYwYzBRdWxBUT09

If relativistic gravitation has a quantum description, it must be meaningful to consider a spacetime metric in a genuine quantum superposition. Here I present a new operational framework for studying “superpositions of spacetimes” via model particle detectors. After presenting the general approach, I show how it can be applied to describe a spacetime generated by a BTZ black hole in a superposition of masses and how such detectors would respond. The detector exhibits signatures of quantum-gravitational effects reminiscent of Bekenstein’s seminal conjecture concerning the quantized mass spectrum of black holes in quantum gravity. I provide further remarks in distinguishing spacetime superpositions that are genuinely quantum-gravitational, notably with reference to recent proposals to test gravitationally-induced entanglement, and those in which a putative superposition can be re-expressed in terms of dynamics on a single, fixed spacetime background.

The constrained Hamiltonian formalism is the basis for canonical quantization techniques. However, there are disagreements surrounding the notion of a gauge transformation in such a formalism. The standard definition of a gauge transformation in the constrained Hamiltonian formalism traces back to Dirac: a gauge transformation is a transformation generated by an arbitrary combination of first-class constraints. On the basis of this definition, Dirac argued that one should extend the form of the Hamiltonian in order to include all of the gauge freedom. However, Pitts (2014) argues that in some cases, a first-class constraint does not generate a gauge transformation, but rather "a bad physical change". Similarly, Pons (2005) argues that Dirac's analysis of gauge transformations is "incomplete" and does not provide an account of the symmetries between solutions. Both authors conclude that extending the Hamiltonian in the way suggested by Dirac is unmotivated. If correct, these arguments could have implications for other issues in the foundations of the constrained Hamiltonian formalism, including the Problem of Time. In this talk, I use a geometric formulation of the constrained Hamiltonian formalism to show that one can motivate the extension to the Hamiltonian independently from consideration of the gauge transformations, and I argue that this supports the standard definition of a gauge transformation without falling prey to the criticisms of Pitts (2014) and Pons (2005). Therefore, in order to maintain that first-class constraints do not generate gauge transformations, one must reject the claim that the constrained Hamiltonian formalism is fully described by the geometric picture; I suggest two avenues for doing so.