A general framework for cosmological quantum theory

Don Nelson Page

James B. Hartle

When quantum mechanics was developed in the '20s of the last century another revolution in physics was just starting. It began with the discovery that the universe is expanding. For a long time quantum mechanics and cosmology developed independently of one another. Yet the very discovery of the expansion would eventually draw the two subjects together because it implied the big bang where quantum mechanics wasimportant for cosmology and for understanding and predicting our observations of the universe today. Textbook (Copenhagen) formulations of quantum mechanics are inadequate for cosmology for at least four reasons: 1) They predict the outcomes of measurements made by observers. But in the very early universe no measurements were being made and no observers were around to make them. 2) Observers were outside of the system being measured. But we are interested in a theory of the whole universe where everything, including observers, are inside. 3) Copenhagen quantum mechanics could not retrodict the past. But retrodicting the past to understand how the universe began is the main task of cosmology. 4) Copenhagen quantum mechanics required a fixed classical spacetime geometry not least to give meaning to the time in the Schrödinger equation. But in the very early universe spacetime is fluctuating quantum mechanically (quantum gravity) and without definite value. A formulation of quantum mechanics general enough for cosmology was started by Everett and developed by many. That effort has given us a more general framework that is adequate for cosmology --- decoherent (or consistent) histories quantum theory in the context of semiclassical quantum gravity. Copenhagen quantum theory is an approximation to this more general quantum framework that is appropriate for measurement situations. We discuss whether further generalization may still be required.

Nelson Pinto-Neto, J. C. Fabris

We review the main results that have been obtained in quantum cosmology from the perspective of the de Broglie-Bohm quantum theory. As it is a dynamical theory of assumed objectively real trajectories in the configuration space of the physical system under investigation, this quantum theory is not essentially probabilistic and dispenses the collapse postulate, turning it suitable to be applied to cosmology. In the framework of minisuperspace models, we show how quantum cosmological effects in the de-Broglie-Bohm's approach can avoid the initial singularity, and isotropize the Universe. We then extend minisuperspace in order to include linear cosmological perturbations. We present the main equations which govern the dynamics of quantum cosmological perturbations evolving in non-singular quantum cosmological backgrounds, and calculate some of their observational consequences. These results are not known how to be obtained in other approaches to quantum theory. In the general case of full superspace, we enumerate the possible structures of quantum space and time that emerge from the de Broglie-Bohm picture. Finally, we compare some of the results coming from the de Broglie-Bohm theory with other approaches, and discuss the physical reasons for some discrepancies that occur.

M. P. Ryan

James B. Hartle

Usual quantum mechanics requires a fixed background spacetime geometry and its associated causal structure. A generalization of the usual theory may therefore be needed at the Planck scale for quantum theories of gravity in which spacetime geometry is a quantum variable. The elements of generalized quantum theory are briefly reviewed and illustrated by generalizations of usual quantum theory that incorporate spacetime alternatives, gauge degrees of freedom, and histories that move forward and backward in time. A generalized quantum framework for cosmological spacetime geometry is sketched. This theory is in fully four-dimensional form and free from the need for a fixed causal structure. Usual quantum mechanics is recovered as an approximation to this more general framework that is appropriate in those situations where spacetime geometry behaves classically.

James B. Hartle