- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Generalized analysis of a dust collapse in effective loop quantum gravity: Fate of shocks and covariance

Kristina Giesel1, Hongguang Liu1,*, Parampreet Singh2, and Stefan Andreas Weigl1

  • *Contact author: hongguang.liu@gravity.fau.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 110, 104016 – Published 8 November, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.104016

Abstract

Based on modifications inspired from loop quantum gravity (LQG), spherically symmetric models have recently been explored to understand the resolution of classical singularities and the fate of the spacetime beyond. While such phenomenological studies have provided useful insights, questions remain on whether such models exhibit some of the desired properties such as consistent LTB conditions, covariance, and compatibility with the improved dynamics of loop quantum cosmology in the cosmological and LTB sector. We provide a systematic procedure to construct effective spherically symmetric models encoding LQG modifications as a 1+1 field theory models encoding these properties following the analysis in our companion paper [K. Giesel et al., Embedding generalized LTB models in polymerized spherically symmetric spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 110, 104017 (2024)]. As concrete examples of our generalized strategy, we obtain and compare with different phenomenological models, which have been investigated recently and demonstrate resolution of singularity by quantum geometry effects via a bounce. These include models with areal gauge fixing, a polymerized vacuum solution, polymerized junction conditions, and an Oppenheimer-Snyder dust collapse model. An important insight from our approach is that the dynamical equations care about the det(e) part rather than the square root of the determinant of the spatial metric. As a result, shock solutions that have been argued to exist in some models are found to be absent even if one considers coordinate transformations.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

See Also

Embedding generalized Lemaître-Tolman-Bondi models in polymerized spherically symmetric spacetimes

Kristina Giesel, Hongguang Liu, Eric Rullit, Parampreet Singh, and Stefan Andreas Weigl
Phys. Rev. D 110, 104017 (2024)

Article Text

References (63)

  1. M. Bojowald, T. Harada, and R. Tibrewala, Lemaitre-Tolman-Bondi collapse from the perspective of loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 78, 064057 (2008).
  2. M. Bojowald, J. D. Reyes, and R. Tibrewala, Non-marginal LTB-like models with inverse triad corrections from loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 80, 084002 (2009).
  3. C. Bambi, D. Malafarina, and L. Modesto, Non-singular quantum-inspired gravitational collapse, Phys. Rev. D 88, 044009 (2013).
  4. J. G. Kelly, R. Santacruz, and E. Wilson-Ewing, Black hole collapse and bounce in effective loop quantum gravity, Classical Quantum Gravity 38, 04LT01 (2021).
  5. J. Ben Achour, S. Brahma, and J.-P. Uzan, Bouncing compact objects. Part I. Quantum extension of the Oppenheimer-Snyder collapse, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2020) 041.
  6. J. Münch, Effective quantum dust collapse via surface matching, Classical Quantum Gravity 38, 175015 (2021).
  7. J. Münch, Causal structure of a recent loop quantum gravity black hole collapse model, Phys. Rev. D 104, 046019 (2021).
  8. B.-F. Li and P. Singh, Does the loop quantum μo scheme permit black hole formation?, Universe 7, 406 (2021).
  9. V. Husain, J. G. Kelly, R. Santacruz, and E. Wilson-Ewing, Quantum gravity of dust collapse: Shock waves from black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 121301 (2022).
  10. V. Husain, J. G. Kelly, R. Santacruz, and E. Wilson-Ewing, On the fate of quantum black holes, Phys. Rev. D 106, 024014 (2022).
  11. J. Münch, A. Perez, S. Speziale, and S. Viollet, Generic features of a polymer quantum black hole, Classical Quantum Gravity 40, 135003 (2023).
  12. K. Giesel, M. Han, B.-F. Li, H. Liu, and P. Singh, Spherical symmetric gravitational collapse of a dust cloud: Polymerized dynamics in reduced phase space, Phys. Rev. D 107, 044047 (2023).
  13. M. Bobula and T. Pawlowski, Rainbow Oppenheimer-Snyder collapse and the entanglement entropy production, Phys. Rev. D 108, 026016 (2023).
  14. F. Fazzini, C. Rovelli, and F. Soltani, Painlevé-Gullstrand coordinates discontinuity in the quantum Oppenheimer-Snyder model, Phys. Rev. D 108, 044009 (2023).
  15. A. Ashtekar and M. Bojowald, Quantum geometry and the Schwarzschild singularity, Classical Quantum Gravity 23, 391 (2006).
  16. L. Modesto, Loop quantum black hole, Classical Quantum Gravity 23, 5587 (2006).
  17. C. G. Boehmer and K. Vandersloot, Loop quantum dynamics of the Schwarzschild interior, Phys. Rev. D 76, 104030 (2007).
  18. D.-W. Chiou, W.-T. Ni, and A. Tang, Loop quantization of spherically symmetric midisuperspaces and loop quantum geometry of the maximally extended Schwarzschild spacetime, arXiv:1212.1265.
  19. R. Gambini, J. Olmedo, and J. Pullin, Quantum black holes in loop quantum gravity, Classical Quantum Gravity 31, 095009 (2014).
  20. A. Corichi and P. Singh, Loop quantization of the Schwarzschild interior revisited, Classical Quantum Gravity 33, 055006 (2016).
  21. N. Dadhich, A. Joe, and P. Singh, Emergence of the product of constant curvature spaces in loop quantum cosmology, Classical Quantum Gravity 32, 185006 (2015).
  22. J. Olmedo, S. Saini, and P. Singh, From black holes to white holes: A quantum gravitational, symmetric bounce, Classical Quantum Gravity 34, 225011 (2017).
  23. A. Ashtekar, J. Olmedo, and P. Singh, Quantum transfiguration of Kruskal black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 241301 (2018).
  24. M. Han and H. Liu, Improved effective dynamics of loop-quantum-gravity black hole and Nariai limit, Classical Quantum Gravity 39, 035011 (2022).
  25. M. Han and H. Liu, Covariant μ¯-scheme effective dynamics, mimetic gravity, and non-singular black holes: Applications to spherical symmetric quantum gravity and CGHS model, Phys. Rev. D 109, 084033 (2024).
  26. A. Ashtekar, J. Olmedo, and P. Singh, Regular black holes from loop quantum gravity, arXiv:2301.01309.
  27. V. Husain and T. Pawlowski, Time and a physical Hamiltonian for quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 141301 (2012).
  28. C. Kiefer and T. Schmitz, Singularity avoidance for collapsing quantum dust in the Lemaître-Tolman-Bondi model, Phys. Rev. D 99, 126010 (2019).
  29. C. Kiefer and H. Mohaddes, From classical to quantum Oppenheimer-Snyder model: Nonmarginal case, Phys. Rev. D 107, 126006 (2023).
  30. K. Giesel, B.-F. Li, and P. Singh, Non-singular quantum gravitational dynamics of an LTB dust shell model: The role of quantization prescriptions, Phys. Rev. D 104, 106017 (2021).
  31. K. Giesel, H. Liu, E. Rullit, P. Singh, and S. Weigl, following paper, Embedding generalized LTB models in polymerized spherically symmetric spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 110, 104017 (2024).
  32. A. Ashtekar and P. Singh, Loop quantum cosmology: A status report, Classical Quantum Gravity 28, 213001 (2011).
  33. R. Tibrewala, Spherically symmetric Einstein-Maxwell theory and loop quantum gravity corrections, Classical Quantum Gravity 29, 235012 (2012).
  34. A. H. Chamseddine and V. Mukhanov, Mimetic dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2013) 135.
  35. L. Sebastiani, S. Vagnozzi, and R. Myrzakulov, Mimetic gravity: A review of recent developments and applications to cosmology and astrophysics, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2017, 3156915 (2017).
  36. K. Takahashi and T. Kobayashi, Extended mimetic gravity: Hamiltonian analysis and gradient instabilities, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2017) 038.
  37. D. Langlois, M. Mancarella, K. Noui, and F. Vernizzi, Effective description of higher-order scalar-tensor theories, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2017) 033.
  38. J. Ben Achour, F. Lamy, H. Liu, and K. Noui, Non-singular black holes and the limiting curvature mechanism: A Hamiltonian perspective, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2018) 072.
  39. V. Taveras, Corrections to the Friedmann equations from LQG for a universe with a free scalar field, Phys. Rev. D 78, 064072 (2008).
  40. M. Bojowald and G. M. Paily, Deformed general relativity and effective actions from loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 86, 104018 (2012).
  41. M. Bojowald and E. I. Duque, Inequivalence of mimetic gravity with models of loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 109, 084044 (2024).
  42. A. Ashtekar, T. Pawlowski, and P. Singh, Quantum nature of the big bang: Improved dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 74, 084003 (2006).
  43. J. G. Kelly, R. Santacruz, and E. Wilson-Ewing, Effective loop quantum gravity framework for vacuum spherically symmetric spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 102, 106024 (2020).
  44. J. Lewandowski, Y. Ma, J. Yang, and C. Zhang, Quantum Oppenheimer-Snyder and Swiss cheese models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 101501 (2023).
  45. K. V. Kuchar and J. D. Romano, Gravitational constraints which generate a Lie algebra, Phys. Rev. D 51, 5579 (1995).
  46. P. Szekeres and A. Lun, What is a shell crossing singularity?, J. Aust. Math. Soc. Series B, Appl. Math. 41, 167 (1999).
  47. P. D. Lasky, A. W. C. Lun, and R. B. Burston, Initial value formalism for dust collapse, arXiv:gr-qc/0606003.
  48. G. Lemaître, The expanding universe, Ann. Soc. Sci. Bruxelles 53, 51 (1933).
  49. R. C. Tolman, Effect of inhomogeneity on cosmological models, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 20, 169 (1934).
  50. H. Bondi, Spherically symmetrical models in general relativity, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 107, 410 (1947).
  51. K. Giesel, J. Tambornino, and T. Thiemann, LTB spacetimes in terms of Dirac observables, Classical Quantum Gravity 27, 105013 (2010).
  52. C. Hellaby and K. Lake, Shell crossings and the Tolman model, Astrophys. J. 290, 381 (1985).
  53. K. Giesel, H. Liu, P. Singh, and S. A. Weigl, Regular black holes and their relationship to polymerized models and mimetic gravity, arXiv:2405.03554.
  54. S. A. Hayward, Gravitational energy in spherical symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 53, 1938 (1996).
  55. A. Gullstrand, Allgemeine Lösung des statischen Einkörperproblems in der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie, Vol. 16 and 8 of Arkiv för matematik, astronomi och fysik (Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, 1922).
  56. P. Painlevé, La mécanique classique et la théorie de la relativité, C.R. Hebd. Seances Acad. Sci. 173, 677 (1921).
  57. K. Giesel, B.-F. Li, P. Singh, and S. A. Weigl, On consistent gauge fixing conditions in polymerized gravitational systems, Phys. Rev. D 105, 066023 (2022).
  58. J. Yang, Y. Ding, and Y. Ma, Alternative quantization of the Hamiltonian in loop quantum cosmology II: Including the Lorentz term, Phys. Lett. B 682, 1 (2009).
  59. K. Liegener and P. Singh, New loop quantum cosmology modifications from gauge-covariant fluxes, Phys. Rev. D 100, 124048 (2019).
  60. M. Han, Z. Huang, and A. Zipfel, Emergent four-dimensional linearized gravity from a spin foam model, Phys. Rev. D 100, 024060 (2019).
  61. M. Han and H. Liu, Loop quantum gravity on dynamical lattice and improved cosmological effective dynamics with inflaton, Phys. Rev. D 104, 024011 (2021).
  62. J. M. Bardeen, Non-singular general-relativistic gravitational collapse, in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Gravitation and the Theory of Relativity (Publication House of Tbilisi University, Tbilisi, 1968), p. 87.
  63. S. A. Hayward, Formation and evaporation of regular black holes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 031103 (2006).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 110, 104016– Published 8 November, 2024
  • Received 2 October 2023
  • Accepted 20 September 2024
Article part of CHORUS
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2024 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation