Exploring Background Independent Physics

In summary, background independent physics refers to the framework in which physical objects are defined and compared. Most physical theories, such as string theory, Newtonian gravity, and QFT, are formulated on fixed geometric backgrounds and are therefore considered background dependent. However, General Relativity is an exception as it teaches that nature is not fixed-background and the gravitational field is dynamic. Efforts have been made to achieve background independence in string theory, but so far it has not been successful. This difference in background independence sets GR and its quantized versions, like LQG, apart from other physical theories.
  • #1
jby
What is background independent physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't know what that means. Perhaps you're asking about a background independent formalism/theory. Through the 19th century, physics consisted entirely of background independent theories as far as I know. In fact, the only theory that I know to be background dependent is GR. From what I have gathered, "background independent" simply means that the framework in which you express/define your physical objects gives you a reliable frame of reference against which to compare. GR is not like this because the metric is also a physical object that is influenced dynamically. Therefore, if you erect a system of intersecting parallel and perpendicular planes (a coordinate system that you intend to be Cartesian), then they will eventually evolve into unrecognizable distortion.
 
  • #3
the way the words are normally used in theoretical physics, you have it backwards.

GR is a background independent theory

does not depend on a prior choice of geometry or a prior choice of metric (by which lengths, areas, angles etc are measured). The metric is dynamic and emerges as a solution of the equations.

In background dependent theories, fields, trajectories etc are mapped out on an arbitrary geometric grid chosen ahead of time

from a GR standpoint this is unrealistic----the gravitational field (which determines the geometry of spacetime) is not a fixed thing
 
  • #4
Somewhere in his extensive website, John Baez gives an example of a background-dependent theory. A bead sliding along a ring, under the idealization that the bead is affected by the ring but the ring is not affected by the bead, is background-dependent.
 
  • #5
examples of backgr. dependent theories are easy to find
most physical models---string theory, Newtonian gravity, QFT, Maxwell's eqns---are formulated on geometric backgrounds fixed in advance. They are background dependent-----not independent

There has been a longstanding effort to formulate string theory in a background independent way, see for example Edward Witten's paper
http://arxiv.org/hep-th/9306122 [Broken]
on quantum background independence

---start of Witten's paper---
Finding the right framework for an intrinsic, background independent formulation of string theory is one of the main problems in the subject, and so far has remained out of reach...
---end quote---

Various possibilities have been explored. Examples of attempts to achieve BI in M-theory are
http://arxiv.org/hep-th/971019 [Broken]
http://arxiv.org/hep-th/9801051 [Broken]
Someone here mentioned that Vafa was currently working on getting BI.

In 2003 background independence was despaired of by the eminent string theorist Tom Banks in
http://arxiv.org/hep-th/0306074 [Broken]

-----Bank's page 6----
The above discussion and [12] make it clear (to me at least) that the old dream of background independence in string theory is a chimaera...
---end quote---
I think he meant to say a "will-o-the-wisp" or a mirage.
The abstract (for Bank's Critique) reinforces this: "I argue against the possibility of a background independent formulation of the theory,..."

So from Witten's paper to Bank's there is a span of 10 years of trying to achieve background independence without success. Not enough, anyway, to satisfy Banks (one of the inventors of M-theory)

The fact that LQG is a Background Independent theory has, in the past, been offered as an argument for some kind of merger----some kind of hybridization or crossing of the lines of research. It was said that the two approaches (string and loop) had complementary strengths and weaknesses. I forget what the strengths of string theory were supposed to be. The idea was put forward that string theory could use LQG techniques to gain B.I.

------------------------

I guess the moral is that most physical theories don't have BI, and General Relativity (and quantized versions like LQG) are exceptional. Background Independence sets GR apart, and sets Quantum Gravity theories that are quantized versions of GR apart.

And BI is hard to get, hard to build into a theory. Which is why Banks was despairing of it in 2003

GR teaches that nature is not fixed-background----spacetime geometry (the gravitational field) is dynamic. So any fixed-background theory must be an approximation, maybe a very workable effective one but not fundamentally correct. Since there is no fixed background, theories that depend on such a fiction are unrealistic in that regard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
marcus said:
GR teaches that nature is not fixed-background----spacetime geometry (the gravitational field) is dynamic. So any fixed-background theory must be an approximation, maybe a very workable effective one but not fundamentally correct. Since there is no fixed background, theories that depend on such a fiction are unrealistic in that regard.

By dynamic, do you mean that the geometry of spacetime changes? And changes compare to what?

Is quantum physics by itself a background dependent?
 
  • #7
marcus,
Whoops.

jby,
The geometry changes compared to what it was previously. For instance, if you start out by choosing a coordinate system that gives you a perpendicular intersection of geodesics as axes, then, the next moment, these axes may no longer be perpendicular.
 

1. What is background independent physics?

Background independent physics is a theoretical framework in physics where the fundamental laws and principles of nature are not dependent on any pre-existing background structure, such as space and time. This approach allows for a more holistic understanding of the universe and is often used in theories such as loop quantum gravity and causal dynamical triangulation.

2. How does background independence differ from other approaches in physics?

Background independence differs from other approaches, such as the traditional Newtonian or Einsteinian frameworks, in that it does not rely on a fixed background structure to explain the behavior of matter and energy. Instead, it seeks to understand the universe in terms of intrinsic properties and relationships between objects.

3. What are some potential implications of background independence for our understanding of the universe?

Background independence has the potential to provide a more comprehensive and unified understanding of the universe, as it allows for the integration of multiple theories and concepts from different branches of physics. It also has the potential to resolve some of the paradoxes and limitations present in current theories, such as the incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics.

4. How is background independent physics being studied and tested?

Background independent physics is primarily studied through mathematical and computational models, as well as through experiments and observations. Some researchers also use philosophical and conceptual approaches to explore the implications of background independence for our understanding of the universe.

5. What are some challenges and criticisms of background independent physics?

One of the main challenges of background independent physics is the complexity and difficulty of mathematical models, which can make them difficult to test and verify. Additionally, some critics argue that the lack of a fixed background structure in this approach makes it difficult to make predictions about observable phenomena. However, ongoing research and advancements in technology may help address these challenges in the future.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
808
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
902
Replies
9
Views
874
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
721
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
885
Back
Top