Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Thermodynamics
The cosmological constant from informational Landauer erasure at the Planck-Hubble boundary
OpenAlex
Authors: FELIPE DIAS
Year
2026
Paper ID
30003
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
187
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The cosmological constant problem — the 10^121 discrepancy between quantum field theory vacuum energy and the observed dark energy density — remains one of the deepest puzzles in theoretical physics. I propose that this discrepancy can be understood through a chain of three physically motivated postulates. First, the covariant entropy bound on the Hubble volume defines the number of independent degrees of freedom accessible to observation. Second, a minimum of N_crit = distinguishable states (one bit) is required for any non-degenerate quantum measurement, setting an irreducible Landauer erasure cost per holographic degree of freedom. Third, the Unruh radiation associated with the Planck-scale ultraviolet cutoff consists of massless quanta obeying radiation thermodynamics γ = 4/3, so that erasure costs the radiation enthalpy rather than the non-relativistic thermal minimum. Together these yield ρ_Λ = 4ℏc ln2 / 3π² ℓP² RH², giving 6.009 × 10⁻¹⁰ J/m³ versus the Planck measurement of 5.245 × 10⁻¹⁰ J/m³, a residual discrepancy of 14.6% that constitutes a falsifiable prediction of the framework. Once the three postulates are adopted, the framework contains no fitted dimensionless parameter. The predicted H₀ = 62.93 km/s/Mpc lies 8.2σ below Planck and 9.7σ below the SH0ES distance-ladder value, and is disfavoured by all current measurements.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Thermodynamics research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The cosmological constant problem — the 10^121 discrepancy between quantum field theory vacuum energy and the observed dark energy density — remains one of the deepest puzzles...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.