You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
Time and its arrow from quantum geometrodynamics?
arXiv
Authors: Claus Kiefer, Leonardo Chataignier, Mritunjay Tyagi
Year
2024
Paper ID
65881
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
109
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We discuss how quantum geometrodynamics, a conservative approach to quantum gravity, might explain the emergence of classical spacetime and, with it, the emergence of classical time and its arrow from the universal quantum state. This follows from a particular but reasonable choice of boundary condition motivated by the structure of the Hamiltonian of the theory. This condition can also be seen as defining a quantum version of Penrose's Weyl curvature hypothesis. We comment on the relation of this picture to the `past hypothesis' and the different observed arrows of time, and we consider how quantum geometrodynamics could serve as a unifying and more fundamental framework to explain these observations.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We discuss how quantum geometrodynamics, a conservative approach to quantum gravity, might explain the emergence of classical spacetime and, with it, the emergence of classical...
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.
Show Paper arXiv 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.