BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for researchDiscover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
Holger Bech Nielsen contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Identity and collaboration
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
Contributions of the participants of the 24th International Workshop "What Comes Beyond the Standard Models", July 5 to July 11, 2021, Bled, Slovenia, presented either with the arxiv number of each contribution or with the webside of the Proceedings published by DMFA, ZALOlZNISTVO LJUBLJANA, DECEMBER 2021.
We study the periodic complex action theory (CAT) by imposing a periodic condition in the future-included CAT where the time integration is performed from the past to the future, and extend a normalized matrix element of an operator $\hat{\mathcal O}$, which is called the weak value in the real action theory, to another expression $\langle \hat{\mathcal O} \rangle_{\mathrm{periodic}~\mathrm{time}}$. We present two theorems stating that $\langle \hat{\mathcal O} \rangle_{\mathrm{periodic}~\mathrm{time}}$ becomes real for $\hat{\mathcal O}$ being Hermitian with regard to a modified inner product that makes a given non-normal Hamiltonian $\hat{H}$ normal. The first theorem holds for a given period $t_p$ in a case where the number of eigenstates having the maximal imaginary part $B$ of the eigenvalues of $\hat{H}$ is just one, while the second one stands for $t_p$ selected such that the absolute value of the transition amplitude is maximized in a case where $B \leq 0$ and $|B|$ is much smaller than the distances between any two real parts of the eigenvalues of $\hat{H}$. The latter proven via a number-theoretical argument suggests that, if our universe is periodic, then even the period could be an adjustment parameter to be determined in the Feynman path integral. This is a variant type of the maximization principle that we previously proposed.
We study the 3.55 keV X-ray suspected to arise from dark matter in our model of dark matter consisting of a bubble of a new phase of the vacuum, the surface tension of which keeps ordinary matter under high pressure inside the bubble. We consider two versions of the model: Old large pearls model : We worked for a long time on a pearl picture with pearl / bubbles of cm-size adjusted so that the impacts of them on earth could be identified with events of the mysterious type that happened in Tunguska in 1908. We fit both the very frequency, the 3.55 keV, and the overall intensity of the X-ray line coming from the center of the Milky Way and from galaxy clusters with one parameter in the model in which this radiation comes from collisions of pearls. New small pearl model: Our latest idea is to let the pearls be smaller than atoms but bigger than nuclei so as to manage to fit the 3.5 keV X-rays coming from the Tycho supernova remnant in which Jeltema and Profumo observed this line. Further we also crudely fit the DAMA-LIBRA observation with the small pearls, and even see a possibility for including the electron-recoil-excess seen by the Xenon1T experiment as being due to de-excitation via electron emission of our pearls. The important point of even our small size pearl model is that the cross section of our "macroscopic" pearls is so large that the pearls interact several times in the shielding but, due to their much larger mass than the typical nuclei, are {\bf not stopped by only a few interactions}. Nevertheless only a minute fraction of the relatively strongly interacting pearls reach the 1400 m down to the DAMA experiment, but due to the higher cross section we can fit the data anyway.
We have constructed a new formalism for describing a situation with {\color{red} several (dual) strings} present at a time, a {\color{red} string field theory}, by means of a constituent / a strings from objects picture similar to, but importantly different from the "bits" by Charles Thorn\cite{Thorn}. Our "objects" (essentially the bits) represent rather a making a lattice in the {\color{red} light cone variables} on the string. The remarkable feature and simplicity of our formalism is, that the "objects" do {\color{red} NOT interact}, basically just run or sit trivially fixed. {\color{red} Scattering is a fake} in our formalism. This opens also up for hoping for generalizations inspired by hadrons with their partons all having Bjorken variable $x=0$, and thus infinitely many constituents. The p-adic string is an example.
It is the purpose of the present article to collect arguments for, that there should exist in fact -- although not necessarily yet found -- some law, which imply an adjustment to special features to occur in the future. In our own "complex action model" we suggest a version in which the "goal" according to which the future is being arranged is to diminish the integral over time and space of the numerical square of the Higgs field. We end by suggesting that optimistically calculated the collected evidences by coincidences runs to that the chance for getting so good agreement by accident would be of the order of only 1 in 30000. In addition we review that the cosmological constant being so small can be considered evidence for some influence backward in time. Anthropic principle may be considered a way of simulating influence backward in time.
In an earlier article, we have "derived" space, as a part of the Random Dynamics project. In order to get locality we need to obtain reparametrization symmetry, or equivalently, diffeomorphism symmetry. There we sketched a procedure for how to get locality by first obtaining reparametrization symmetry, or equivalently, diffeomorphism symmetry. This is the object of the present article.
We like to investigate the idea of taking as non-accidental a remarkably good agreement of our (C.D. Froggatt and myself, and also with Yasutaka Takanishi) prediction of the Higgs mass. Our modernized most simple "multiple point principle" prediction $129.4 \pm 2$ GeV versus the recently observed $126 \pm 1$ GeV agrees well. The PREdicted Higgs mass is essentially the smallest value, that would not make our present vacuum unstable. There are two slightly different versions in as far as we can either use absolute stability by the alternative vacuum being required to have higher energy density than the present one or just metastability requiring that our vacuum should not have decayed in the early time just after big bang (or later if that should be easier). This is of course provided we suppose that the Standard Model would function almost all the way up to the scale relevant for the alternative vacuum (which as we shall see is close to the Planck energy scale for the Higgs field expectation value). The principle we used to our PREdiction were the requirement of degenerate vacua which we called "multiple point principle" and I shall seek to deliver some arguments that this MPP is "nice" to assume, i.e. it is likely to be true.
It is attempted to construct a group-dependent quantity that could be used to single out the Standard Model group S(U(2) x U(3)) as being the "winner" by this quantity being the biggest possible for just the Standard Model group. The suggested quantity is first of all based on the inverse quadratic Cassimir for the fundamental or better smallest faithful representation in a notation in which the adjoint representation quadratic Cassimir is normalized to unity. Then a further correction is added to help the wanted Standard Model group to win and the rule comes even to involve the Abelian group U(1) to be multiplied into the group to get this correction be allowed. The scheme is suggestively explained to have some physical interpretation(s). By some appropriate proceedure for extending the group dependent quantity to groups that are not simple we find a way to make the Standard Model Group the absolute "winner". Thus we provide an indication for what could be the reason for the Standard Model Group having been chosen to be the realized one by Nature.
We briefly review the correspondence principle proposed in our previous paper, which claims that if we regard a matrix element defined in terms of the future state at time $T_B$ and the past state at time $T_A$ as an expectation value in the complex action theory whose path runs over not only past but also future, the expectation value at the present time $t$ of a future-included theory for large $T_B-t$ and large $t-T_A$ corresponds to that of a future-not-included theory with a proper inner product for large $t-T_A$. This correspondence principle suggests that the future-included theory is not excluded phenomenologically.
We formulate a complex action theory which includes operators of coordinate and momentum $\hat{q}$ and $\hat{p}$ being replaced with non-hermitian operators $\hat{q}_{new}$ and $\hat{p}_{new}$, and their eigenstates ${}_m <_{new} q |$ and ${}_m <_{new} p |$ with complex eigenvalues $q$ and $p$. Introducing a philosophy of keeping the analyticity in path integration variables, we define a modified set of complex conjugate, real and imaginary parts, hermitian conjugates and bras, and explicitly construct $\hat{q}_{new}$, $\hat{p}_{new}$, ${}_m <_{new} q |$ and ${}_m <_{new} p |$ by formally squeezing coherent states. We also pose a theorem on the relation between functions on the phase space and the corresponding operators. Only in our formalism can we describe a complex action theory or a real action theory with complex saddle points in the tunneling effect etc. in terms of bras and kets in the functional integral. Furthermore, in a system with a non-hermitian diagonalizable bounded Hamiltonian, we show that the mechanism to obtain a hermitian Hamiltonian after a long time development proposed in our letter works also in the complex coordinate formalism. If the hermitian Hamiltonian is given in a local form, a conserved probability current density can be constructed with two kinds of wave functions.
We study a diagonalizable Hamiltonian that is not at first hermitian. Requirement that a measurement shall not change one Hamiltonian eigenstate into another one with a different eigenvalue imposes that an inner product must be defined so as to make the Hamiltonian normal with regard to it. After a long time development with the non-hermitian Hamiltonian, only a subspace of possible states will effectively survive. On this subspace the effect of the anti-hermitian part of the Hamiltonian is suppressed, and the Hamiltonian becomes hermitian. Thus hermiticity emerges automatically, and we have no reason to maintain that at the fundamental level the Hamiltonian should be hermitian. If the Hamiltonian is given in a local form, a conserved probability current density can be constructed with two kinds of wave functions. We also point out a possible misestimation of a past state by extrapolating back in time with the hermitian Hamiltonian. It is a seeming past state, not a true one.
If it is to be true that the history of the universe should be adjusted to minimize the "imaginary part of action" [arXiv:0802.2991, arXiv:0711.3080, arXiv:0707.1919, arXiv:hep-ph/0612032, arXiv:hep-th/0509205, arXiv:hep-th/0701018], it would be "easiest" to have this "imaginary part of the action" to be rather independent of whether the neutrons are converted to electrons and protons (and neutrinos), and therefore of whether the contribution to the imaginary part of the Lagrangian were conserved under this conversion. Under the further assumption - which is reasonable - that the by far dominant term in the imaginary part of the Lagrangian density is the one corresponding to the Higgs mass square term in the Standard Model Lagrangian density mH**2 |phi(x)|**2 we derive a relation: (down mass square minus up mass square) = constituent quark mass times electron mass/"ln", where "ln" is defined by <1/gamma >= "ln"/ < gamma > and is of the order of 1 to 4, where gamma stands for relativity gamma of a valence quark inside a nucleon. This relation is very well satisfied with the phenomeno- logically estimated current algebra quark masses mu, md, and the constituent mass mconstituent for the light quarks, taken say to be one third of the nucleon mass. Our model has been criticised on the ground that it should have prevented cosmic rays with energies capable of producing Higgs particles, when hitting say the atmosphere. Indeed there is, however, a well known "knee" in the density curve as function of energy at an order of magnitude for the cosmic ray particle energy close to the effective threshold for Higgs production. A parameter giving the order of magnitude of number of Higgsses to be produced in order to get a significant effect is estimated to be about 300000.