 Journal of Modern Physics, 2012, 3, 1172-1177 http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2012.329151 Published Online September 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/jmp) Prediction of Cosmological Constant Λ in Veneziano Ghost Theory of QCD* Lijuan Zhou1, Weixing Ma2, Leonard S. Kisslinger3 1Department of Information and Computing Science, Guangxi University of Technology, Liuzhou, China 2Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 3Department of Physics, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA Email: Leonard Kisslinger kissling@andrew.cmu.edu Received June 15, 2012; revised July 14, 2012; accepted July 24, 2012 ABSTRACT Based on the Veneziano ghost theory of QCD, we estimate the cosmological constant Λ, which is related to the vacuum energy density, , by =8πG . In the recent Veneziano ghost theory is given by the absolute value of the product of the local quark condensate and quark current mass: 2f NH m =< 0::|0>| q cm qq . By solving Dyson- Schwinger Equations for a dressed quark propagator, we found the local quark condensate 3 :0 235MeVqq q m 0: , the generally accepted value. The quark current mass is 4.0 Mev. This gives the same result for as found by previous authors, which is somewhat larger than the observed value. However, when we make use of the nonlocal quark condensate, 0:0 :0=0::0qxqgxqq , with g(x) estimated from our previous work, we find Λ is in a good agreement with the observations. Keywords: Cosmological Constant Λ; Veneziano Ghost Theory of QCD; Local Quark Vacuum Condensate; Nonlocal Quark Condensate; Quantum Chromodynamics-QCD 1. The Cosmological Constant Λ and the QCD Veneziano Ghost Theory The starting point of most cosmological study is Albert Einstein’s Equations, which is a set of ten equations in Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The original Ein- stein field equations can be written as the form [1] 1=8π 2 RRg GT ==1c 39 2 = 6.7087(10)10GeVG (1) in units of , where G is the gravitational constant ( ,=0, ,3R , sometime called Newton’s constant), is the Ricci tensor, R is the trace of Ricci tensor (it is like the radius of curvature of space-time), x T is the energy-momentum tensor, which describes the distribution of matter and energy. Equation (1) des- cribes a non-static universe. However, Einstein believed, at that time, that our universe should be static. In order to get a static universe, in 1917 Einstein introduced a new term, , in Equation (1) to balance the attractive force of gravity, giving his modified equation represents the me- tric tensor, which is a function of position x in spacetime. 1=8π. 2 RRgg GT (2) The in Equation (2) is the so-called cosmological constant, which is a dimensional parameter with units of 2 length . Indeed, Equation (2) allows a static universe [2], called Einstein’s universe, which is one of the so- lution [3] of Friedmann’s simplified form of Einstein’s equation with a term. However, almost one hundred years ago the observations of redshifts of galaxies led to Hubbles Law [4] and the interpretation that the universe is expanding. This led Einstein to declare his static cos- mological model, and especially the introduction of the term to his original field equation theory, his “biggest blunder”. Note that the term *This work was supported in part by National Natural Science Founda- tion of China (10647002), Guangxi Science Foundation for Young Re- searchers under contract No. 0991009, and Guangxi Education Depar- tment with grant No.200807MS112, Department of Science and Tech- nology of Guangxi under funds No. 2011GXNSFA018140, Department of Guangxi Education for the Excellent Scholars of Higher Education, 2011-54, Doctoral Science Foundation of Guangxi University of Tech- nology, 11Z16, and in part by the Pittsburgh Foundation. in Equation (2) corresponds C opyright © 2012 SciRes. JMP  L. J. ZHOU ET AL. 1173 T to adding a vacuum term to =.ac g , Tv (3) Therefore, the cosmological constant is related to the vacuum energy density, by [3] =8πG. (4) The vacuum energy density, called dark energy den- sity, and a model with representing dark energy were reintroduced about three decades ago. See Ref. [5] for a review of the physics and cosmology of , with refe- rences to the many models that have been published. To explain our uniform and flat universe via inflation a cos- mological constant was added to the Friedmann equation [6]. From studies of radiation from the early universe, the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), by a number of projects, including WMAP [7], the inflation scenerio was verified, and it was shown that about 73% of the total energy in the universe is dark energy. As clearly shown by Friedmann’s equation with a cosmolo- gical constant, dark energy corresponds to negative pre- ssure, or anti-gravity. This was confirmed by studies of distant type 1a supernovae [8,9], which showed an acce- leration of the expansion of the universe, and was con- sistent with dark energy being 73% of the energy in the universe. Also, dark energy causes distant galaxies to accelerate away from us, in contrast to the tendency of ordinary forms of energy to slow down the recession of distant objects. See Ref. [5] for other of the many refe- rences to CMBR, supernovae, galaxy and other studies of dark energy. The existence of a non-zero vacuum energy would, in principle, have an effect on gravitational physics on all scales. The value of in our present universe is not well known, and it is an empirical issue which will ulti- mately be settled by observation. A precise determination of this number () or will be one of the primary goals of observational cosmology in the near future. Re- cently the possiblity of determining the cosmological constant by observations has been discussed [10]. A major outstanding problem is that most quantum field theories predict a huge cosmological constant from the energy of the quantum vacuum. This conclusion also follows from dimensional analysis and effective field theory down to the Planck scale, by which we would expect a cosmological constant of the order of 4 l ( l is the Planck mass with 12 ==MG 19 1.22 10 Gepl . The Planck energy is thought to be the energy where conventional physical theories break down and a new theory of quantum gravity is required ). We know that the measured value is on the order of ,or , or V 47 10 35 2 s 10 4 GeV 3 cm energy expected from zero -point fluctuations and scalar potential, 3 110 =210ergcm, theory and the observed value, 3 10 =210ergcm observe 120. observe 11 10 , a discrepancy of a factor of 10 This is the largest discrepancy—the worst theoretical prediction in the history of physics. At the same time, some supersymmetric theories require a cosmological constant that is exactly zero. Therefore, we face a big difficulty in understanding the observational . This problem has been referred to as the long- standing cosmological constant problem. Vacuum energy is predicted to be created in cosmolo- gical phase transitions. In the standard model of particle physics with the temperature (T) of the universe as a function of time (t), there are two important phase tran- sitions. At t seconds, with T 140 GeV the universe undergoes the electroweak phase transition (EWPT), with the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs 0: :0 Higgs 5 10 field, , going from zero to a finite value corresponding to a Higgs mass 140 GeV. At t seconds, with T 150 MeV, the universe undergoes the QCD phase transition (QCDPT), when a universe consisting of a dense quark-gluon plasma becomes our current universe with hadrons. The latent heat for this phase transition is the quark condensate, 0: :0qq , also a vacuum energy, which is an essential part of the present work. First we review the work of F. R. Urban, A. R. Zhit- nitsky [11,12], which is based on the QCD Veneziano ghost theory [13-16] In this model the cosmological va- cuum energy density can be expressed in terms of QCD parameters for light flavors as follows [10,11] =2 f N 29 g 10 , or about in reduced planck units ( 120 10 l ). That is, there is a large difference between the magnitude of the vacuum 2 =0:00:0, f q HN cmqq m =ccc (5) where mq is the current quark mass and .QCD grav . The first factor D is a dimensionless coefficient with value of QCD c [10,11], which is entirely of QCD origin and is related to the definition of QCD on a specific finite compact manifold such as a torus, QC c 1 2fq QCD Nmqq cLm L m with being the size of the manifold and the mass of meson. A precise computation of QCD c has been calculated in a conventional lattice QCD approach by studying corre- ctions of order 1 to the vacuum energy [10,11]. Note that QCD depends on the manifold where the theory is defined. The second factor c rav has a purely gravita- tional origin and is defined as the relation between the size L of the manifold we live in, and the Hubble constant H, c 1 .0 =grav LcH . One can define this size of the manifold as 1 0 17LH 42 0=2.1 10 where h GeV =0.71h0 and ( , Hubble Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JMP  L. J. ZHOU ET AL. 1174 constant today). Therefore, one can explicitly obtain an estimate for the linear length of the torus, and then obtain the value of L . rav .grav In Section 2 we briefly review our previous calculation of the quark condensate [17] using Dyson-Schwinger equations (DSEs) [18,19], and discuss the quark current mass q, which are needed to calculate c c with . = 0.0588 m , as shown in Equation (5). Since our values for the local quark condensate 0:00 :0qq and the current quark mass are approximately the same as in Ref. [10,11] we find the same value for no as in that work, with a factor 6 discrepancy when compared to the observed vacuum energy density. In Section 3 we use a nonlocal quark condensate, based on earlier research, and find good agreement between and . Finally, we give our Summary and concluding remarks in Section 4. nlocaltheoryobserved 2. Local Quark Condensate, Current Quark Mass, ρΛ In this section we review our previous work on the quark condensate, the current quark mass, and the resulting va- lue for the cosmological constant/vacuum energy density. 2.1. The Local Quark Condensate The quark propagator is defined by ()=0 ab a q Sx Tq0 0, b xq x bx (6) where (q) is a quark field with color a (b), and T is the time-ordering operator. The nonperturbative part of the quark propagator is given by a q 1 =0 12 Sx : 0:00:0:0. NP q qx qxqx q (7) For short distances, the Taylor expansion of the scalar part, 0:qx NP q Sx0 :0q, of can be written as ( see, e.g., Refs.[17,20] ) 2 0:0 :0=0: 0: 00 4s qxq q xqigG 00:0 0 :0. q q (8) In Equation (8) the vacuum expectation values in the expansion are the local quark condensate, the quark- gluon mixed condensate, and so forth. The Dyson-Schwinger Equations [18,19] were used to derive the local quark condensate in Ref. [17]. See this reference for details and a discussion of approximations. Note that as shown in Equation (8), the quark-gluon mixed condensate provides the small-x dependence of the nonlocal 0:0 :0qxq quark condensate. How- ever, for the present work this small-x expansion is not useful, and we shall use a known expression for the nonlocality, described below. Therefore we only give the results for the local quark condensate. Also note that the vacuum condensates can act as a medium [21,22], which influences the properties of particles propagating through it. Using the solutions of DSEs with three different sets of the quark-quark interaction parameters (see Ref.[17]) leads to our theoretical predictions for the local quark vacuum condensate listed in Table 1. Set 1 results are consistent with many other calcula- tions, such as QCD sum rules [23-25], Lattice QCD [26-28] and Instanton model predictions [29-31]. These numerical results will be used to calculate in the Subsection 2.3 below. 2.2. The Current Mass of Light Quarks As we have seen from Equation (5) to predict we need to know the basic quark current mass q. Since one cannot produce a beam of quarks, it is difficult to determine the quark masses. Using various models the effective quark masses have been estimated, but we need the current quark masses of the light u and d quark. Estimates of these masses and references can be foud in the Particle Data Physics booklet [32]. They are m 1.7<< 3.3 MeV 4.1 <<5.8MeVe. u d m m 4.0MeV q m (9) From this we estimate that the current quark mass is (10) 2.3. Cosmological Constant Λ with ::0000qq =8πG and mq From Equation (2), , the vacuum energy density, while , is given in Equation (5) as 2 =0:00:0 f q HN cmqq m (11) Since our values for mq and 0:00 :0qq are the standard ones, we find the same value for as in Table 1. Predictions of local quark condensate in QCD vacuum, ::00 f qq with f standing for quark flavor and μ denotes renormalization point, μ2 = 10 GeV2. Set no. of quark interactions , 0::0ud qq for u and d quarks Set 1 33 0.0130GeV235MeV Set 2 33 0.0078GeV198 MeV 33 0.0027GeV139 MeV Set 3 Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JMP  L. J. ZHOU ET AL. 1175 Ref.[11] 4 3 10 eV, 4 3 10 eV 3.6 theory (12) while the value observed [33] is 2.3 observed . (13) Although the theoretical and observed values are similar, they still differ by 6.0 observed theory 3. Cosmological Constant Λ with Nonlocal Quark Condensate As mentioned above, the expression 2 0:0 :0=0: 0: 00 4s qxq q xqigG 00 :0 0 :0 q q does not work except for very small x. Therefore we shall use the nonlocal quark condensate derived from the quark distribution function (see Refs.[34,35]). Using the form in Ref.[35], 2 0:0 :0=0:qxqgx q00 :0,q (14) with 2 22 1 = 18 gx x 2 . (15) The value of estimated in Ref.[36] is . Using 22 GeV0.8 1QCD as the length scale, or 2 .2GeV 0 2=1x, one obtains 2 11 1==. 6.25 2.25 QCD g (16) From this we obtain 1 0:0 :0=0: 6.25 qxq q00:0 ,q (17) and 4 4 eV Vobserved quantity, wh was introduced by A. Einstein who mo- 3 3 13.6 10 6 =2.310 e nonlocal theory (18) Therefore, using the modification of the quark conden- sate via the nonlocal condensate, one obtains excellent agreement between the theoretical and observed cosmo- logical constants. 4. Summary and Concluding Remarks The cosmological constant is an important physical dified the field equations of his general theory of rela- tivity to obtain a stationary universe. The constant has recently been used to explain the observed accelerated expansion of the universe, but its observational value is about 120 orders of magnitude smaller than the one theoretically computed in the framework of the currently accepted quantum field theories. Namely, quantum field theory predicted that vacuum energy density, ich , is of the order of 4 l , with 19 =1.22 10 GeV pl M,hich is about 120 order of mag observed value of 4 3 =2.310 eV observed . This difference is w snitude larger than the ed cosmological constan eory of QCD, using a lo the so callt problem, the worst problem of fine-tuning in physics. Based on the Veneziano ghost th cal quark condensate, we obtained the same result for as in Refs[11,12], about a factor of 6 larger than observed . However, 0:00 :0qq is just an appro- n to ximatio 0:qx the nonlocal quark 0 :0q. Using condensate 0:0 :0qxq the theoretical and observed values of =0:00 :0gxq q we find that are approximately equal. The cosmological constant is a potentially impor- ta might doubt the correctness of the Veneziano Q nt contributor to the dynamical history of the universe. Unlike ordinary matter, which can clump together or dis- perse as it evolves, the vacuum energy is a property of spacetime itself, and is expectd to be the same every- where. If the cosmological costant is the valid model of dark energy, a sufficiently large cosmological constant will cause galaxies and supernovae to accelerate away from us, as has been observed, in contrast to the tendency of ordinary forms of energy to slow down the recession of distant objects. The value of in our present uni- verse is not well known. A precise determination of this constant will be one of the primary goals of both theore- tical cosmology and observational cosmology in the near future. One CD ghost theory that we used in this work, since it is an analogue of two-dimensional theory based on the Schw- inger model [18,19], replacing the vector gauge field by two scalar fields. These scalar fields have positive and negative norms and cancel with each other, leaving no trace in the physical subspace. They have small contribu- tion to the vacuum energy in the curved space. It is known that the QCD ghost must be an intrinsically vector field in order for the 1U problem to be consistently resolved within the fraork of QCD. It seems to be necessary to examine if the Veneziano mechanism works in terms of the vector ghost fields instead of the scalar fields used here. However, Ohta and others in Refs. [36-38] have discussed the same problem in more rea- listic four dimensional models, and show that the QCD mew Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JMP  L. J. ZHOU ET AL. 1176 ghost produces vacuum energy density proportional to the Hubble parameter which has aoximately the right magnitude 4 3 310eV . ppr considerable evence that the universe be There is now id gan as fireball in the cosmological vacuum, the so- called “Big Bang”, with extremely high temperature and high energy density. One knows that the quark conden- sate is vastly changed by the QCD phase transition, and this implies that there is a tempreature (T) dependence of 0:0 :0qxq and . is probably dependent and moentm p of virtual particles which produce vacuum condensateas mentioned above. We can predict the dependence on temperature T and momentum p by solving the temperature depen- dent Dyson-Schwger Equations. In this case, on temperat T mu s, in ure is a function of T and p. Such a new study could shw the behavior of the uring the evolution of the universe. This work is und its way and should be complete soon. o er REFERENCES [1] A. Einstein, “General Theor n ravity: An Introduction to Einstein’s Gen- - d The Foundation of the y of Relativity,” 1916. http:// www.alberteinstein.info [2] A. Einstein, “Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitatio , Sit- zungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Models,” 1915, p. 387. [3] J. B. Hartle, “G eral Relativity,” Addison Wesley, Boston, 2008, p. 482. [4] E. Hubble, “A Relation between Distance and Radial Velo city among Extra-Galactic Nebulae,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA, Vol. 15, No. 3, 1929, 168-173. doi:10.1073/pnas.15.3.168 [5] S. M. Carroll, “The Cosmological Constant,” Living Re- “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solu- , et al., “First Year “Observational Evidence - and J. D Barrow, “A Testable Solution of the hys- views in Relativity, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2000. arXiv: astro-ph/ 0004075 [6] A. H. Guth, tion to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,” Physical Re- view D, Vol. 23, 1981, pp. 347-356. [7] D. N. Spergel, L. Verde, H. V. Peiris Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Ob- sevations: Determinaion of Cosmological Parameters,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement, Vol. 148, No. 1, 2003, p. 175. arXiv:astro-ph/0302209 [8] A. G. Riess, J. Astron, et al., from Supernovae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmological Constant,” Astronomical Journal, Vol. 116, No. 3, 1998, p. 1009. arXiv:astro-ph / 9805201 [9] S. Perlmutter, et al., “Measurements of Omega and Lam bda from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae,” Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 517, No. 2, 1999, p. 565. arXiv:astro-ph/ 9812133 [10] D. J. Shaw Cosmological Constant and Coincidence Problems,” Phy- sical Review D, Vol. 83, 2011, Article ID: 043518. [11] F. R. Urban and A. R. Zhitnitsky, “The Cosmological Constant from the Veneziano Ghost which Solves the U(1) Problem in QCD,” Physical Letters B, Vol. 688, 2010, p. 9. [12] F. R. Urban and A. R. Zhitnitsky, “Cosmological Con- stant, Violation of Cosmological Isotropy and CMB,” Phy- sical Review D, Vol. 80, 2009, Article ID: 063001. [13] G. Veneziano, “U(1) without Instantons,” Nuclear P ics B, Vol. 159, No. 1-2, 1979, pp. 213-224. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90332-8 [14] E. Witten, “Current Algebra Theorems for the U(1) ‘Gold- stone Boson’,” Nuclear Physics B, Vol. 156, No. 2, 1979, pp. 269-283. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90031-2 [15] J. D. Barrow and D. J. Shaw, “Quantum Field Effects Skew-Symmetric Tensor Near Singularities,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 1, 2011, p. 10130.arXiv:1201.1138v1 [16] H. Hata, T. Kugo and N. Ohta, “ Gauge Field Theory Dynamically Realized in the QCD U(1) Channel,” Nuclear Physics B, Vol. 178, No. 3, 1981, pp. 527-544. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90170-X [17] L.-J. Zhou, L. S. Kisslinger and W.-X. Ma, “Nonzero Matrix in Quantum Electrodynam- uantized Mean Squared Momentum of Quarks in the Non-Pertur- bative QCD Vacuum,” Physical Review D, Vol. 82, 2010, Article ID: 034037. [18] F. J. Dyson, “The S- ics ,” Physical Review, Vol. 75, 1949, p. 1736. [19] J. S. Schwinger, “On the Green’s Functions of Q Fields. I,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences of USA, Vol. 37, No. 7, 1951, pp. 452-455. doi:10.1073/pnas.37.7.452 [20] A. G. Williams, G. Krein and C. D. Roberts, “Modelling the Quark Propagator,” Annals of Physics, Vol. 210, No. 2, 1991, pp. 464-485. doi:10.1016/0003-4916(91)90051-9 [21] L.-J. Zhou and W.-X. Ma, “Structure of Nonlocal Vac- uum Condensate of Quarks,” Chinese Physics Letters, Vol. 20, No. 12, 2003, p. 2137. doi:10.1088/0256-307X/20/12/014 irtuality and QCD [22] L.-J. Zhou and W.-X. Ma, “Quark V Vacuum Condensates,” Chinese Physics Letters, Vol. 21, No. 8, 2004, p. 1471. doi:10.1088/0256-307X/21/8/016 [23] W.-X. Ma, L.-J. Zhou, Gu Yun-ting, et al., “Quark Mass nd C. Weiss, “Mixed Quark-Gluon )01098-2 Dependence of Nucleon Magnetic Moment and Charge Radii,” Communications in Theoretical Physics, Vol. 44, 2005, p. 333. [24] M. V. Polyakov a Condensate from Instantons,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 387, No. 4, 1996, pp. 841-847. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(96 Extraction of the [25] H. G. Dosch and S. Narison, “Direct Chiral Quark Condensate and Bounds on the Light Quark Masses,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 417, 1998, pp. 173-176. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)01370-1 [26] M. Kremer and G. Schierholz, “Calculation of the Con- densate svv qGq on the Lattice,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 1941987, pp. 283-286. , No. 2, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(87)90543-0 [27] D. B. Leinweber, “QCD Sum Rules For Skeptics,” Report No. DOE/Er/40427-17-N 95, 1995. Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JMP  L. J. ZHOU ET AL. Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JMP 1177 sate from the Lat-[28] L. Giusti, “The QCD Chiral Conden tice,” Nuclear Physics B, Vol. 538, No. 1-2, 1999, pp. 249-277. doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(98)00659-2 [29] P. Hernandez, “Scalar Condensate and Light Quark Masses from Overlap Fermions,” Nuclear Physics B, Vol. 106-107, 2002, pp. 766-771. doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(01)01838-2 [30] M. Jamin, J. A. Oller and A. Pich, “Light Quark Masses from Scalar Sum Rules,” The European Physical Journal C: Particles and Fields, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2002, pp. 237- 243. doi:10.1007/s100520200930 [31] T. Doi, N. Ishii, M. Oka and H. Suganuma, “Quark- Gluon Mixed Condensate vv qGq from Lattice QCD,” Nuclear Physics A, Vo721, 2003, pp. 934-937. cle Physics,” os- ,” Physical ,” Nuclear 682-692. mological Parameters from SDSS and WMAP Review D, Vol. 69, 2004, Article ID: 103501. [34] H. Jung and L. S. Kisslinger, “Non-Local Quark Con- densate for the Nucleon Sea-Quark Distribution Physics A, Vol. 586, No. 4, 1995, pp. doi:10.1016/0375-9474(95)00004-K [35] M. B. Johnson and L. S. Kisslinger, “Hadronic Coupling via QCD Sum Rules Using Three-Point Functions: Vac- uum Susceptibilities,” Physical Review D, Vol. 57, No. 2, ,” Physical Letters . 1998, p. 2847. [36] N. Ohta, “Dark energy and QCD Ghost B, Vol. 695, No. 1-4, 2011, pp. 41-44 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010.11.044 [37] J. B. Kogut and L. Susskind, “Hamiltonian Formulation of Wilson’s Lattice Gauge T l. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(03)01246-6 [32] K. Nakamura et al., “Review of Parti heory,” Physical Review D, Physical Review D, Vol. 23, No. 2, 1981, pp. 473-476. Vol. 11, 1975, pp. 359-408. [38] P. Nath and R. L. Arnowitt, “U(1) Problem: Current Al- gebra and the θ Vacuum,” Jour- nal of Physics G, Vol. 37, 2010, Article ID: 075021. [33] M. Tegmark, M. A. Strauss, M. R. Blanton, et al., “C
|
