Perturbative unitarity and the wavefunction of the Universe


Creative Commons License

ALBAYRAK S., Benincasa P., Pueyo C. D.

SCIPOST PHYSICS, cilt.16, sa.6, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 16 Sayı: 6
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.21468/scipostphys.16.6.157
  • Dergi Adı: SCIPOST PHYSICS
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Adresli: Hayır

Özet

Unitarity of time evolution is one of the basic principles constraining physical processes. Its consequences in the perturbative Bunch-Davies wavefunction in cosmology have been formulated in terms of the cosmological optical theorem. In this paper, we re-analyse perturbative unitarity for the Bunch-Davies wavefunction, focusing on: i) the role of the i epsilon-prescription and its compatibility with the requirement of unitarity; ii) the origin of the different "cutting rules"; iii) the emergence of the flat-space optical theorem from the cosmological one. We take the combinatorial point of view of the cosmological polytopes, which provide a first-principle description for a large class of scalar graphs contributing to the wavefunctional. The requirement of the positivity of the geometry together with the preservation of its orientation determine the i epsilon-prescription. In kinematic space it translates into giving a small negative imaginary part to all the energies, making the wavefunction coefficients well-defined for any value of their real part along the real axis. Unitarity is instead encoded into a non-convex part of the cosmological polytope, which we name optical polytope. The cosmological optical theorem emerges as the equivalence between a specific polytope subdivision of the optical polytope and its triangulations, each of which provides different cutting rules. The flat-space optical theorem instead emerges from the non-convexity of the optical polytope. On the more mathematical side, we provide two definitions of this non-convex geometry, none of them based on the idea of the non-convex geometry as a union of convex ones.