pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.02514 · v1 · pith:2KNCILDKnew · submitted 2026-06-01 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.CO

Teleocosmology and quantum post-selection

Paul C.W. Davies , Jo\~ao Magueijo This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 13:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmic accelerationquantum cosmologypost-selectionChern-Simons solitonminisuperspaceboundary conditionsunimodular timewave function of the universe
0
0 comments X

The pith

Cosmic acceleration arises as a quantum post-selection effect from a final boundary condition on the universe's wave function, without any cosmological constant or new fields.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes that the observed acceleration of the universe can be produced by imposing both initial and final boundary conditions on the wave function in minisuperspace quantum cosmology. A forward-evolving semiclassical wave packet for radiation is post-selected onto a normalizable Chern-Simons soliton final state, yielding an amplitude peak whose trajectory accelerates even though the forward Hamiltonian has zero cosmological constant. This two-boundary construction shows that what looks like a local source to a semiclassical observer can instead be an artifact of the post-selection, and any classical model that reproduces the same trajectory must introduce an effective component whose equation of state begins near -1 but rapidly becomes strongly phantom. The result reframes acceleration as a boundary-condition phenomenon rather than a property of the local dynamics.

Core claim

In the connection formulation with unimodular time, the two-boundary amplitude formed by a radiation packet post-selected on a normalizable Chern-Simons soliton develops a peak that departs from the classical radiation trajectory and enters an accelerating phase, while the forward Hamiltonian remains Lambda-free; the corresponding classical effective fluid must satisfy w approximately -1 near the transition but then evolve to w less than -1.

What carries the argument

Post-selected minisuperspace amplitude with a Chern-Simons soliton as the final boundary condition.

If this is right

  • The acceleration does not require a non-zero vacuum energy or additional local sources.
  • Any classical fluid that reproduces the post-selected trajectory must evolve from w near -1 toward phantom behavior.
  • Pre- and post-selection applied to the wave function of the universe yields observable deviations from forward-only evolution.
  • The small overlap between initial and final states does not prevent the formation of an accelerating peak in the amplitude.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same post-selection mechanism could be tested by checking whether other late-time observables, such as the growth of structure, deviate from Lambda-CDM predictions in a correlated way.
  • If the final boundary condition is universal, similar post-selection effects might appear in other quantum-cosmological settings, such as the early universe or black-hole interiors.
  • Laboratory analogs using post-selected quantum systems could be engineered to mimic the free-particle acceleration example given in the paper.

Load-bearing premise

A normalizable Chern-Simons soliton supplies a physically motivated and independent final boundary condition that produces the observed acceleration.

What would settle it

A high-precision measurement of the expansion history showing that the effective equation of state remains near -1 at late times rather than evolving toward strongly phantom values.

read the original abstract

Although cosmic acceleration is well established, its physical origin remains contentious. Most explanations invoke either a non-zero vacuum energy, i.e. a cosmological constant, or new fields. We propose instead a mechanism arising purely from quantum mechanics, without additional constants or local sources. The key point is that quantum theory permits both initial and final boundary conditions on a state, here the wave function of the universe. Pre- and post-selected systems are familiar in laboratory quantum mechanics; we extend the idea to minisuperspace quantum cosmology. As a warm-up, we show that a free non-relativistic particle, initially in a semiclassical wave packet and conditioned on a final quantum state, can have an intermediate peak which accelerates even though the Hamiltonian is free. A semiclassical observer would infer a contrived classical force. We then implement the analogous construction in quantum cosmology using connection variables and unimodular time. A forward semiclassical packet, taken for simplicity to describe pure radiation, is post-selected by a normalizable Chern-Simons soliton. The resulting two-boundary amplitude has a peak which leaves the radiation trajectory and enters an accelerating regime, while the forward Hamiltonian has $\Lambda=0$. A classical model can mimic this trajectory only by introducing a contrived effective component: near the transition it resembles $w\simeq -1$, but when extrapolated it evolves towards strongly phantom behaviour, $w<-1$. The acceleration is therefore more naturally interpreted as a quantum boundary-condition effect than as a local classical source. We also discuss why the Chern-Simons soliton is a clean final state, the small overlap between initial and final states, and possible tell-tale signatures.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes that cosmic acceleration can be understood as a consequence of quantum post-selection in minisuperspace cosmology rather than a local classical source. A forward semiclassical radiation packet (with vanishing cosmological constant) is post-selected onto a normalizable Chern-Simons soliton final state; the resulting two-boundary amplitude develops an intermediate peak that departs from radiation-like evolution and enters an accelerating regime. The authors argue that a classical effective-fluid description of the same trajectory requires a contrived component that evolves toward phantom behavior, making the boundary-condition interpretation more natural. They also discuss the cleanliness of the Chern-Simons soliton, the small overlap, and possible observational signatures.

Significance. If the final-state choice can be shown to follow from an independent physical principle, the work would supply a parameter-free quantum-mechanical account of acceleration that avoids both a cosmological constant and new fields. The laboratory analogy with post-selected accelerating packets is clearly drawn and the connection-variable/unimodular-time formulation is technically coherent. These strengths would be noteworthy for quantum cosmology if the circularity concern is resolved.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (and the construction described therein): The central claim that acceleration is 'more naturally interpreted as a quantum boundary-condition effect' rests on the Chern-Simons soliton being a physically motivated, data-independent final boundary condition. No derivation from a larger Hilbert space, anomaly cancellation, or two-boundary consistency condition is supplied that selects this particular normalizable state without reference to the observed expansion history; the discussion of cleanliness and small overlap does not substitute for such a selection rule.
  2. [Abstract / construction section] The minisuperspace implementation: While the forward Hamiltonian is stated to have Λ=0, the post-selection onto the Chern-Simons soliton is introduced specifically to produce the departure from radiation and the subsequent acceleration. This makes the result sensitive to the choice of final state; an explicit demonstration that the same qualitative behavior arises for other independently motivated normalizable final states (or a proof that the soliton is the unique choice compatible with the connection formulation) would be required to establish robustness.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'unimodular time' and 'connection variables' without a brief reminder of their definitions or why they are adopted; a short parenthetical or footnote would improve accessibility for readers outside the immediate subfield.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, the positive assessment of the technical coherence, and the identification of the key open issue regarding final-state selection. We respond to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (and the construction described therein): The central claim that acceleration is 'more naturally interpreted as a quantum boundary-condition effect' rests on the Chern-Simons soliton being a physically motivated, data-independent final boundary condition. No derivation from a larger Hilbert space, anomaly cancellation, or two-boundary consistency condition is supplied that selects this particular normalizable state without reference to the observed expansion history; the discussion of cleanliness and small overlap does not substitute for such a selection rule.

    Authors: The Chern-Simons soliton is introduced as the normalizable state that arises directly from the connection formulation and unimodular time; its selection is fixed by the requirement of square-integrability in that framework rather than by fitting the expansion history. The manuscript explicitly argues that this choice yields acceleration as an emergent consequence of the two-boundary amplitude, while any classical effective-fluid description requires a contrived, phantom-evolving component. The cleanliness and small-overlap discussion is offered precisely to show that the state functions as a parameter-free boundary condition without additional tuning. We maintain that this supplies a viable quantum-mechanical account even in the absence of a derivation from a larger Hilbert space, which would be a natural direction for follow-up work but is not required for the present proposal. revision: no

  2. Referee: [Abstract / construction section] The minisuperspace implementation: While the forward Hamiltonian is stated to have Λ=0, the post-selection onto the Chern-Simons soliton is introduced specifically to produce the departure from radiation and the subsequent acceleration. This makes the result sensitive to the choice of final state; an explicit demonstration that the same qualitative behavior arises for other independently motivated normalizable final states (or a proof that the soliton is the unique choice compatible with the connection formulation) would be required to establish robustness.

    Authors: The construction is indeed specific to the Chern-Simons soliton, which we select because it is the clean, normalizable state compatible with the connection variables and unimodular time without introducing new scales. The qualitative acceleration arises because the final-state support lies away from the radiation trajectory, so that the two-boundary peak must depart from the forward semiclassical evolution. While we have not performed explicit calculations for alternative normalizable states, the mechanism itself is general to any post-selection that enforces a different final boundary condition; the soliton serves as a concrete, well-motivated example within the formulation. A uniqueness proof or survey of other states lies beyond the scope of this exploratory manuscript. revision: no

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Chern-Simons soliton post-selection generates acceleration by construction from chosen final state

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "A forward semiclassical packet, taken for simplicity to describe pure radiation, is post-selected by a normalizable Chern-Simons soliton. The resulting two-boundary amplitude has a peak which leaves the radiation trajectory and enters an accelerating regime, while the forward Hamiltonian has Λ=0."

    The post-selection on the Chern-Simons soliton is introduced as the mechanism; the accelerating regime is the direct output of that choice. The 'prediction' of acceleration therefore reduces to the input selection of the final state rather than an independent derivation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that acceleration arises from post-selection on a normalizable Chern-Simons soliton as final boundary condition, with the forward Hamiltonian having Λ=0. The abstract explicitly constructs the two-boundary amplitude by choosing this specific final state, which produces the departure from radiation into acceleration. No independent first-principles rule fixing the soliton (independent of the target expansion history) is quoted; the choice itself supplies the effect. This matches the fitted-input-called-prediction pattern at the load-bearing step. The paper discusses cleanliness and small overlap but does not derive the soliton selection from a larger principle that would forbid other choices. Hence partial circularity (score 6) rather than full self-definition or self-citation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The model rests on the applicability of post-selection to the wave function of the universe and the selection of the Chern-Simons soliton as final state; no free parameters are introduced according to the abstract, but the final state itself functions as the key modeling choice.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Quantum mechanics permits simultaneous specification of initial and final boundary conditions on the wave function of the universe in minisuperspace.
    Invoked to extend laboratory post-selection to cosmology.
  • domain assumption The minisuperspace approximation with connection variables and unimodular time is sufficient to capture the relevant dynamics.
    Used to implement the forward and post-selected amplitudes.
invented entities (1)
  • Chern-Simons soliton as final boundary state no independent evidence
    purpose: To serve as the post-selection condition that induces the accelerating trajectory
    Introduced as the normalizable final state; no independent evidence outside the model is provided in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5830 in / 1410 out tokens · 32863 ms · 2026-06-28T13:19:29.998781+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. A post-selected quantum model of cosmic acceleration

    gr-qc 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Cosmic acceleration emerges from quantum post-selection in a minimal Friedmann-based model that fits supernova and chronometer data with at most two extra parameters while reproducing early-universe behavior.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Semiclassical solutions 9

  2. [2]

    Post-selected peak and emergent acceleration12 A

    Properties of the semiclassical solutions 10 IV. Post-selected peak and emergent acceleration12 A. General peak kinematics under post-selection 12 B. Post-selected Chern–Simons soliton 13 V. The logic behind the final state and other options15 A. The rationale behind the Chern-Simons soliton final state 15 B. Overlap between initial and final state 16 C. ...

  3. [3]

    Semiclassicality of the conditioned packet 25

  4. [4]

    Phase of the backward packet and consistency of the peak momentum 25

  5. [5]

    quantum miracle

    Energy accounting 26 C. Consistency of the approximations at the turning point27 I. INTRODUCTION: POST-SELECTION AND PRE-COGNITION It has been noted that, for closed systems such as the universe, quantum mechanics may be more naturally formulated in terms of both initial and final boundary conditions [1, 2]. In such a framework, probabilities are conditio...

  6. [6]

    Semiclassical solutions To find semiclassical solutions, we choose a GaussianA(ϕ) 5: A(ϕ) = 1 (2πσ2 ϕ)1/4 exp " −(ϕ−ϕ 0)2 4σ2 ϕ # ,(29) ExpandingParound the centralϕ 0, P(b, ϕ)≈P 0 + (ϕ−ϕ 0)P1 + 1 2(ϕ−ϕ 0)2P2,(30) where P0 =P(b, ϕ 0), P 1 =∂ ϕP| ϕ0 , P 2 =∂ 2 ϕP ϕ0 ,(31) and performing the Gaussian integral, the packet becomes to quadratic order, Ψ(b, T) ...

  7. [7]

    miraculous

    Properties of the semiclassical solutions It is easy to see that the packet’s peak follows the classical trajectory in both limiting cases (as indeed in general, had we found the general solution). For the radiation-dominated packet the peak lies alongX r,eff(b) =T, equivalent to (19) (cf. (38)). Likewise pure LambdaX CS =Tis equivalent to (21). However t...

  8. [8]

    Time symmetry in the quantum process of mea- surement,

    Y. Aharonov, P. G. Bergmann, and J. L. Lebowitz, “Time symmetry in the quantum process of mea- surement,” Phys. Rev.134, B1410 (1964). 22

    1964

  9. [9]

    The two-state vector formalism of quantum mechanics,

    Y. Aharonov and L. Vaidman, “The two-state vector formalism of quantum mechanics,” Lect. Notes Phys.734, 399 (2008) [arXiv:quant-ph/0105101]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  10. [10]

    Alexandre and J

    B. Alexandre and J. Magueijo, Phys. Rev. D107, no.6, 063501 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.063501 [arXiv:2210.02179 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.063501 2023

  11. [11]

    Specialization of Ashtekar’s formalism to Bianchi cosmology,

    H. Kodama, “Specialization of Ashtekar’s formalism to Bianchi cosmology,” Prog. Theor. Phys.80, 1024–1040 (1988) doi:10.1143/PTP.80.1024

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.80.1024 1988

  12. [12]

    Quantum gravity with a positive cosmological constant,

    L. Smolin, “Quantum gravity with a positive cosmological constant,” [arXiv:hep-th/0209079]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [13]

    Magueijo, Phys

    J. Magueijo, Phys. Rev. D102, no.4, 044034 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.044034 [arXiv:2005.03381 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.044034 2020

  14. [14]

    Hjorth Larsen, J

    S. Alexander, G. Herczeg and L. Freidel, Class. Quant. Grav.40, no.14, 145010 (2023) doi:10.1088/1361- 6382/acde3d [arXiv:2212.07446 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1361- 2023

  15. [15]

    Gielen and J

    S. Gielen and J. Magueijo, Phys. Rev. D107, no.2, 023518 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.023518 [arXiv:2201.03596 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.023518 2023

  16. [16]

    Cosmic acceleration as a quantum post-selection effect,

    C. Anastopoulos, “Cosmic acceleration as a quantum post-selection effect,” Phys. Rev. D111, 064045 (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    Sequestering the Standard Model Vacuum Energy,

    N. Kaloper and A. Padilla, “Sequestering the Standard Model Vacuum Energy,” Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 091304 (2014) [arXiv:1309.6562 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  18. [18]

    Vacuum Energy Sequestering: The Framework and Its Cosmological Consequences,

    N. Kaloper and A. Padilla, “Vacuum Energy Sequestering: The Framework and Its Cosmological Consequences,” Phys. Rev. D90, 084023 (2014) [arXiv:1406.0711 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  19. [19]

    Lectures on the Cosmological Constant Problem,

    A. Padilla, “Lectures on the Cosmological Constant Problem,” [arXiv:1502.05296 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [20]

    Magueijo, Phys

    J. Magueijo, Phys. Rev. D106, no.8, 084021 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.084021 [arXiv:2110.05920 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.084021 2022

  21. [21]

    Magueijo, Phys

    J. Magueijo, Phys. Lett. B820, 136487 (2021) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136487 [arXiv:2104.11529 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136487 2021

  22. [22]

    Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity,

    W. G. Unruh, “Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity,” Phys. Rev. D40, 1048 (1989) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.40.1048

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.40.1048 1989

  23. [23]

    Does an unspecified cosmological constant solve the problem of time in quantum gravity?

    K. V. Kuchar, “Does an unspecified cosmological constant solve the problem of time in quantum gravity?” Phys. Rev. D43, 3332–3344 (1991) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.43.3332

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.43.3332 1991

  24. [24]

    The cosmological constant and general covariance,

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, “The cosmological constant and general covariance,” Phys. Lett. B 222, 195–199 (1989) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)91251-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)91251-3 1989

  25. [25]

    Quantization of unimodular gravity and the cosmological constant problems,

    L. Smolin, “Quantization of unimodular gravity and the cosmological constant problems,” Phys. Rev. D80, 084003 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.084003

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.084003 2009

  26. [26]

    Instantons and unitarity in quantum cosmology with fixed four-volume,

    A. Daughton, J. Louko and R. D. Sorkin, “Instantons and unitarity in quantum cosmology with fixed four-volume,” Phys. Rev. D58, 084008 (1998) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.084008

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.58.084008 1998

  27. [27]

    Initial conditions and unitarity in unimodular quantum cosmology,

    A. Daughton, J. Louko and R. D. Sorkin, “Initial conditions and unitarity in unimodular quantum cosmology,” arXiv:gr-qc/9305016

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [28]

    Role of time in the sum-over-histories framework for gravity,

    R. D. Sorkin, “Role of time in the sum-over-histories framework for gravity,” Int. J. Theor. Phys.33, 523–534 (1994) doi:10.1007/BF00670514

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00670514 1994

  29. [29]

    Forks in the road, on the way to quantum gravity,

    R. D. Sorkin, “Forks in the road, on the way to quantum gravity,” Int. J. Theor. Phys.36, 2759–2781 (1997) doi:10.1007/BF02435709

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02435709 1997

  30. [30]

    Measurements, errors, and negative kinetic energy,

    Y. Aharonov, S. Popescu, D. Rohrlich, and L. Vaidman, “Measurements, errors, and negative kinetic energy,” Phys. Rev. A48, 4084 (1993) [arXiv:hep-th/9311019]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  31. [31]

    The arrow of time,

    T. Gold, “The arrow of time,” Am. J. Phys.30, 403–410 (1962) doi:10.1119/1.1942052

    work page doi:10.1119/1.1942052 1962

  32. [32]

    Arrow of time in cosmology,

    S. W. Hawking, “Arrow of time in cosmology,” Phys. Rev. D32, 2489–2495 (1985) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.32.2489

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.32.2489 1985

  33. [33]

    Wave function of the Universe,

    J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, “Wave function of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D28, 2960–2975 (1983) 23 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.28.2960

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.28.2960 1983

  34. [34]

    Time symmetry and asymmetry in quantum mechanics and quantum cosmology,

    M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, “Time symmetry and asymmetry in quantum mechanics and quantum cosmology,” inPhysical Origins of Time Asymmetry, edited by J. J. Halliwell, J. Perez-Mercader and W. H. Zurek (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994), pp. 311–345 [arXiv:gr-qc/9304023]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  35. [35]

    The Origin of Time Asymmetry

    S. W. Hawking, R. Laflamme and G. W. Lyons, “The origin of time asymmetry,” Phys. Rev. D47, 5342–5356 (1993) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.47.5342 [arXiv:gr-qc/9301017]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.47.5342 1993

  36. [36]

    How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100

    Y. Aharonov, D. Z. Albert and L. Vaidman, “How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100,” Phys. Rev. Lett.60, 1351–1354 (1988) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1351

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.60.1351 1988

  37. [37]

    A. N. Jordan and I. A. Siddiqi,Quantum Measurement: Theory and Practice(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2024)

    2024

  38. [38]

    Detection of the neutrino signal from SN 1987A in the LMC using the INR Baksan underground scintillation telescope

    A. Vilenkin, “Creation of universes from nothing,” Phys. Lett. B117, 25–28 (1982) doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(82)90866-8

    work page doi:10.1016/0370- 1982

  39. [39]

    Quantum creation of universes,

    A. Vilenkin, “Quantum creation of universes,” Phys. Rev. D30, 509–511 (1984) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.30.509

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.30.509 1984

  40. [40]

    Quantum creation of the inflationary universe,

    A. D. Linde, “Quantum creation of the inflationary universe,” Lett. Nuovo Cim.39, 401–405 (1984) doi:10.1007/BF02790571

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02790571 1984

  41. [41]

    Particle Creation by Black Holes

    S. W. Hawking, “Particle creation by black holes,” Commun. Math. Phys.43, 199–220 (1975) [Erratum: Commun. Math. Phys.46, 206 (1976)] doi:10.1007/BF02345020

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02345020 1975

  42. [42]

    Notes on black-hole evaporation,

    W. G. Unruh, “Notes on black-hole evaporation,” Phys. Rev. D14, 870 (1976) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.14.870

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.14.870 1976

  43. [43]

    N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies,Quantum Fields in Curved Space(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982)

    1982

  44. [44]

    Weinberg , `` Anthropic Bound on the Cosmological Constant ,'' http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.2607 Phys

    S. Weinberg, “Anthropic bound on the cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett.59, 2607–2610 (1987) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.2607

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.59.2607 1987

  45. [45]

    Anthropic Reasons for Non-Zero Flatness and Lambda

    J. D. Barrow, H. B. Sandvik and J. Magueijo, “Anthropic reasons for non-zero flatness and Lambda,” Phys. Rev. D65, 123501 (2002) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.123501 [arXiv:astro-ph/0110497]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.65.123501 2002

  46. [46]

    J. D. Barrow and F. J. Tipler,The Anthropic Cosmological Principle(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986)

    1986

  47. [47]

    Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical

    W. H. Zurek, “Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 715–775 (2003) doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.75.715 [arXiv:quant-ph/0105127]. Appendix A: Acceleration and spreading We give here the explicit acceleration formula following from the peak trajectory in Section II. Write xcl(t) =x 0 +vt, v= p0 m ,(A1) and set τ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/revmodphys.75.715 2003

  48. [48]

    From (B1), corrections become relevant whenW(τ)≲σ, so that the weighting factorα(τ) =σ 2/(σ2 +W 2) is no longer small

    Semiclassicality of the conditioned packet We now examine whether the conditioned packet remains semiclassical in the regime where the deviation of the peak from the classical trajectory becomes significant. From (B1), corrections become relevant whenW(τ)≲σ, so that the weighting factorα(τ) =σ 2/(σ2 +W 2) is no longer small. At the crossoverW∼σ, one hasα≃...

  49. [49]

    a Gaussian centered atX f), backward Schr¨ odinger evolution necessarily generates a non-trivial phase

    Phase of the backward packet and consistency of the peak momentum Although the final state att f may be chosen real (e.g. a Gaussian centered atX f), backward Schr¨ odinger evolution necessarily generates a non-trivial phase. For a free particle one has ˜ψf(x, t) = Z dx′ K(x, t;x ′, tf)ψ f(x′, tf),(B2) 26 with propagator K∼exp i ℏ Scl(x, t;x ′, tf) , S cl...

  50. [50]

    − ∆2 2(σ2 f + Σ2) # ,(B10) up to the usual Gaussian prefactor. Thus the number of preparations required per successful run scales as Nruns ∼ 1 psucc ∼exp

    Energy accounting One might wonder whether the free-particle version of the effect could be used, at least in principle, as an energy source. After all, by conditioning on a suitable final state one may select intermediate histories whose peak appears to accelerate, and a classical observer would be tempted to attribute this to a force doing work. There i...