According to the "dark dimension" (DD) scenario, we might live in a universe with a single compact extra dimension, whose mesoscopic size is dictated by the measured value of the cosmological constant. This scenario is based on swampland conjectures that lead to the relation rho swamp similar to m(KK)(4) between the vacuum energy rho swamp and the size of the extra dimension m(KK)(-1) (m(KK )is the mass scale of a Kaluza-Klein tower), and on the corresponding result rho(EFT) from the effective field theory (EFT) limit. We show that rho(EFT) contains previously missed UV-sensitive terms, whose presence invalidates the widely spread belief (based on existing literature) that the calculation gives automatically the finite result rho(EFT) similar to m(KK)(4) (with no need for fine-tuning). This renders the matching between rho(swamp) and rho(EFT) a nontrivial issue. We then comment on the necessity to find a mechanism that implements the suppression of the aforementioned UV-sensitive terms. This should finally allow to frame the DD scenario in a self-consistent framework, also in view of its several phenomenological applications based on EFT calculations.
Does the cosmological constant really indicate the existence of a dark dimension?
Carlo Branchina;Vincenzo Branchina
;Filippo Contino;Arcangelo Pernace
2024-01-01
Abstract
According to the "dark dimension" (DD) scenario, we might live in a universe with a single compact extra dimension, whose mesoscopic size is dictated by the measured value of the cosmological constant. This scenario is based on swampland conjectures that lead to the relation rho swamp similar to m(KK)(4) between the vacuum energy rho swamp and the size of the extra dimension m(KK)(-1) (m(KK )is the mass scale of a Kaluza-Klein tower), and on the corresponding result rho(EFT) from the effective field theory (EFT) limit. We show that rho(EFT) contains previously missed UV-sensitive terms, whose presence invalidates the widely spread belief (based on existing literature) that the calculation gives automatically the finite result rho(EFT) similar to m(KK)(4) (with no need for fine-tuning). This renders the matching between rho(swamp) and rho(EFT) a nontrivial issue. We then comment on the necessity to find a mechanism that implements the suppression of the aforementioned UV-sensitive terms. This should finally allow to frame the DD scenario in a self-consistent framework, also in view of its several phenomenological applications based on EFT calculations.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.