Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Dark bubble cosmology predicts gravity weakens below L~10^-5 m, yielding V=-G4M(1/rho - 3L^2/(2rho^3)+...) and a radiation-only inflationary phase.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 19:59 UTC pith:PU7KTDP3

load-bearing objection Dark bubble paper makes a concrete, testable micron-scale prediction that gravity weakens, but the headline potential rests on an asserted massless-to-massive step, so treat it as conditional. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2511.21362 v2 pith:PU7KTDP3 submitted 2025-11-26 hep-th astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph

Weak gravity at micron scales from dark bubble cosmology and its cosmological consequences

Ulf Danielsson , Suvendu Giri This is my paper
classification hep-th astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph
keywords gravitybubbledarkmodelblackcosmologicalscalesuniverse
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The dark bubble model says our universe is a four-dimensional bubble expanding inside a five-dimensional anti-de Sitter space, with a tiny positive cosmological constant. This paper calculates how a small lump of matter sitting on that bubble changes the surrounding geometry. In most extra-dimensional models gravity gets stronger at short distances because extra graviton modes pile up. Here the opposite happens: the bubble's own back-reaction cancels the usual force below a length L ~ 10^-5 m, leaving only a much weaker five-dimensional residual. The resulting potential is the Newtonian one at large distances, with corrections of order L^2/rho^3, so a tabletop experiment measuring gravity at tens of microns could see the force fall below Newton's prediction. The same mechanism is applied to the early universe: when energy density is so high that the Hubble radius is about L, four-dimensional gravity effectively switches off. Instead of the standard a^-2 divergence, the Hubble rate freezes at roughly 1/L for more than thirty e-foldings, mimicking inflation while the universe is still filled with radiation. The authors also connect the initial nucleation of the bubble to a small five-dimensional black hole that supplies the radiation and entropy we see today, and they translate that into a prediction of a small positive spatial curvature Omega_c ~ 5 x 10^-4. The paper is honest that part of this rests on a holographic prescription that is not mathematically forced, and the late-time curvature prediction depends on parameters fixed to reproduce known physics.

Core claim

Central claim: on the dark bubble, 4D gravity turns off at distances below the AdS scale L ~ 10^-5 m. Eq. (67): V(rho) = -G4 M4 [1/rho - 3L^2/(2rho^3) + ...]; at rho -> 0 the potential becomes G5 M4 / rho^2 (eq. 64), i.e. gravity is much weaker than Newtonian. If correct, tabletop experiments can detect the departure, and the same shutting-off generates a radiation-only inflationary phase with H ~ sqrt(3) k for over 30 e-folds (eq. 75).

Load-bearing premise

The derivation of the modified potential relies on the 'dark bubble holography' condition in Section II.C: one assumes the bulk is 'as empty and simple as possible' and that the hologram at a non-dynamical cutoff 'is a perfect representation of the theory on the brane.' The text concedes this is 'not a necessary condition.' This mixed-boundary choice provides the missing equation (50) that fixes B+(q) in terms of A+(q); without it the junction conditions leave the system underdetermined. The cosmology additionally uses the tuned choice M+ = 2M- to recover the standard radiation-dominated Friedmann equation (eq. 73).

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies linearized gravity around a localized source in the dark bubble model of 5D AdS cosmology. It claims that the 4D gravitational force is cut off below the AdS length L ~ 10^-5 m, with the Newtonian potential replaced by a much weaker 5D 1/rho^2 potential at small distances [Eqs. (60)-(67)]. The same suppression is then applied to homogeneous radiation cosmology, producing an inflationary phase with H^2 = 3k^2 for more than 30 e-folds [Eqs. (74)-(75)]. The paper also proposes a 5D AdS black hole as the nucleation catalyst, estimates the resulting positive-curvature density parameter as Omega_c ~ 5 x 10^-4 [Eq. (81)], and speculates about AdS black shells as black-hole mimickers. The technical framework is the Israel junction conditions for an asymmetric brane, closed by an assumed holographic mixed-boundary condition in Section II.C.

Significance. If the central derivation is correct, the paper gives a clear, falsifiable prediction that distinguishes the dark bubble from other extra-dimensional scenarios: gravity becomes weaker, not stronger, below L ~ 10^-5 m, within reach of tabletop experiments. The q -> 0 limit correctly reproduces linearized 4D general relativity, and the q -> infinity limit reproduces 5D gravity; obtaining both limits from a single linearized junction calculation is a genuine strength. The potential in Eq. (67) is sufficiently explicit to be tested by short-range gravity experiments, and the cosmological Omega_c prediction is also concrete. However, the finite-q regime, which contains the new physics, rests on an admitted non-necessary holographic assumption and on a step for massive sources that is asserted rather than derived. The cosmological section additionally uses a tuned mass ratio. The significance is therefore conditional, but the paper is a worthy contribution if these gaps are either filled or clearly labeled as assumptions.

major comments (4)
  1. The point-mass potential, Eq. (67), is obtained by substituting the massless A_-(q) from Eq. (51) into a formula for a massive source, Eq. (60). For a point mass the trace is nonzero, so Eq. (58) gives F(p) = -k_- k_+ M(p)/(3p^2), and the brane bending is nonzero. The paper cites reference [9] only for the p -> 0 limit (Eq. (59)) and then states, without a calculation, that the full result to all orders q 'must be given by' Eq. (60), with G(q) taken from the massless A_-(q) expression. No argument is given that the coordinate transformation removing F(p) leaves Eq. (50) intact, nor that A_-(q) is unchanged at finite q. Since Eq. (67) is a series expansion of this G(q), a trace-dependent correction would directly change the predicted force at rho ~ L. This is a load-bearing gap in the derivation of the headline experimental prediction.
  2. Equation (50) is the 'missing condition' that closes the junction-condition system. The paper explicitly concedes that the holographic representation condition is 'not a necessary condition' and that the bulk is assumed to be 'as empty and simple as possible.' Setting Delta-kappa1 = 1 reproduces the observed 4D Newton constant, so the q -> 0 limit is imposed rather than derived. The large-q limit (63) is independent of Delta-kappa1, but the intermediate behavior in Eq. (61) and the expansion in Eq. (67) depend on eta and hence on this choice. The authors should either present Eq. (50) as a model-dependent input with a clear statement of its consequences, or provide an independent argument selecting this mixed-boundary condition.
  3. The standard radiation Friedmann equation is recovered only after imposing M_+ = 2 M_-, which is introduced by hand. The paper says this choice is 'equivalent to the choices made for localized matter,' but no derivation is given, and it is not a consequence of the junction conditions alone. The inflationary phase in Eq. (75) and the subsequent nucleation analysis in Section IV.C rely on this tuned ratio. If M_+ = 2 M_- is a free parameter, the cosmological predictions, including the claimed >30 e-folds, are not unique unless the model provides a separate mechanism fixing the mass ratio.
  4. The numerical prediction Omega_c ~ 5 x 10^-4 is built on the interval 0.0178 < chi < 0.0363 for the initial 5D black-hole mass, obtained from the barrier analysis in Section IV.C. That analysis uses a Hamiltonian that is only quadratic for small momenta, and the paper states that actual tunneling amplitudes are left to future work. The prediction also imports g_s = (2/3) alpha_em from reference [7]. This is a legitimate speculation, but it should be presented as a preliminary estimate rather than a firm prediction of the model.
minor comments (5)
  1. Typo: 'the first few terms at larger' should read 'at large r' or 'at large rho.' Also, 'Einsten' appears in the text after Eq. (59).
  2. The treatment of the point-mass delta function is terse. The normalization factors in Eqs. (54)-(56) would be easier to follow with an explicit statement that M(p) is the Fourier-sine transform of a delta function in the sense used in the main text.
  3. The caption says 'Upper curves correspond to ordinary 4D gravity, while the lower curves correspond to the 4D universe on a dark bubble.' Since the figure shows one curve per panel, the intended comparison should be stated more explicitly; otherwise the reader may be uncertain which curve is which.
  4. The discussion of active versus passive gravitational mass is interesting but somewhat phenomenological. It should be made clear that this is an interpretation of the linearized result, not a derivation of a new equivalence-principle violation beyond the model's assumptions.
  5. Reference [8] dates to 2015; more recent short-range gravity bounds would strengthen the introduction and the claim that L ~ 10^-5 m is close to current experimental sensitivity.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged

Central small-scale weakening is independent of the tunings, but the 'unique' potential is partly built from fitted low-q limits and an asserted massless-to-massive extension; partial circularity.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Section II.C.1 (dark bubble holography), Eqs. (48)-(53)]
    "We need Δκ1 = 1 to reproduce the expected 4D gravity. This implies that Newton’s constant in the hologram is a factor z2 c /z2 0 larger than on the dark bubble."

    The junction conditions leave B+(q) undetermined; the missing relation (50) is fixed by choosing Δκ1 = 1 to match the observed 4D Newton constant. Substituting this into the q→0 limit (53) then returns exactly 16πG4M(q)/q2, i.e. the Newtonian 1/ρ part of the headline potential (67) is an input, not a derived prediction. The genuinely new small-ρ weakening comes from the q→∞ regime where η cancels, so this tuning does not by itself fabricate the micron-scale claim.

  2. other [Section IV.A, Eqs. (72)-(75)]
    "provided that we make the choice M+ = 2M−, which is equivalent to the choices made for localized matter. This is just the Friedmann equation for a universe with radiation."

    The standard radiation-dominated Friedmann equation is recovered by imposing M+ = 2M−, and the same choice is then used in eq. (74) to obtain the early-time H2 = 3k2 inflationary phase. Thus the late-time GR branch is a tuned input rather than a prediction. However, the small-a inflationary phase follows from the shutting off of 4D gravity at high densities and is not simply a restatement of the tuned ratio, so this is a parameter-consistency condition rather than a full circular derivation.

  3. other [Section II.E, Eqs. (58)-(61)]
    "We conclude that the full result to all orders q, with non-vanishing trace, must be given by (60), where G(q) = ... To get the first line, we note that (59) should be compared with the limit taken in (53), while the full expression needs (51)."

    For a massive point source F(p) is nonzero, so the brane bends; only the p→0 limit was derived in [9]. The finite-q G(q) inserted into the massive-source metric is taken from the massless A−(q) solution (51), with no calculation showing that the coordinate transformation removing F(p) leaves the massless relation intact at finite q. The micron-scale potential (67) is therefore built by substituting a massless-source transfer function into a massive-source formula. I flag this as an omitted derivation / unsupported extension rather than a strict textbook circularity; if the trace does not decouple, the headline experimental prediction is unsupported.

full rationale

The core claim that 4D gravity weakens below the AdS scale L is not simply the tuning restated: the q→∞ limit (63) is independent of Δκ1/η, so the 5D G5/ρ2 regime survives the choices used to fix the Newtonian and radiation limits. Likewise, the early-time H2 = 3k2 phase follows from the small-a structure rather than from the particular M+/M− ratio. Nevertheless, the announced ‘unique’ potential is not fully derived from first principles: Δκ1 = 1 is explicitly fitted to reproduce observed 4D gravity, M+ = 2M− is chosen to reproduce standard radiation cosmology, and the finite-q massive-source result is asserted by transplanting the massless A−(q) formula into the massive metric. The self-citations [9,17] are load-bearing for the p→0 limit and the holographic boundary-condition prescription, but the paper states the key assumption openly (‘not a necessary condition’), so I treat this as partial circularity rather than a complete reduction. Score 4: some tunings and a derivation gap surround the central claim, but the central small-scale weakening has independent asymptotic content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 7 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central derivation rests on standard brane-world geometry plus the dark bubble model's own holographic prescription. The counterterm coefficient Delta-kappa1 and the M+/M- ratio are fixed to reproduce known gravity and cosmology, so they are listed as free parameters. L is an input from the measured cosmological constant. The new physical entities are the 5D nucleation black hole and the speculative AdS black shells.

free parameters (4)
  • Delta-kappa1 (holographic counterterm coefficient) = 1 (chosen)
    Set to 1 in eqs. (48)-(50) so the hologram reproduces the 4D Newton constant; it affects the normalization of the potential but not the large-q weakening.
  • M+/M- ratio = 2 (chosen)
    Section IV.A, eq. (73): chosen to recover the standard radiation-dominated Friedmann equation and to make G(q) interpolate without extra numerical coefficients.
  • AdS scale L (k = 1/L) = ~1e-5 m via N ~ 1e60 from measured Lambda
    From [7] compactification relations; sets the scale where gravity turns off and is used for the micron-scale predictions.
  • Nucleation mass parameter chi = M- / (k^2 G5) = 0.0178 < chi < 0.0363
    Section IV.C: interval from requiring the barrier endpoints to sit at or near the 5D Schwarzschild horizon; propagates directly into the Omega_c prediction.
axioms (7)
  • standard math Israel junction conditions and Gauss-Codazzi equations relate brane stress-energy to 5D geometry
    Used in Section II.A (eqs. 12-16) to derive the 4D Einstein equation on the brane.
  • domain assumption 5D bulk is AdS-Schwarzschild, eq. (1), with k_+ < k_- and brane tension below critical
    This is the dark bubble model; positive 4D cosmological constant follows from sigma < sigma_c in Section II.
  • domain assumption AdS/CFT dictionary with mixed boundary conditions and holographic renormalization applies to the dark bubble
    Section II.C; used to supply the missing junction condition, eq. (50).
  • ad hoc to paper The bulk is 'as empty and simple as possible' and the hologram perfectly represents brane physics
    Explicitly admitted to be not mathematically necessary in Section II.C; drives eq. (50) and hence the modified potential.
  • ad hoc to paper M+ = 2M- is the unique choice for standard radiation cosmology and matching G(q)
    Section IV.A after eq. (73); not derived from first principles.
  • domain assumption Small-mass linearization G4 M << L, with O(Delta-k) corrections dropped
    Section II.E/F; potential (67) and force plots use the leading-Delta-k approximation and are valid only for masses below roughly the moon mass.
  • domain assumption Relation g_s = (2/3) alpha_em from earlier dark-bubble Reissner-Nordstrom matching
    Section IV.D; needed to translate chi into Omega_c; borrowed from [7] and claimed corroborated in [29].
invented entities (2)
  • 5D AdS black hole catalyst at nucleation independent evidence
    purpose: Sources radiation and entropy on the dark bubble; sets the mass interval chi and the Omega_c prediction.
    It is a standard AdS-Schwarzschild solution, but its role in the model yields a falsifiable handle: Omega_c ~ 5e-4 and the absence of sub-lunar-mass 4D black holes.
  • AdS black shell on the dark bubble (black hole mimicker) no independent evidence
    purpose: Replace large 4D black holes with nucleated shells of AdS in 5D, with weak gravity inside the shell.
    Section V is explicitly speculative ('tempting', 'future work'), with no quantitative prediction yet.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22600 in / 16362 out tokens · 129200 ms · 2026-08-03T19:59:05.076948+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The dark bubble model makes a positive cosmological constant natural in string theory, and predicts several new physical phenomena within reach in the near future. In this paper we study the experimental consequences of the model for the strength of gravity at scales of order $10^{-5}$m. Contrary to other models of gravity involving extra dimensions, the dark bubble model predicts gravity to become weaker rather than stronger at small scales, compared to Newtonian gravity. In particular, we provide explicit predictions of measurable deviations using table top experiments. We also show how the same effect reduces the effective force of gravity at high energy densities in cosmology, leading to a period of early inflation without the need for anything beyond radiation. We also discuss the quantum origin of the universe with a 5D black hole acting as a catalyst for the nucleation of the dark bubble and how it accounts for the present matter content in the universe. This leads to a prediction of $\Omega_c \approx 5\times 10^{-4}$ for a positive curvature of the universe, suggesting an explanation of the why-now-problem of the cosmological constant. We end by speculating on how to incorporate AdS black shells as black hole mimickers within the dark bubble model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.21362 by Suvendu Giri, Ulf Danielsson.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: A small mass resting on the dark bubble. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Spacetime outside the bubble (top of the figure, in light [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The scale where gravity is turned off is constant on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The gravitational potential and the gravitational force (both in units of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The active mass density for a point mass as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: A schematic plot of effective potential for the scale factor, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: The effective potential near the top of the potential, where [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: A higher dimensional picture of a black shell. The two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗

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. Dark bubbles, dark dimensions and fat gravitons

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The dark bubble model realizes the dark dimension and fat graviton proposals by predicting a micron-sized extra dimension, gravity weakening at that scale, a tens-of-TeV string scale, and measurable positive spatial c...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 28 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Time independent 4D-cutoff 6

  2. [2]

    active” and “pas- sive

    Time dependent 4D-cutoff 7 D. Massless sources 7 E. Massive sources 9 F. Examining the gravitational potential 10 III. Why the dark bubble might not have an EFT 10 IV. Cosmological consequences 12 A. Gravity gets weaker at high densities 12 B. An inflationary phase 13 C. Nucleation 13 D. Late time observational consequences 14 V. What about black holes in...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Time independent 4D-cutoff The procedure follows that of [17]. We start by recalling the junction conditions on the dark bubble, which give rise to the 4D Einstein equation, σ+ρ r = 3 8πG5z0 q k2 −z2 0 + ˙z2 0 + 1−2G 5M−/z2 0 − 3 8πG5z0 q k2 +z2 0 + ˙z2 0 + 1−2G 5M+/z2 0 ≈ 3k− 8πG5 − 3k+ 8πG5 + 3 16πk−G5 ˙z2 0 z2 0 + 1 z2 0 − 2G5M− z4 0 − 3 16πk+G5 ˙z2 0 ...

  4. [4]

    −3k + + r 2 π Z ∞ 0 dp× × p(B+(p)I1( p k2 +zc )−A +(p)K1( p k2 +zc )) 2k3 +rzc sin(pr) # zck+≫1 − − − − − →1 8πG5

    Time dependent 4D-cutoff Let us introduce a time independent cutoff in 5D at a constant z = zc ≫z 0(t). The value of zc is arbitrary as long as it is large. As the universe expands, we might at some point need to increase it. Beyond this, the actual value of the cutoff should not affect the 4D physics. At the expanding non-dynamical cutoff, there will be ...

  5. [5]

    That is, physics is invariant up to scaling

    As we saw earlier, this is needed to compensate for the 1 /z4 c decrease in the energy density such that the dimensionless combination ϵG2 4, with ϵ as the energy density, is invariant. That is, physics is invariant up to scaling. Note that the sublead- ing term ∼ 1/z2 c in A+(p), is multiplied with an extra factor 1/z2 c from eq. (48) in eq. (47). This j...

  6. [6]

    Basile, A

    I. Basile, A. Borys, and J. Masias, Dark bubble cosmology and the equivalence principle, (2025), arXiv:2507.03748 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    10 Furthermore, we see that the Friedmann equation at even higher densities, will be dominated by the G5 term that previously was subleading

    ∼ 1/(l4 s), which corresponds to energy densities of order string scale. 10 Furthermore, we see that the Friedmann equation at even higher densities, will be dominated by the G5 term that previously was subleading. Again, this is in line with the properties of the gravitational force outlined earlier in the paper. B. An inflationary phase Let us now try t...

  8. [8]

    Murata and S

    J. Murata and S. Tanaka, A review of short-range gravity experiments in the LHC era, Class. Quant. Grav.32, 033001 (2015), arXiv:1408.3588 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  9. [9]

    From here on, we absorb z0 and use the physical 4D momentum q

    the result in thep→0 limit was shown to be hab =− 16πG4 q2 Tab − 1 2 T ηab ,(59) in perfect agreement with 4D general relativity. From here on, we absorb z0 and use the physical 4D momentum q. In fact, this is a highly non-trivial check that the dark bubble reproduces relativistic gravity in line with Einsten gravity. As explained above, we will use a dif...

  10. [10]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, G. Dibitetto, S. Giri, and M. Schillo, Emergent de Sitter Cosmology from Decaying Anti–de Sitter Space, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 261301 (2018), arXiv:1807.01570 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, and S. Giri, Curing with Hemlock: Escaping the swampland using instabilities from string theory, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D30, 2142029 (2021), arXiv:2103.17121 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  12. [12]

    Danielsson, D

    U. Danielsson, D. Panizo, and R. Tielemans, Gravita- tional waves in dark bubble cosmology, Phys. Rev. D106, 024002 (2022), arXiv:2202.00545 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Danielsson, O

    U. Danielsson, O. Henriksson, and D. Panizo, Stringy realization of a small and positive cosmological constant in dark bubble cosmology, Phys. Rev. D107, 026020 (2023), arXiv:2211.10191 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Basile, U

    I. Basile, U. Danielsson, S. Giri, and D. Panizo, Shed- ding light on dark bubble cosmology, JHEP02(02), 112, arXiv:2310.15032 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [15]

    Danielsson and D

    U. Danielsson and D. Panizo, Experimental tests of dark bubble cosmology, Phys. Rev. D109, 026003 (2024), arXiv:2311.14589 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  16. [16]

    Padilla, Infra-red modification of gravity from asym- metric branes, Class

    A. Padilla, Infra-red modification of gravity from asym- metric branes, Class. Quant. Grav.22, 1087 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0410033. 17

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  17. [17]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, and S. Giri, Dark bubbles: decorating the wall, JHEP04(04), 085, arXiv:2001.07433 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  18. [18]

    J. D. Brown and C. Teitelboim, Neutralization of the Cos- mological Constant by Membrane Creation, Nucl. Phys. B297, 787 (1988)

    1988

  19. [19]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, G. Dibitetto, S. Giri, and M. Schillo, de Sitter Cosmology on an expanding bubble, JHEP10(10), 164, arXiv:1907.04268 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1907

  20. [20]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, and S. Giri, Bubble needs strings, JHEP21(21), 250, arXiv:2009.01597 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  21. [21]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, and S. Giri, Features of a dark energy model in string theory, Phys. Rev. D108, 126009 (2023), arXiv:2212.14004 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    In our case α+ = k2 +a2 + 1 − 2G5M+/a2, while α− = k2 +a2 + 1

    is H= 2π 2a3 σ− 3(β− −β +) 8πG5a = 2π2a3σ− 6π2a2 8πG5 α− +α + −2 √α−α+ cosh 4G5p 3πa2 1/2 = 0,(76) with respect to proper timeτ, with cosh 4G5p 3πa2 = β−β+ −˙a2 √α−α+ ,(77) where β± = p α± + ˙a2. In our case α+ = k2 +a2 + 1 − 2G5M+/a2, while α− = k2 +a2 + 1. We have also added 12 This is similar to string gas cosmology [25, 26]. 13 Note the parallel with ...

    2022

  23. [23]

    Garriga and T

    J. Garriga and T. Tanaka, Gravity in the brane world, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2778 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/9911055

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  24. [24]

    S. B. Giddings, E. Katz, and L. Randall, Linearized gravity in brane backgrounds, JHEP03, 023, arXiv:hep- th/0002091

    arXiv

  25. [25]

    Banerjee, U

    S. Banerjee, U. Danielsson, and M. Zemsch, The dark bubbleography, JHEP02(02), 102, arXiv:2311.16242 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Compere and D

    G. Compere and D. Marolf, Setting the boundary free in AdS/CFT, Class. Quant. Grav.25, 195014 (2008), arXiv:0805.1902 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  27. [27]

    Banerjee, S

    S. Banerjee, S. Bhowmick, A. Sahay, and G. Siopsis, Generalized Holographic Cosmology, Class. Quant. Grav. 30, 075022 (2013), arXiv:1207.2983 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  28. [28]

    de Haro, S

    S. de Haro, S. N. Solodukhin, and K. Skenderis, Holo- graphic reconstruction of space-time and renormalization in the AdS / CFT correspondence, Commun. Math. Phys. 217, 595 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0002230

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  29. [29]

    Fragkos and I

    V. Fragkos and I. Pikovski, Probing classical and quan- tum violations of the equivalence of active and passive gravitational mass, (2025), arXiv:2503.16198 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    U. H. Danielsson, D. Panizo, R. Tielemans, and T. Van Riet, Higher-dimensional view on quantum cosmol- ogy, Phys. Rev. D104, 086015 (2021), arXiv:2105.03253 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Vilenkin, Creation of Universes from Nothing, Phys

    A. Vilenkin, Creation of Universes from Nothing, Phys. Lett. B117, 25 (1982)

    1982

  32. [32]

    Vilenkin, Quantum Creation of Universes, Phys

    A. Vilenkin, Quantum Creation of Universes, Phys. Rev. D30, 509 (1984)

    1984

  33. [33]

    R. H. Brandenberger and C. Vafa, Superstrings in the Early Universe, Nucl. Phys. B316, 391 (1989)

    1989

  34. [34]

    R. H. Brandenberger, String Gas Cosmology (2008) arXiv:0808.0746 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  35. [35]

    Gregory, I

    R. Gregory, I. G. Moss, and B. Withers, Black holes as bubble nucleation sites, JHEP03, 081, arXiv:1401.0017 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [36]

    Hertog, R

    T. Hertog, R. Tielemans, and T. Van Riet, Cosmic eggs to relax the cosmological constant, JCAP08(08), 064, arXiv:2101.01437 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Danielsson and V

    U. Danielsson and V. Van Hemelryck, Charged Nariai black holes on the dark bubble, Class. Quant. Grav.41, 245011 (2024), arXiv:2405.13679 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    U. H. Danielsson, G. Dibitetto, and S. Giri, Black holes as bubbles of AdS, JHEP10(10), 171, arXiv:1705.10172 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  39. [39]

    Randall and R

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, An Alternative to compact- ification, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 4690 (1999), arXiv:hep- th/9906064

    arXiv 1999

  40. [40]

    Randall and R

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, A Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 3370 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9905221

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  41. [41]

    S. Giri, U. Danielsson, L. Lehner, and F. Pretorius, Ex- ploring black hole mimickers: Electromagnetic and gravi- tational signatures of AdS black shells, Phys. Rev. D111, 024007 (2025), arXiv:2405.08062 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025