Can codimension-two branes solve the cosmological constant problem?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that codimension-two braneworlds might naturally explain the vanishing of the 4D effective cosmological constant, due to the automatic relation between the deficit angle and the brane tension. To investigate whether this cancellation happens dynamically, and within the context of a realistic cosmology, we study a codimension-two braneworld with spherical extra dimensions compactified by magnetic flux. Assuming Einstein gravity, we show that when the brane contains matter with an arbitrary equation of state, the 4D metric components are not regular at the brane, unless the brane has nonzero thickness. We construct explicit 6D solutions with thick branes, treating the brane matter as a perturbation, and find that the universe expands consistently with standard Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) cosmology. The relation between the brane tension and the bulk deficit angle becomes $\ensuremath{\Delta}=2\ensuremath{\pi}{G}_{6}(\ensuremath{\rho}\ensuremath{-}3p)$ for a general equation of state. However, this relation does not imply a self-tuning of the effective 4D cosmological constant to zero; perturbations of the brane tension in a static solution lead to deSitter or anti-deSitter braneworlds. Our results thus confirm other recent work showing that codimension-two braneworlds in nonsupersymmetric Einstein gravity do not lead to a dynamical relaxation of the cosmological constant, but they leave open the possibility that supersymmetric versions can be compatible with self-tuning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".