# Response of a rotating detector coupled to a polymer quantized field

**Authors:** D. Jaffino Stargen, Nirmalya Kajuri, L. Sriramkumar

arXiv: 1706.05834 · 2017-09-13

## TL;DR

This paper investigates how polymer quantization, which modifies dispersion relations of scalar fields, affects the response of a rotating Unruh-DeWitt detector, finding that the modifications are not substantially different from standard predictions.

## Contribution

It analyzes the detector response in the context of polymer quantized fields, showing that specific dispersion relation modifications have limited impact on detector transition rates.

## Key findings

- Sub-luminal dispersion relations can significantly alter detector responses.
- Polymer quantization leads to only minor modifications in the transition probability rate.
- Results suggest limited observational differences from standard quantum field theory.

## Abstract

Assuming that high energy effects may alter the standard dispersion relations governing quantized fields, the influence of such modifications on various phenomena has been studied extensively in the literature. In different contexts, it has generally been found that, while super-luminal dispersion relations hardly affect the standard results, sub-luminal relations can lead to (even substantial) modifications to the conventional results. A polymer quantized scalar field is characterized by a series of modified dispersion relations along with suitable changes to the standard measure of the density of modes. Amongst the modified dispersion relations, one finds that the lowest in the series can behave sub-luminally over a small domain in wavenumbers. In this work, we study the response of a uniformly rotating Unruh-DeWitt detector that is coupled to a polymer quantized scalar field. While certain sub-luminal dispersion relations can alter the response of the rotating detector considerably, in the case of polymer quantization, due to the specific nature of the dispersion relations, the modification to the transition probability rate of the detector does not prove to be substantial. We discuss the wider implications of the result.

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1706.05834/full.md

## Figures

6 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1706.05834/full.md

## References

32 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1706.05834/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1706.05834