How negative can forward-limit coefficients be once gravity is included
In plain words
Without gravity, a certain coefficient in the scattering of two particles must be positive. With gravity it may be slightly negative, and the size of the allowed negative value is not known.
Precise statement
For a weakly coupled 4D effective field theory of a massless scalar coupled to Einstein gravity, with $2\to 2$ amplitude $M(s,t) = 8\pi G s^2/(-t) + c_2 s^2/\Lambda^4 + ...$, determine the lowest value of $c_2$ consistent with unitarity, analyticity, crossing and a UV completion whose amplitude Reggeizes (grows as $s^{2 + \alpha' t}$) above a scale $M_*$. Under this Regge assumption proposals give $c_2 \ge -\operatorname{O}(\Lambda^4/(M_{\mathrm{pl}}^2 M_*^2))$; smeared impact-parameter sum rules in $D = 4$ instead give $c_2 \ge -\operatorname{O}(G \Lambda^4/M^2)\operatorname{log}(M b_{\mathrm{IR}})$, where $M$ is the EFT cutoff and $b_{\mathrm{IR}}$ an infrared impact-parameter cutoff. An answer is the optimal bound in $D = 4$ with its assumptions stated, saying which form is optimal, or an explicit consistent UV completion that violates it.
What would settle it
A derivation from stated axioms of the optimal lower bound on $c_{2}$, checked against explicit string-theory amplitudes.
Status in the literature
Bounds allowing Planck-suppressed negativity have been derived since 2020, but their size depends on the assumed Regge behavior of the UV completion or on an infrared cutoff.
See also
- Related Bounds on four-dimensional gravitational couplings free of infrared logarithms
- Related Does electromagnetism plus gravity require new particles far below the Planck scale
- Related Prove high-energy growth bound for gravitational amplitudes from first principles
- Related Is a massive graviton with cosmological mass a consistent theory?