The Tunneling Potential Formalism was introduced to calculate the tunneling actions that control vacuum decay as an alternative to the standard Euclidean Formalism. The new approach sets the problem as a simple variational problem in field space with decay described by a tunneling potential function Vₜ that extremizes a simple action functional S[Vₜ] and has a number of appealing properties that have been presented elsewhere. In this note I discuss several instances in which this Vₜ approach seems to give more than one would have expected a priori, as the following: the Vₜ describing the decay is a minimum of the new action S[Vₜ] rather than a saddle point; the decay of AdS, dS or Minkowski vacua are governed by a unique universal S[Vₜ] which also gives the Hawking-Moss instanton in the appropriate limit; physically relevant solutions beyond the Coleman-De Luccia (CdL) bounce, like pseudo-bounces or bubbles of nothing (BoNs), show up in a straightforward way as generalizations of the CdL bounce, with the correct boundary conditions; in cases for which the Euclidean action calculation requires the inclusion of particular boundary terms (like for BoNs or for the decay of AdS maxima above the Breitenlohner-Freedman bound) S[Vₜ] gives the correct result without the need of including any boundary term.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jose Espinosa (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: