March 2023

We give a conceptual exposition of aspects of gravitational radiation, especially in relation to energy. Our motive for doing so is that the strong analogies with electromagnetic radiation seem not to be widely enough appreciated. In particular, we reply to some recent papers in the philosophy of physics literature that seem to deny that gravitational waves carry energy. Our argument is based on two points: (i) that for both electromagnetism and gravity, in the presence of material sources, radiation is an effective concept, unambiguously emerging only in certain regimes or solutions of the theory; and (ii) similarly, energy conservation is only unambiguous in certain regimes or solutions of general relativity. Crucially, the domain of (i), in which radiation is meaningful, has a significant overlap with the domain of (ii), in which energy conservation is meaningful. Conceptually, the overlap of regimes is no coincidence: the long-standing question about the existence of gravitational waves was settled precisely by finding a consistent way to articulate their energy and momentum.

We provide a unified operational framework for the study of causality, non-locality and contextuality, in a fully device-independent and theory-independent setting. Our work has its roots in the sheaf-theoretic framework for contextuality by Abramsky and Brandenburger, which it extends to include arbitrary causal orders (be they definite, dynamical or indefinite). We define a notion of causal function for arbitrary spaces of input histories, and we show that the explicit imposition of causal constraints on joint outputs is equivalent to the free assignment of local outputs to the tip events of input histories. We prove factorisation results for causal functions over parallel, sequential, and conditional sequential compositions of the underlying spaces. We prove that causality is equivalent to continuity with respect to the lowerset topology on the underlying spaces, and we show that partial causal functions defined on open sub-spaces can be bundled into a presheaf. In a striking departure from the Abramsky-Brandenburger setting, however, we show that causal functions fail, under certain circumstances, to form a sheaf. We define empirical models as compatible families in the presheaf of probability distributions on causal functions, for arbitrary open covers of the underlying space of input histories. We show the existence of causally-induced contextuality, a phenomenon arising when the causal constraints themselves become context-dependent, and we prove a no-go result for non-locality on total orders, both static and dynamical.

We provide a unified operational framework for the study of causality, non-locality and contextuality, in a fully device-independent and theory-independent setting. We define causaltopes, our chosen portmanteau of “causal polytopes”, for arbitrary spaces of input histories and arbitrary choices of input contexts. We show that causaltopes are obtained by slicing simpler polytopes of conditional probability distributions with a set of causality equations, which we fully characterise. We provide efficient linear programs to compute the maximal component of an empirical model supported by any given sub-causaltope, as well as the associated causal fraction. We introduce a notion of causal separability relative to arbitrary causal constraints. We provide efficient linear programs to compute the maximal causally separable component of an empirical model, and hence its causally separable fraction, as the component jointly supported by certain sub-causaltopes. We study causal fractions and causal separability for several novel examples, including a selection of quantum switches with entangled or contextual control. In the process, we demonstrate the existence of “causal contextuality”, a phenomenon where causal inseparability is clearly correlated to, or even directly implied by, non-locality and contextuality.

We present an exhaustive classification of the 2644 causally complete spaces of input histories on 3 events with binary inputs, together with the algorithm used to find them. This paper forms the supplementary material for a trilogy of works: spaces of input histories, our dynamical generalisation of causal orders, are introduced in “The Combinatorics of Causality”; the sheaf-theoretic treatment of causal distributions is detailed in “The Topology of Causality”; the polytopes formed by the associated empirical models are studied in “The Geometry of Causality”.

Entropy bounds have played an important role in the development of holography as an approach to quantum gravity, so in this article we seek to gain a better understanding of the covariant entropy bound. We observe that there is a possible way of thinking about the covariant entropy bound which would suggest that it encodes an epistemic limitation rather than an objective count of the true number of degrees of freedom on a light-sheet; thus we distinguish between ontological and epistemic interpretations of the covariant bound. We consider the consequences that these interpretations might have for physics and we discuss what each approach has to say about gravitational phenomena. Our aim is not to advocate for either the ontological or epistemic approach in particular, but rather to articulate both possibilities clearly and explore some arguments for and against them.