AG-2026.05-090·hep-th·cross-listed: gr-qchep-ph
Wormholes and the imaginary distance bound
Authors
- Juan Maldacena
- Alexander Maloney
- Brian McPeak
Abstract
Some of the simplest wormhole solutions involve massless scalar fields that take imaginary values. Massless fields can be interpreted as coupling constants in asymptotically flat or asymptotically AdS gravity theories. We argue that wormhole effects imply an imaginary distance bound, an upper limit for the analytic continuation of the theory to imaginary values of these couplings. In string theory examples, we find explicit effects that render the low-energy theory invalid either before or precisely at this wormhole limit. We argue that the existence of such effects enforcing the distance bound is a general feature of string theories containing wormholes. In some cases, the bounds we discuss coincide with the weak gravity conjecture, and with the Kontsevich-Segal-Witten condition on complex metrics.
Submitted
6 May 20261 month ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2605.05336
Summary
Wormholes in gravity theories with scalar fields suggest there's a fundamental limit to how far you can mathematically extend the theory into imaginary coupling values, with string theory providing explicit examples where this limit is enforced.
- Wormhole solutions naturally lead to an 'imaginary distance bound'—a constraint on how far you can analytically continue coupling constants into the complex plane before the low-energy description breaks down.
- String theory examples show that physical effects (like certain particle instabilities) explicitly prevent you from reaching or exceeding this wormhole boundary, suggesting it's a universal feature rather than a coincidence.
- This bound connects several seemingly separate concepts in theoretical physics: weak gravity conjectures and conditions on complex geometry, hinting at deeper principles governing what effective theories are actually consistent.
curious · generated by claude-haiku-4-5
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.