Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 42 references

Singularity resolution in spherically reduced 2D semiclassical gravity with negative central charge

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Negative central charge removes the curvature singularity in a backreacted 2D black hole model.

desk verdict A clean derivation and honest framing, but the singularity-resolution claim rests on a stream plot and fitted exponentials without shipped code or data—worth a conditional referee, not a pass. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10523 v3 pith:YQBQXDGI submitted 2024-11-15 gr-qc hep-th

Adrián del Río , F. Javier Marañón-González , José Navarro-Salas This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C5783C8081T20 PACS 04.60.-m04.62.+v04.70.-s
keywords 2DdilatongravityBoulwarestatecentralchargesingularityresolutionsemiclassicalbackreactionsphericalreductionSchwarzschildblackholeconformalanomaly
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that in the two-dimensional model obtained by spherical reduction of Einstein gravity, the curvature singularity left after semiclassical backreaction in the Boulware state disappears if the conformal matter has negative central charge. With positive central charge the backreacted geometry is horizonless but develops a null singularity on the far side of a wormhole throat; with $C=-1$ the solution instead stays regular, reaches $r=0$ with finite curvature, and extends through it to a second asymptotically flat end. This matters because it shows, in a model without the special global symmetry of the CGHS/RST case, that the sign of the central charge can decide whether the classical singularity survives. The paper also points to unitary four-dimensional fields, such as dimensionless scalars, whose anomaly coefficients are negative, suggesting a concrete route to horizonless regular black-hole geometries.

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is the one-loop Polyakov effective action with the Boulware-state choice $t_\pm=0$, whose central charge $C$ enters the two-dimensional conformal anomaly $\langle T^a{}_a\rangle=\hbar C R/(24\pi)$. In static conformal gauge the field equations reduce to a single second-order ODE for the inverse radius $\omega(\rho)=z^{-1}=r_0/r$, or equivalently a first-order Hamiltonian system in $(z,z_\rho)$. The sign of $C$ controls the flow: for $C=1$ the integration stops at a null curvature singularity, while for $C=-1$ the phase-space trajectory approaches but does not touch the singular curve, and the inverse-curvature functional $R^{-1}$, whose zero would signal a singularity, stays nonzero as the numerical error is reduced.

What would settle it

Integrate the ODE (31) for $C=-1$ with asymptotically flat boundary conditions using arbitrary-precision arithmetic to large negative $\rho$, and check whether the phase-space trajectory $(z,z_\rho)$ crosses the red singular curve at any finite $\rho$, or equivalently whether $R^{-1}$ changes sign; if either happens, the claimed singularity resolution fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the semiclassical Schwarzschild-like solution of the spherically reduced theory, with asymptotically flat Boulware boundary conditions and central charge $C=-1$, is free of curvature singularities. Solving the second-order ODE for the inverse radius $\omega(\rho)=z^{-1}=r_0/r$ numerically with decreasing error, and checking the inverse-curvature functional $R^{-1}$, shows that the solution penetrates the classical horizon, reaches $z=0$ at finite $\rho$ with finite curvature, and continues to negative $z$; the curvature $|R|$ peaks at $r=0$ and decays exponentially to zero on both sides. The phase-space stream plot indicates the trajectory approaches but never intersects the singular curve. The resulting spacetime is horizonless, asymptotically flat at both ends, and has the causal structure of two-dimensional Minkowski space, in contrast to the $C>0$ case where a null singularity remains.

Load-bearing premise

The whole singularity-free result depends on the unproven claim that the exact solution never touches the curve in the phase-space flow that would make the curvature blow up; the authors support this with stream plots and error-decreasing numerical integrations, not with an analytic proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any mass parameter $a>0$ the qualitative picture is the same, because $a$ only places the initial data in the same quadrant of the phase space; the regular two-end geometry therefore extends to astrophysical masses.
  • If the claim is right, quantum backreaction in the Boulware state does not merely remove the classical horizon: with negative central charge it also removes the $r=0$ curvature singularity, leaving a globally regular, horizonless spacetime.
  • The result extends the CGHS/RST negative-central-charge mechanism to a model without the protecting global symmetry, so the singularity-resolution effect is not an accident of that symmetry.
  • At the four-dimensional level, the paper suggests that Boulware-type vacuum states of unitary conformal fields with negative anomaly coefficients (for instance, dimensionless scalar fields) would imply removal of the event horizon and a correspondingly different picture of evaporating black holes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: a decisive next step would be a rigorous proof that the phase-space trajectory never intersects the singular set; the current evidence is numerical convergence, not an analytic invariant.
  • Editorial inference: because regularity of the Ricci scalar alone does not guarantee geodesic completeness, one could test whether the extended spacetime is future and past complete; if geodesics terminate at finite affine parameter at $z\to -\infty$, the singularity resolution would be only partial.
  • Editorial inference: hybrid matter with a mix of positive and negative central-charge fields, with net $C<0$, might interpolate between singular and regular endpoints; the paper leaves this open as a possible source of wormhole-like geometries.
  • Editorial inference: translating the two-dimensional result to four dimensions requires that the dimensionless-scalar vacuum has vanishing stress-energy at infinity and that its backreaction behaves like the two-dimensional model; neither follows automatically from the anomaly coefficients.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies the semiclassical backreaction of conformal matter in the Boulware vacuum for the two-dimensional dilaton-gravity model obtained by spherical reduction of four-dimensional general relativity. The authors derive the static field equations (20)-(22), reduce them to a single second-order ODE for the inverse radial function ω(ρ), and integrate Eq. (31) numerically with asymptotically flat boundary conditions (29)-(30) for central charge C = -1. They claim that, in contrast to the C = 1 case, the resulting spacetime is horizonless and free of curvature singularities: the radial function z(ρ) reaches zero at a finite value of ρ, the inverse Ricci scalar behaves as -λ(z^2+1)e^{mρ+n} in the large-curvature region, and the solution can be analytically extended through z = 0 to a second asymptotically flat end. The paper also argues that negative central charges can arise from unitary four-dimensional fields such as the gravitino and the dimensionless scalar field of Eq. (40), thus giving physical motivation for the negative sign. The central claim is that the sign of the central charge reverses the fate of the classical singularity.

Significance. If the claimed singularity resolution is correct, the paper establishes a nontrivial two-dimensional semiclassical-gravity result: in a model without the special global symmetry of CGHS/RST, a negative conformal central charge removes the classical Schwarzschild singularity, producing a horizonless, asymptotically flat, two-sided geometry. The derivation of the ODE system is clean, and the paper is generally well organized. However, the decisive step — that the phase-space trajectory approaches but never reaches the singular set — rests on numerical integration and a stream plot, without a rigorous error bound, an analytic invariant, or released code and data. The physical discussion of negative central charges in four dimensions is suggestive but not a derivation of the two-dimensional C. Thus the result is promising and worth publishing in a major revision that addresses the rigor and reproducibility of the numerical evidence.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 8, Eq. (34)] The central claim that the exact solution of Eq. (25) avoids the singular curve R^{-1}=0 is not established. A stream plot cannot rule out a crossing between plotted arrows or at values of ρ beyond the plotted range, and the statement in the text that the trajectory 'approaches' but 'will never intersect' the red curve is an inference, not a proof. The exponential fits in Figs. 5 and 7, with constants m, n, ~m, ~n, are not derived from Eq. (31); their convergence as ϵ→0 is suggestive but does not prove that the denominator ω_ρ^2 - 2ω_ρ ω - ω^4 in Eq. (34) remains nonzero for all finite ρ. The authors should either provide an analytic argument (for example, an invariant region or a Lyapunov-type estimate showing the singular set is not reached) or, failing that, present reproducible high-precision numerics with explicit global error control on the distance to the singular set. As it stands, the singularity-resolution result rests entirely on numerical evidence of the kind that can mask a genuine crossing.
  2. [Sec. III.A, Eqs. (29)-(31)] The numerical implementation is not sufficiently described to be reproduced. Equation (31) is formally singular at the starting point ω(0)=0 because of the term 2ω_ρ^2/ω; although this singularity is cancelled by the second term when the boundary conditions (29)-(30) hold, the paper never explains the cancellation or the asymptotic expansion used to initialize the integration away from ρ=0. No code or data are provided despite the statement that a custom C++ solver was used. This makes it impossible for a reader to check whether the reported convergence of |R^{-1}| as ϵ→0 is a genuine property of the solution or an artifact of the numerical scheme. Please specify the initialization procedure and provide either the code or sufficient data for independent verification.
  3. [Sec. III, Eq. (15)] The semiclassical theory is defined with the local counterterm Slocal=0, but this choice is not unique and the model lacks a symmetry that would fix it. Since the central result — singularity resolution for C=-1 — is a property of this specific semiclassical action, the authors should discuss how the result depends on the counterterm ambiguity. At minimum, they should state whether the qualitative conclusion (no horizon, no singularity) survives for a one-parameter family of local counterterms, or argue that Slocal=0 is the physically preferred minimal choice in the spherically reduced setting. Without this, the claim that the mechanism is generic rather than a gauge artifact of the counterterm choice is not supported.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. IV] The phrase 'reversing the sign of the central charge of the conformal matter' refers to taking C=-1 in the two-dimensional anomaly ⟨T^a_a⟩ = CħR/(24π), but the connection between this C and the four-dimensional anomaly coefficients a and c discussed in Sec. IV is not derived; the text says the argument is suggestive. Please make clear that the 4D discussion is motivational rather than a derivation.
  2. [Fig. 5 caption and Eq. (35)] In Eq. (35), the notation δR^{-1}/δω and δR^{-1}/δω_ρ is used for partial derivatives; this should be made explicit. Also, the statement that 'δR^{-1} tends to zero as ϵ_i → 0' does not by itself establish that the value e remains nonzero in the limit; clarify the relationship between e and the numerical errors.
  3. [Sec. III.B, final paragraph] The extrapolation 'this behavior holds for any value of a > 0' is based on the qualitative phase portrait only; the numerical integrations are shown for a=2. Please state the range of a values actually checked or provide an argument that the phase-space flow is independent of a apart from the starting point.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central ODE boundary-value problem is self-contained, and the numerical fits are diagnostics of the computed solution rather than fitted inputs renamed as predictions.

full rationale

The paper's derivation is self-contained. The central result follows by reducing the action (15), with the explicitly stated Slocal=0 choice, to the ODEs (20)-(22), changing variables to z(rho) and omega(rho) to obtain (25) and (31), imposing asymptotic flatness through (26)-(30), and then integrating numerically. None of these steps defines the desired singularity resolution into the inputs: the Boulware condition t+-=0 and asymptotic flatness are standard state and boundary choices, and C=-1 is an assumed matter content, not a parameter fitted to the target outcome. The exponential fits in Figs. 5 and 7 are numerical characterizations of the computed inverse curvature, used as evidence that R^{-1} stays away from zero; they are not fitted parameters that select the solution or that are then renamed as predictions. Self-citations such as [20], [23], and [39] are used for context, for the prior C>0 comparison, and for speculative four-dimensional motivation, while the CGHS negative-central-charge comparison is cited to the independent works [17-19]. The phase-space and stream-plot reasoning in Sec. III.B is heuristic, and the strongest singularity-resolution claim ultimately rests on numerical evidence rather than a rigorous proof of avoidance of the red singular curve; that is a robustness concern, not a circular reduction of the result to its own premises.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the Polyakov effective action with Slocal=0, the constant-r^2 approximation, the Boulware-state boundary conditions, and the physical admissibility of negative central charge. The qualitative result is established numerically, so the global behavior of the exact solution is itself an assumption. C, a, and r0 are chosen inputs; m,n are fit parameters of the limiting-curve analysis.

free parameters (4)
  • C = -1
    Central charge of the conformal matter is set to -1. It is not fitted to data but is the key input; the paper claims the result for negative C, with C=-1 as the representative numerical value.
  • a = GM/r0 = 2
    Dimensionless mass parameter chosen for the numerical examples. The authors argue via phase space that the qualitative conclusion holds for any a>0, so this is a representative choice, not a fit.
  • r0 = sqrt(lambda)
    Dilaton scale set to the Planck scale in the numerical integration; a simplification that does not affect the qualitative claim.
  • m, n = not reported; depend on a
    Numerical constants in the exponential fit R^{-1} -> -lambda(z^2+1)e^{|m|rho+n/2}; values depend on a and are extracted from the numerical solution, not derived analytically.
assumptions (6)
  • ad hoc to paper The semiclassical theory is defined by the Polyakov effective action with the local counterterm Slocal=0 (Eq. 15).
    In Sec. III the authors say 'we take the simplest choice Slocal = 0' because no global symmetry fixes the counterterm; different counterterms could change the backreaction and the singularity structure.
  • domain assumption The 4D spherical reduction is approximated by freezing r^2 in the matter coupling, so the s-wave matter is treated as 2D conformal fields (Eq. 14).
    The authors write 'it is customary to work in the approximation ... to keep r^2 constant in the second line of (14)'. The central claim applies to this approximated model, not to the full s-wave-reduced theory.
  • domain assumption The Boulware state is implemented by setting t±=0 and imposing asymptotic flatness (Eqs. 18-19, 29-30).
    The choice of quantum state fixes the integration functions t±; the solution depends on this choice.
  • domain assumption A negative central charge C=-1 is physically admissible despite violating the unitarity bound C>0 in 2D, because the Boulware vacuum has no asymptotic excitations.
    This is the key physical input, defended in Secs. I and IV using refs [17-19] and 4D trace-anomaly examples; it is not derived within the 2D model.
  • ad hoc to paper The exact solution of Eq. (25) with asymptotically flat boundary conditions exists globally and avoids the singular set (red curve in Fig. 8).
    The singularity resolution is inferred from numerical integration and a stream plot, with no analytic existence result; if this fails, the conclusion fails.
  • standard math Standard ODE theory and the inverse function theorem justify the coordinate changes from Eq. (23) to Eq. (31).
    The derivations use ordinary calculus and ODE manipulation; these are standard background results.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Singularity resolution in spherically reduced 2D semiclassical gravity with negative central charge." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YQBQXDGI

@misc{pith2026241110523,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Singularity resolution in spherically reduced 2D semiclassical gravity with negative central charge},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YQBQXDGI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10523}
}
read the original abstract

We analyze the semiclassical Schwarzschild geometry in the Boulware quantum state in the framework of two-dimensional (2D) dilaton gravity. The classical model is defined by the spherical reduction of Einstein's gravity sourced with conformal scalar fields. The expectation value of the stress-energy tensor in the Boulware state is singular at the classical horizon of the Schwarzschild spacetime, but when backreaction effects are considered, previous results have shown that the 2D geometry is horizonless and described by a non-symmetric wormhole with a curvature singularity on the other side of the throat. In this work we show that reversing the sign of the central charge of the conformal matter removes the curvature singularity of the 2D backreacted geometry, which happens to be horizonless and asymptotically flat. This result is consistent with a similar analysis recently performed for the CGHS model. We also argue the physical significance of negative central charges in conformal anomalies from a four-dimensional perspective.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10523 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Penrose diagram showing the causal structure of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Penrose diagram showing the causal structure of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Numerical solution for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Logarithmic plot for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Phase space of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Analytical extension of the two-dimensional spacetime [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    X+X− → 0 [17–19] and the singularity is resolved

    The two classical horizons are removed and, instead, null curvature singularities emerge at the same locations: X+ = 0 and X− = 0. X+X− → 0 [17–19] and the singularity is resolved. The corresponding Penrose diagrams are illustrated in Fig. 2 (C > 0) and Fig. 3 (C < 0). III. BOULWARE STATE IN THE SPHERICALLY REDUCED MODEL OF EINSTEIN’S GRA VITY In this sec...

    work page

  2. [2]

    velocity

    (35) Since δR−1 tends to zero as ϵi → 0, we can claim that ρ∗ is not a singular point in the resulting spacetime if e remains nonzero in this limit. To do the numerical com- putation we coded a custom numerical solver in C++ adapted to this particular problem. The code is based on a modified version of the Runge-Kutta-Fehlberg of fourth order, which uses ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Atrac- cion de Talento Cesar Nombela

    The green line represents points with zero curvature, while the red line represents curvature singularities. The blue lines correspond to nullclines (i.e. points where either zρ = 0 or zρρ = 0), some of which agree with the green lines. With asymptotically flat boundary conditions (27) and (28), the system evolves from a point in the first quadrant for an...

    2023

  4. [4]

    Jackiw, Liouville field theory: A two-dimensional model for gravity?, in Quantum Theory of Gravity , edited S.M

    R. Jackiw, Liouville field theory: A two-dimensional model for gravity?, in Quantum Theory of Gravity , edited S.M. Christensen (Hilger, Briston, 1984), pp. 403-420

    work page 1984

  5. [5]

    Teitelboim, The Hamiltonian structure of two- dimensional spacetime and its relation with the confor- mal anomaly, in Quantum Theory of Gravity , edited S.M

    C. Teitelboim, The Hamiltonian structure of two- dimensional spacetime and its relation with the confor- mal anomaly, in Quantum Theory of Gravity , edited S.M. Christensen, (Hilger, Briston, 1984), pp. 327-344. 6 We have ignored contributions of the form 2R as they are intrinsi- cally ambiguous and can be shifted by local counterterms

    work page 1984

  6. [6]

    Callan, S

    C.G. Callan, S. B. Giddings, J.A. Harvey, and A. Stro- minger, Phys. Rev. D 45, R1005 (1992)

    work page 1992

  7. [7]

    S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 406 (1992)

    work page 1992

  8. [8]

    J. A. Harvey and A. Strominger, arXiv:hep-th/9209055

    arXiv

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Strominger, arXiv:hep-th/9501071

    A. Strominger, arXiv:hep-th/9501071

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Grumiller, W

    D. Grumiller, W. Kummer and D. V . Vassilevich, Phys. Rep. 369, 327 (2002)

    2002

  3. [11]

    Fabbri and J

    A. Fabbri and J. Navarro-Salas, Modeling black hole evapo- ration, ICP-World Scientific, London (2005)

    2005

  4. [12]

    V . P . Frolov and I. D. Novikov,Black Hole Physics (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998). 11

    1998

  5. [13]

    Polyakov, Phys

    A.M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. 103B, 207 (1981)

    1981

  6. [14]

    S. M. Christensen and S. A. Fulling, Phys. Rev. D 15, 2088 (1977)

    1977

  7. [15]

    Candelas,Phys

    P . Candelas,Phys. Rev. D 21 2185 (1980)

    1980

  8. [16]

    J. G. Russo, L. Susskind, and L. Thorlacius, Phys. Rev. D 46, 3444 (1992)

    1992

  9. [17]

    Cruz and J

    J. Cruz and J. Navarro-Salas, Phys. Lett. B 375, 47 (1996)

    1996

  10. [18]

    Ashtekar, F

    A. Ashtekar, F. Pretorius, and F. M. Ramazanoglu, Phys. Rev. D 83, 044040 (2011)

    2011

  11. [19]

    O. B. Zaslavskii, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 21, 2283 (2006)

    2006

  12. [20]

    Potaux, D

    Y. Potaux, D. Sarkar, and S. N. Solodukhin,Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 261501 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Potaux, D

    Y. Potaux, D. Sarkar, and S. N. Solodukhin, Phys. Rev. D 105, 025015 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Potaux, D

    Y. Potaux, D. Sarkar, and S. N. Solodukhin, Phys. Rev. D 108, 125012 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Fabbri, S

    A. Fabbri, S. Farese, J. Navarro-Salas, G. Olmo, and H. Sanchis-Alepuz, Phys. Rev. D 73, 104023 (2006)

    2006

  16. [24]

    Ho and Y

    P .M. Ho and Y. Matsuo, Classical Quantum Gravity 35 065012 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Arrechea, C

    J. Arrechea, C. Barcel ´o, R. Carballo-Rubio, and L. J. Garay, Phys. Rev. D 101 064059 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Beltr´an-Palau, A

    P . Beltr´an-Palau, A. del R ´ıo, and J. Navarro-Salas, Phys. Rev. D 107 085023 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Arrechea, C

    J. Arrechea, C. Barcel ´o, R. Carballo-Rubio, and L. J. Garay, Phys. Rev. D 107 085005 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Varadarajan, Phys

    M. Varadarajan, Phys. Rev. D 111 026005 (2025)

    2025

  21. [29]

    J. Cruz, J. Navarro-Salas, M. Navarro, and C. F. Talavera, Phys. Lett. B 402, 270 (1997)

    1997

  22. [30]

    Strogatz

    S. Strogatz. , Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applica- tions to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering (West- view Press, 2000)

    2000

  23. [31]

    Damour and S

    T. Damour and S. N. Solodukhin, Phys. Rev. D 76, 024016 (2007)

    2007

  24. [32]

    Friedan, Z

    D. Friedan, Z. Qiu. and S. Shenker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 1575 (1984)

    1984

  25. [33]

    N. D. Birrell and P . C. W. Davies,Quantum Fields in Curved Space (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1982)

    1982

  26. [34]

    M. J. Duff, Classical Quantum Gravity 11 1387 (1994)

    1994

  27. [35]

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, Phys. Lett. 76B, 571 (1978)

    1978

  28. [36]

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, Nucl. Phys. B154, 301 (1979)

    1979

  29. [37]

    V . P . Gusynin,Phys. Lett. B 225, 233 (1989)

    1989

  30. [38]

    Bogolubov, A.A

    N.N. Bogolubov, A.A. Logunov, A.I. Oksak, and I. T. Todorov, General Principles of Quantum Field Theory (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1990)

    1990

  31. [39]

    Turok and L

    N. Turok and L. Boyle, arXiv:2302.00344; L. Boyle and N. Turok, Phys. Lett. B 849, 138442 (2024); 849, 138443 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Miller, G

    J. Miller, G. E. Volovik and M. A. Zubkov,Phys. Rev. D 106 015021 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    Beltr´an-Palau, S

    P . Beltr´an-Palau, S. Nadal-Gisbert, J. Navarro-Salas, and S. Pla, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2531 012009 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    Navarro-Salas, Classical Quantum Gravity 41, 085003 (2024)

    J. Navarro-Salas, Classical Quantum Gravity 41, 085003 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.