Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Chern-Simons States in $SO(1,n)$ Yang-Mills Gauge Theory of Quantum Gravity

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A one-loop SO(1,4) Yang-Mills integral is shown to reduce to Einstein gravity when a curvature-derivative term is neglected.

desk verdict The abstract sells a derivation, but the body delivers a truncation — dropping the Yang-Mills term at Eq. (41)/(36) — and the paper's solid core is the Abelian Chern-Simons state regularization in Section 3. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.19658 v1 pith:DHXVI5AM submitted 2025-08-27 hep-th gr-qc

Zbigniew Haba This is my paper
classification hep-thgr-qc PACS 04.60.-m11.15.-q
keywords SO(1n)Yang-MillsquantumgravityChern-Simonswavefunctionone-loopeffectiveactionPalatiniformalismself-dualityequationLorentzconnectionWilsonloops
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

The paper sets out to show that Einstein gravity is not a separate input but an approximation to a pure SO(1,4) Yang-Mills gauge theory, the same type of theory used for the other forces. Its main result is a one-loop calculation: after integrating out the Lorentz connection and discarding the derivative of the SO(1,3) curvature, the effective action reduces to the Einstein-Hilbert action in Palatini form plus one-loop quantum corrections. The paper also establishes that the Chern-Simons wave function is an exact time-independent state and that, through a similarity transformation, it turns the Schrödinger equation into a diffusion equation whose classical drift is the self-duality equation. If the calculation is correct, the model provides a concrete route from a renormalizable, asymptotically free gauge theory to quantum-corrected general relativity, with that truncation carrying the argument.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the SO(1,4) connection split into a Lorentz connection and a vierbein, with the coupling rescaled so that σ² = λ²/(8πG), and the Chern-Simons wave function ψ_CS = exp(−W/ħ), which absorbs the total-derivative part of the Yang-Mills Lagrangian. The split makes the Palatini Einstein-Hilbert term visible in the action; the wave function converts the Schrödinger equation into a diffusion equation whose drift is the self-duality equation. The one-loop reduction is carried by a background-field expansion of the connection, with the derivative term in Eq. (41) omitted, leaving a zero-torsion equation whose solution is the Palatini connection.

What would settle it

Keep the ∂_μ R^{ab}_{μν} term in Eq. (41) and recompute the one-loop effective action to O(ħ). If the Palatini Einstein-Hilbert term still appears with the same coefficient, the central claim survives; if its coefficient changes or vanishes, the dropped term is doing the work and the claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a pure SO(1,4) Yang-Mills theory, quantized in a ħ expansion, contains Einstein gravity: integrating out the Lorentz connection and neglecting the derivative of the SO(1,3) curvature yields the Einstein-Hilbert action in Palatini form at leading order, plus one-loop counterterms of Yang-Mills, R², R_{μν}R^{μν}, and cosmological type. The same formalism shows that the Chern-Simons wave function is an exact stationary state, and that states built on it evolve at leading order by the self-duality equations, with higher orders governed by a stochastic self-duality equation. These are presented as evidence that gravity can be regarded as a low-energ

Load-bearing premise

The derivation depends on discarding the derivative-of-curvature term in Eq. (41), and no small parameter or symmetry controls that discard; if that term contributes, the Yang-Mills action does not reduce to Einstein gravity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reduction is legitimate, classical general relativity is the leading semiclassical limit of the SO(1,4) Yang-Mills action, with Newton's constant determined by the chosen ratio of the gauge coupling to the symmetry-breaking scale.
  • At one loop the model needs only the standard counterterms (Yang-Mills curvature square, R², R_{μν}R^{μν}, cosmological term), so the approximation is renormalizable in the usual sense.
  • Chern-Simons states provide a calculable vacuum: Wilson-loop correlation functions reduce to linking numbers plus perturbative corrections, giving a concrete topological signature of the gauge theory.
  • The leading ħ evolution of states near the Chern-Simons state follows the classical self-duality equations, so instanton-type configurations control the semiclassical dynamics.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: applying the same one-loop reduction to SO(1,n) with n>4 would make the coupling between gravity and the compact SO(n−4) gauge sector explicit, yielding a concrete unified model whose low-energy predictions could be tested.
  • Beyond the paper: the confinement assumption that justifies neglecting the connection's Yang-Mills dynamics could be tested directly on a lattice; a phase where the spin connection is confined would support the reduction, while a deconfined phase would remove its dynamical basis.
  • Beyond the paper: the analytic continuation used to make non-normalizable Chern-Simons states well-defined could be applied to the full gravitational connection, offering a regulated definition of diffeomorphism-invariant observables such as knotting and linking of spacetime loops.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a quantum treatment of Yang–Mills theory with internal group SO(1,n) as a framework for quantum gravity and unification. Its main technical claims are: (i) Chern–Simons wave functions are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian for gauge theories with an action that splits into a quadratic form plus a Chern–Simons divergence; (ii) in Abelian U(1) theory, regularized correlation functions in Chern–Simons states can be defined by analytic continuation and yield Gauss-linking-number expectations; (iii) in the non-Abelian SO(1,4) theory, integrating out the Lorentz connection in a one-loop background-field expansion gives, after neglecting a certain derivative term, the Einstein–Hilbert action in Palatini form plus one-loop counterterms. The paper also sketches a stochastic interpretation of the self-duality equation and Wilson-loop calculations in Chern–Simons states for SO(1,n).

Significance. If the main claim were established, the paper would provide a concrete route from a unified SO(1,n) Yang–Mills theory to Einstein gravity as a low-energy/one-loop approximation, which would be a significant result. The Abelian Chern–Simons state calculations in Section 3 are concrete and largely self-contained; the regularization by analytic continuation and the derivation of linking numbers are plausible and connect to existing topological field theory results. The paper also honestly acknowledges known obstacles of non-compact gauge groups, including unbounded energy and questionable unitarity. However, the central gravitational claim is currently not supported: the step from the SO(1,4) Yang–Mills action to Einstein gravity involves dropping a term of the same order as those retained, without a controlled expansion parameter, and the one-loop determinant/counterterm computation is not actually carried out. These are load-bearing gaps, not presentation issues.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5, Eq. (41)] The derivation of Einstein gravity rests on neglecting the first term in Eq. (41), namely (1/√−g)∂_μ(√−g(∂^μ A^{ab}_ν − ∂_ν A^{ab}_μ + σ²(h^a_μ h^b_ν − h^b_ν h^a_μ))). The paper states that this term is 'coming from ∂_μ R^{ab}_{μν}' and simply drops it to obtain the zero-torsion condition (42). No small parameter, symmetry, or dynamical mechanism is given to justify this neglect. In a Yang–Mills action, this term is precisely the part of the field strength that carries the ω-dynamics; discarding it is an uncontrolled truncation, not an approximation. The references to infrared confinement ([27–30]) are motivational and no calculation shows that confinement eliminates this term from the one-loop functional integral. Since the abstract's central claim depends on this step, this is a fatal gap in the derivation.
  2. [Section 4, Eq. (36)-(37)] The appearance of the Einstein–Hilbert term is largely by construction. After the metric identification (37), g_μν = h_μ^a η_ab h_ν^b, and the coupling choice σ² = λ²/(8πG), the decomposed Lagrangian (36) already contains the Palatini Einstein term with the correct coefficient. Thus Newton's constant is an input fixed by hand, not an emergent output of the gauge theory. The paper itself notes the arbitrariness in coupling constants in the classical decomposition (Section 4, above Eq. (36)), but the quantum derivation does not resolve this arbitrariness; it inherits it. This weakens the claim that Einstein gravity is 'obtained' from the gauge theory.
  3. [Section 5, Eqs. (40)-(48)] The one-loop computation is not completed. The background equation (40) is nonlinear; its solution is addressed only by linearizing and, as noted, further neglecting the derivative term. The fluctuation operator in Eq. (46) is written in a schematic form, and the determinant det M^{−1/2} is not evaluated. The counterterms in Eq. (48) are asserted with undetermined coefficients c_1,...,c_4, and no renormalization calculation is presented. Consequently, the statement that 'in one-loop calculations, we show that Einstein gravity can be considered as an approximation to gauge theory' is not substantiated by the manuscript. To support the claim, the paper would need to show, with a controlled truncation, that the one-loop effective action reduces to the Einstein action plus metric curvature-squared terms in an appropriate limit.
  4. [Section 6, Eq. (63)] The Wilson-loop correlation function formula (63), <U_C1...U_Cn> = 1 + 4πℏ∑_{k,l} link(C_k,C_l) + ..., is presented as a consequence of the Gaussian formula (64). However, the derivation is not given: Eq. (64) is a free propagator identity, while the full Chern–Simons state involves the interacting YCS (35), which is trilinear in Ω. The statement that 'by elementary power counting' the theory is renormalizable in three dimensions does not establish the validity of the perturbative expansion in the non-compact SO(1,4) setting, where the Hamiltonian and the integration measure are not defined with standard positive-definite weights. This section is therefore not sufficient to support the claimed extension of the Abelian results to the non-Abelian gauge group.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] The text contains several typos and misspellings: 'Fadeev–Popov' should be 'Faddeev–Popov' (after Eq. (47) and in Eq. (48) discussion); 'invarian' should be 'invariant' (Section 4, after Eq. (34)); 'S0(1, 4)' appears in Section 5; 'gravitatinal' in reference [47].
  2. [Eq. (37)] The index placement in the metric identification g_μν = h_μ^a η_ab h_ν^b is confusing: if h_μ^a is the vierbein, then the usual notation is g_μν = h_μ^a h_ν^b η_ab. The subsequent condition (38) should be written more clearly, e.g., η_ab h_μ^a h_ν^b = g_μν and its inverse.
  3. [Section 4, Eq. (33)] The Killing form g_AB;CD is introduced but its explicit normalization is not given. Since the Lagrangian depends on this normalization, this ambiguity propagates into the decomposition (36) and the coupling choice σ² = λ²/(8πG). Please specify the normalization of the SO(1,4) generators.
  4. [Section 3, Eq. (26)] The two-point function (26) is reported without derivation. While the result is plausible, a few intermediate steps would help the reader verify the analytic continuation, especially the sign of the imaginary term and the pole at γℏ = 1.
  5. [References] Reference [47] is listed as 'Schwinger, J. Quantized gravitatinal field. Phys. Rev. 1963, 130, 1253.' The journal title and volume are correct, but the article title should be checked for typographical errors.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

The headline result that Einstein gravity is an approximation to SO(1,n) Yang-Mills is obtained by discarding the Yang-Mills curvature term by hand; the Einstein term was already inserted via metric identification and coupling choice.

  1. self definitional [Section 4, Eq. (36)-(37)]
    "It can be seen from Equation (36) that the choice gµν = hµ aηabhν b , where hµ a satisfy ηabhµ b hc µ = ηac, leads in Equation (36) to the appearance (as the second term) of the Einstein Lagrangian in the Palatini formalism, if we choose σ2 = λ2 8πG = λ2m²_PL, where m_PL is the Planck mass."

    The Einstein-Hilbert term is not derived from the gauge dynamics; it is selected from the decomposed SO(1,4) Yang-Mills Lagrangian by identifying the tetrad with the metric and fixing the coupling σ² in terms of Newton's constant. These choices are inputs, and the later one-loop calculation simply keeps this already-present term. Thus the 'prediction' of Einstein gravity is built into the model definition.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 5, after Eq. (43)]
    "When the first term (coming from ∂µRabµν) is neglected, then we obtain the equation for zero torsion ... It follows that by neglecting the derivative term (the first term in (41)) in the functional integration over ω, we obtain in the leading order of the ¯h expansion the Einstein gravity. This could also be seen as a consequence of neglecting the first (Yang–Mills) term in the Yang–Mills action (36) and taking into account only the second (Palatini) term."

    The load-bearing step in deriving Einstein gravity is the sentence 'by neglecting the derivative term (the first term in (41))'. That first term contains ∂µRabµν, the Yang-Mills field-strength contribution; it is not shown to be small in any expansion parameter, and it is precisely the part that carries the gauge dynamics of ω. The conclusion is therefore equivalent to the assumption that the Yang-Mills term is negligible. The paper itself acknowledges this equivalence ('could also be seen as...'), so the advertised result reduces by construction to dropping an input term.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, 'Einstein gravity can be considered as an approximation to gauge theory,' is supported by two built-in choices rather than by a derivation. First, the SO(1,4) Yang-Mills Lagrangian is decomposed in Eq. (36), and the Einstein-Hilbert term is identified as the second term only after choosing the metric to be the vierbein metric (37) and fixing σ² = λ²/(8πG). This puts the target result into the starting Lagrangian. Second, the one-loop functional integration over ω in Section 5 reaches Einstein gravity only after dropping the first term in Eq. (41), which contains the derivative of the SO(1,3) curvature and is the Yang-Mills kinetic part. The text states that this is 'a consequence of neglecting the first (Yang-Mills) term ... and taking into account only the second (Palatini) term.' No small parameter or symmetry justifies that neglect, so the 'approximation' is a truncation chosen to isolate the already-planted Einstein term. The remainder of the paper, on Chern-Simons wave functions in Abelian models and stochastic self-duality, is substantial and independent, but it does not repair the circularity of the headline gravity derivation. The one-loop counterterm set (48) is also asserted rather than computed, but that is a completeness gap rather than a circularity. On balance, the main result reduces by construction to the model's inputs, giving a circularity score of 8.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities. Its free parameters are dominated by the arbitrary gauge coupling and the hand-set scale sigma, which is fixed to match Newton's constant. The central axioms are the SO(1,n) action, the vierbein identification, and the unjustified neglect of a Yang-Mills term, which together make the 'emergence' of Einstein gravity a restatement of an input rather than a new derivation.

free parameters (3)
  • sigma (SO(1,n) generator rescaling parameter) = sigma^2 = lambda^2/(8 pi G), chosen to match Newton's constant
    Introduced in Eq. (29) to rescale generators; later fixed in Section 4 so that Eq. (36) contains the Einstein-Hilbert term with the physical gravitational constant. This is an input, not a prediction.
  • lambda (Yang-Mills coupling) = unfixed bare coupling
    The Yang-Mills coupling is left free; the paper notes arbitrariness in coupling constants. It is related to sigma via sigma^2 = lambda^2/(8 pi G).
  • gamma (regularization parameter for CS state normalization) = gamma hbar -> 0 (or complex continuation)
    Introduced in Eq. (25) to make psi normalizable; the physical limit is obtained by analytic continuation. This is a regulator, not a physical parameter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The SO(1,n) Yang-Mills action with the o(1,n)-valued connection is the fundamental unified action.
    The entire program assumes this model, citing [1,2,3,4,7,8]. Stated in Section 4, Eq. (28).
  • domain assumption Identification of the connection component h_a^mu with the vierbein via the metric ansatz g_mu nu = h_mu^a eta_ab h_nu^b (Eq. 37).
    This is the key step that turns the SO(1,4) connection into geometry; the paper itself calls the decomposition 'ad hoc'.
  • ad hoc to paper The neglect of the first term in Eq. (41) (the derivative of the Yang-Mills curvature) in the functional integration over omega.
    Without this truncation the zero-torsion solution and the Einstein-Hilbert action do not emerge; no controlling parameter is given.
  • domain assumption The stochastic quantization interpretation (Brownian motion / analytic continuation) from refs [43-45] is valid in the Lorentzian setting.
    The paper uses the stochastic representation of Section 3 without proof of existence for the non-Abelian model in Minkowski signature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chern-Simons States in $SO(1,n)$ Yang-Mills Gauge Theory of Quantum Gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DHXVI5AM

@misc{pith2026250819658,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chern-Simons States in $SO(1,n)$ Yang-Mills Gauge Theory of Quantum Gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DHXVI5AM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.19658}
}
abstract

We discuss a quantization of the Yang--Mills theory with an internal symmetry group $SO(1,n)$ treated as a unified theory of all interactions. In one-loop calculations, we show that Einstein gravity can be considered as an approximation to gauge theory. We discuss the role of the Chern-Simons wave functions in the quantization.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [48]

    Behavior in strong fields of Euclidean gauge theories

    Haba, Z. Behavior in strong fields of Euclidean gauge theories. II. Phys. Rev. 1984, D29, 1716

    work page 1984

  2. [1]

    Integral formalism for gauge fields

    Yang, C.N. Integral formalism for gauge fields. Phys. Rev. Lett.1974, 33, 445

    work page 1974

  3. [2]

    Higher-dimensional unifications of gravitation and gauge theo- ries

    Cho, Y.M. Higher-dimensional unifications of gravitation and gauge theo- ries. J. Math. Phys.1975, 16, 2029

    work page 1975

  4. [3]

    Non Abelian gauge fields as Nambu-Goldstone fields

    Cho, Y.M.; Freund, P.G.O. Non Abelian gauge fields as Nambu-Goldstone fields. Phys. Rev.1975, D12, 1711

    work page 1975

  5. [4]

    Conformal gravity as a gauge theory

    MacDowell, S.W.; Mansouri, F. Conformal gravity as a gauge theory. Phys. Rev. Lett.1977, 38, 739

    work page 1977

  6. [5]

    Supergravity as a Yang–Mills theory

    van Nieuwenhuizen, P. Supergravity as a Yang–Mills theory. In 50 Years of Yang-Mills Theory ; t Hooft, G., Ed

    work page

  7. [6]

    A Chern-Simons action for three- dimensional anti-de Sitter supergravity theories

    Achucarro, A.; Townsend, P.K. A Chern-Simons action for three- dimensional anti-de Sitter supergravity theories. Phys. Lett. 1986, 180, 89

    work page 1986

  8. [7]

    On unification of gravity and gauge interactions

    Chamseddine, A.H.; Mukhanov, V. On unification of gravity and gauge interactions. J. High Energy Phys.2016, 2016, 20

    work page 2016

Show all 49 references
  1. [8]

    Konitopoulos, S.; Roumeliot, D.; Zoupanos, G.; Unification of gravity and internal interactions. Fort. Phys.2024 , 72, 2300226

    2024

  2. [9]

    Unity of all elementary-particle forces

    Georgi, H.; Glashow, S.L. Unity of all elementary-particle forces. Phys. Rev. Lett.1974, 32, 438

    1974

  3. [10]

    Lepton number as the fourth “color”

    Pati, J.C.; Salam, A. Lepton number as the fourth “color”. Phys. Rev. 1974, D10, 275

    1974

  4. [11]

    Stelle, K.S.; West, P.C.; Spontaneously broken de Sitter symmetry and the gravitational holonomy group. Phys. Rev.1980, D21, 1466

    1980

  5. [12]

    Riemann-Einstein structure from volume and gauge symmetry

    Wilczek, F. Riemann-Einstein structure from volume and gauge symmetry. Phys. Rev. Lett.1998, 80, 4851

    1998

  6. [13]

    Gravitational theory without the cos- mological constant problem

    Guendelman, E.I.; Kaganovich, A.B. Gravitational theory without the cos- mological constant problem. Phys. Rev.1997, D55, 5970

    1997

  7. [14]

    Small-scale structure of the space-time as the origin of the gravitational constant

    Townsend, P.K. Small-scale structure of the space-time as the origin of the gravitational constant. Phys. Rev.1977, D15, 2795

    1977

  8. [15]

    Gravity and unification: A review

    Krasnov, K.; Percacci, R. Gravity and unification: A review. Class. Quant. Grav. 2018, 35, 143001

    2018

  9. [16]

    Collider signatures of mirror fermions in the framework of a left-right mirror model

    Chakdar, S.; Ghosh, K.; Nandi, S.; Rai, S.K. Collider signatures of mirror fermions in the framework of a left-right mirror model. Phys. Rev. 2013, D88, 095005. 15

    2013

  10. [17]

    Gravi-weak unification

    Nesti, F.; Percacci, R. Gravi-weak unification. J. Phys.2008, A41, 075405

    2008

  11. [18]

    Spontaneous Sym- metry Breaking in Graviweak Theory

    Alexander, S.; Alexandre, B.; Magueijo, J.; Pezzelle, M. Spontaneous Sym- metry Breaking in Graviweak Theory. , arXiv:2505.17935

  12. [19]

    Pure gauge theory for the gravitational spin connection

    Alexander, S.; Manton, T. Pure gauge theory for the gravitational spin connection. Phys. Rev.2023, D107, 064065

    2023

  13. [20]

    New variables for classical and quantum gravity

    Ashtekar, A. New variables for classical and quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1986, 57, 2244

    1986

  14. [21]

    Covariant action for Ashtekar’s form of canonical gravity

    Jacobson, T.; Smolin, L. Covariant action for Ashtekar’s form of canonical gravity. Class. Quantum Grav.1988, 5, 583

    1988

  15. [22]

    A Lagrangian basis for Ashtekar’s reformulation of canonical gravity

    Samuel, J. A Lagrangian basis for Ashtekar’s reformulation of canonical gravity. Pramana J. Phys.1987, 28, L429

    1987

  16. [23]

    Gauge theory of the de Sitter group and the Ashtekar formulation

    Nieto, J.A.; Obregon, O.; Socorro, J. Gauge theory of the de Sitter group and the Ashtekar formulation. Phys. Rev.1994, D50, R3583

    1994

  17. [24]

    Self-dual variables, semi-definite action, and discrete transforma- tions in fourdimensional quantum gravity

    Soo, C. Self-dual variables, semi-definite action, and discrete transforma- tions in fourdimensional quantum gravity. Phys. Rev.1995, D52, 3484

    1995

  18. [25]

    Fermion path integrals and topological phases

    Witten, E. Fermion path integrals and topological phases. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2016, 88, 035001

    2016

  19. [26]

    Parity violation and gauge noninvariance of the effective gauge field action in three dimensions

    Redlich, A.N. Parity violation and gauge noninvariance of the effective gauge field action in three dimensions. Phys. Rev.1984, D29, 2366

    1984

  20. [27]

    Conformal model of gravitons

    Donoghue, J.F. Conformal model of gravitons. Phys. Rev. 2017, D96, 004006

    2017

  21. [28]

    Is the spin connection confined or condensed? Phys

    Donoghue, J.F. Is the spin connection confined or condensed? Phys. Rev. 2017, D96, 044003

    2017

  22. [29]

    Gauge assisted quadratic gravity:a framework for UV complete quantum gravity

    Donoghue, J.F.; Menezes, G. Gauge assisted quadratic gravity:a framework for UV complete quantum gravity. Phys. Rev.2018, D97, 126005

    2018

  23. [30]

    QCD analogy for quantum gravity

    Holden, B.; Ren, J. QCD analogy for quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. 2016, D93, 124030

    2016

  24. [31]

    Gauge theories on a lattice

    Osterwalder, K.; Seiler, E. Gauge theories on a lattice. Ann. Phys. 1978, 110, 440

    1978

  25. [32]

    (2+1)-dimensional gravity as an exactly soluble system

    Witten, E. (2+1)-dimensional gravity as an exactly soluble system. Nucl. Phys. 1988, B311, 46

    1988

  26. [33]

    A note on the Chern-Simons and Kodama wavefunctions

    Witten, E. A note on the Chern-Simons and Kodama wavefunctions. arXiv 2003, arXiv:gr-qc/0306083

    2003 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Quantum field theory and the Jones polynomial

    Witten, E. Quantum field theory and the Jones polynomial. Commun. Math. Phys. 1989, 121, 351. 16

    1989

  28. [35]

    Quantization of Chern-Simons gauge theory with complex gauge group

    Witten, E. Quantization of Chern-Simons gauge theory with complex gauge group. Commun. Math. Phys.1991, 137, 29

    1991

  29. [36]

    Perturbative expansion of Chern-Simons theory with noncompact gauge group

    Bar-Natan, D.; Witten, E. Perturbative expansion of Chern-Simons theory with noncompact gauge group. Commun. Math. Phys.1991, 141, 423

    1991

  30. [37]

    Fractional statistics

    Greiter, M.; Wilczek, F. Fractional statistics. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 2024, 15, 131

    2024

  31. [38]

    Quantum field theories of vortices and anyons

    Fr¨ ohlich, J.; Marchetti, P.A. Quantum field theories of vortices and anyons. Commun. Math. Phys.1989, 121, 177

    1989

  32. [39]

    Loop space representation of general relativity

    Rovelli, C.; Smolin, L. Loop space representation of general relativity. Nucl. Phys. 1990, B331, 80

    1990

  33. [40]

    Chern-Simons states of photons and gravitons

    Haba, Z. Chern-Simons states of photons and gravitons. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 2025, 140, 271

    2025

  34. [41]

    ground state

    Haba, Z. Chern-Simons “ground state” from the path integral. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2503.18039

    2025 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Smoothness of time functions and the metric splitting of globally hyperbolic spacetimes

    Bernal, A.N.; Sanchez, M. Smoothness of time functions and the metric splitting of globally hyperbolic spacetimes. Commun. Math. Phys. 2005, 257, 43

    2005

  36. [43]

    State-dependent graviton noise in the equation of geodesic devi- ation

    Haba, Z. State-dependent graviton noise in the equation of geodesic devi- ation. Eur. Phys. J.2021, C81, 40

    2021

  37. [44]

    Functional formulation of quantum theory of a scalar field in a metric with Lorentzian and Euclidean signatures

    Haba, Z. Functional formulation of quantum theory of a scalar field in a metric with Lorentzian and Euclidean signatures. Entropy 2024, 26, 329

    2024

  38. [45]

    Lectures on Quantum Field Theory and Functional Integration; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023

    Haba, Z. Lectures on Quantum Field Theory and Functional Integration; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023

    2023

  39. [46]

    Functional Integration and Quantum Physics; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1981

    Simon, B. Functional Integration and Quantum Physics; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1981

    1981

  40. [47]

    Quantized gravitatinal field

    Schwinger, J. Quantized gravitatinal field. Phys. Rev.1963, 130, 1253

    1963

  41. [49]

    Quantum Field Theory; Cambridge Universitry Press1996

    Ryder, L.H. Quantum Field Theory; Cambridge Universitry Press1996. 17

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.