pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.19109 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · ✦ hep-th · math-ph· math.MP

Recognition: unknown

Hamiltonian formulation for scalar and two-form gauge fields coupled to 3d gravity

Omar Rodr\'iguez-Tzompantzi
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th math-phmath.MP
keywords Hamiltonian formulation3D gravitygauge fieldsDirac-Bergmann analysisfirst-class constraintsdiffeomorphismsPoincaré symmetriesDirac brackets
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Hamiltonian generator of gauge symmetries reproduces spacetime diffeomorphisms and local Poincaré symmetries on shell for scalar and two-form fields coupled to 3D Einstein-Cartan gravity.

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

This paper develops the full Hamiltonian formulation for a topological matter system in three-dimensional spacetime consisting of a scalar gauge field and a rank-2 antisymmetric gauge field coupled to Einstein-Cartan gravity. It carries out the Dirac-Bergmann constraint analysis to classify first- and second-class constraints and compute their Poisson bracket algebra. The central step is the explicit construction of the Hamiltonian generator of gauge symmetries on the complete set of canonical variables. This generator, with its exact number of gauge parameters, maps to the spacetime diffeomorphism and local Poincaré symmetries when evaluated on shell, while the reduced phase space is shown to possess exactly three reducibility conditions on the first-class constraints that fix the correct physical degrees of freedom count. The Dirac brackets then supply the fundamental symplectic structure.

Core claim

The Hamiltonian generator of gauge symmetries for the coupled system contains the precise number of gauge parameters and, via a mapping of those parameters, reproduces on-shell the spacetime diffeomorphism and local Poincaré symmetries. The reduced phase space admits exactly three reducibility conditions for the first-class constraints that guarantee consistency and the correct count of physical degrees of freedom, with the Dirac brackets establishing the fundamental symplectic structure on that space.

What carries the argument

The Hamiltonian generator of gauge symmetries expressed on the full set of canonical variables, together with the three reducibility conditions on the first-class constraints.

If this is right

  • The coupled model possesses the complete expected symmetry structure of spacetime diffeomorphisms and local Poincaré transformations.
  • The reduced phase space is consistent with the correct number of physical degrees of freedom.
  • The Dirac brackets define the fundamental symplectic structure on the reduced phase space.
  • The constraint algebra closes in a manner that supports the topological character of the matter-gravity system.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same Dirac-Bergmann procedure could be repeated for other topological matter couplings in 3D gravity to test whether three reducibility conditions appear generically.
  • The explicit generator offers a starting point for canonical quantization of the system by providing the correct gauge-fixing and reduced symplectic form.
  • The on-shell reproduction of diffeomorphisms suggests that the matter fields are fully absorbed into the gravitational symmetries without introducing independent local degrees of freedom.

Load-bearing premise

That the three reducibility conditions identified for the first-class constraints are sufficient to guarantee consistency and the correct physical degrees of freedom count for the entire gravitating matter system.

What would settle it

An explicit count of physical degrees of freedom after imposing the three reducibility conditions that differs from the expected value for this topological coupling, or a set of field configurations where the mapped gauge transformations fail to reproduce diffeomorphisms.

read the original abstract

We develop a systematic Hamiltonian formulation for a gravitating topological matter system in three-dimensional spacetime, coupling a scalar gauge field and a rank-2 antisymmetric gauge field to Einstein--Cartan gravity. We perform the Dirac--Bergmann analysis, systematically finding the full structure of the constraints, classifying them into first- and second-class ones, and computing their Poisson bracket algebra. Furthermore, we write down the explicit expression for the Hamiltonian generator of gauge symmetries on the full set of canonical variables, containing the exact number of gauge parameters, and demonstrate that, through a mapping of the gauge parameters, these gauge transformations reproduce on-shell the spacetime diffeomorphism and local Poincar\'e symmetries, thereby establishing the full symmetry structure of the coupled model. Our canonical analysis further reveals that the reduced phase-space admits exactly three reducibility conditions for the first-class constraints, which guarantee the consistency of the gravitating matter system by ensuring a correct count of physical degrees of freedom. The fundamental symplectic structure on the reduced phase-space is established through the explicit computation of the Dirac brackets.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper develops a systematic Hamiltonian formulation for a gravitating topological matter system in three-dimensional spacetime, coupling a scalar gauge field and a rank-2 antisymmetric gauge field to Einstein-Cartan gravity. It performs the Dirac-Bergmann analysis to determine the full constraint structure, classifies constraints into first- and second-class, computes their Poisson bracket algebra, constructs the explicit Hamiltonian generator of gauge symmetries containing the exact number of gauge parameters, and shows via parameter mapping that these reproduce on-shell the spacetime diffeomorphisms and local Poincaré symmetries. The analysis identifies exactly three reducibility conditions on the first-class constraints to ensure consistency and the correct physical degrees of freedom count, and computes the Dirac brackets to establish the fundamental symplectic structure on the reduced phase space.

Significance. If the explicit calculations hold, the work provides a complete canonical analysis of the coupled system that confirms its full symmetry structure and degrees of freedom. The construction of the gauge generator and its on-shell equivalence to diffeomorphisms and Poincaré transformations is a central technical achievement. The identification of the three reducibility conditions together with the Dirac brackets supplies a precise account of the reduced phase space. Such systematic treatments are valuable for 3d gravity-matter models and support further study of their quantization or topological properties.

minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract summarizes the procedure and results at a high level but omits any explicit expressions for the constraints, their algebra, or the gauge generator. Adding one or two key formulas would improve immediate accessibility without lengthening the abstract unduly.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive and accurate summary of our manuscript, as well as for the recommendation of minor revision. We appreciate the recognition of the technical contributions, including the constraint analysis, gauge generator construction, and identification of the reducibility conditions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper performs a standard Dirac-Bergmann constraint analysis on the coupled scalar/two-form + 3d gravity system, classifies constraints, computes their algebra, constructs the gauge generator, and verifies on-shell reproduction of diffeomorphisms and local Poincaré symmetries via explicit parameter mapping. The three reducibility conditions are identified directly from the first-class constraints to obtain the correct physical DOF count on the reduced phase space, with Dirac brackets computed explicitly. None of these steps reduce by construction to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations; the central results follow from the canonical procedure applied to the given action without circular renaming or ansatz smuggling.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the standard applicability of the Dirac-Bergmann algorithm to first-order gravity actions and on the Einstein-Cartan formulation of 3D gravity; no free parameters or new postulated entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Einstein-Cartan formulation of three-dimensional gravity
    The model is defined by coupling matter fields to Einstein-Cartan gravity as stated in the abstract.
  • standard math Dirac-Bergmann constraint analysis applies to the system
    Used to classify constraints, compute their algebra, and construct the gauge generator.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5485 in / 1328 out tokens · 40719 ms · 2026-05-10T02:45:41.837469+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Notably, the presence of exactly three reducibility conditions among the first-class constraints leads to a vanishing count of local degrees of freedom

    Thus, the action (7) defines a topological gauge theory; as expected, there are no local degrees of freedom. Notably, the presence of exactly three reducibility conditions among the first-class constraints leads to a vanishing count of local degrees of freedom. This result is consistent with the fact that, in 2 + 1 dimensions, the coupling of the scalar a...

  2. [2]

    Deser, R

    S. Deser, R. Jackiw, Gerard ’t Hooft, Three-dimensional Einstein gravity: Dynamics of flat space, Annals Phys. 152 (1984) 220

    1984

  3. [3]

    Deser and R

    S. Deser and R. Jackiw, Three-dimensional cosmological gravity: dynamics of constant curvature, Ann. of Phys. 153 (1984) 405–416

    1984

  4. [4]

    11 (1994) 1087-1132

    Peter Peldan, Actions for gravity, with generalizations: A Review, Class.Quant.Grav. 11 (1994) 1087-1132

    1994

  5. [5]

    Witten, 2+1 dimensional gravity as an exactly soluble system, Nucl

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

    1988

  6. [6]

    Ach´ uarro and P

    A. Ach´ uarro and P. Townsend, A Chern-Simons Action for Three-Dimensional anti-De Sitter Supergravity Theories, Phys. Lett. B 180 (1986) 89

    1986

  7. [7]

    Horne, E

    J.H. Horne, E. Witten, Conformal gravity in three-dimensions as a gauge theory. Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 501 (1989)

    1989

  8. [8]

    Three-Dimensional Gravity Revisited

    E. Witten, Three-Dimensional Gravity Revisited, arXiv:0706.3359

    work page Pith review arXiv

  9. [9]

    Manuel-Cabrera, Hamiltonian dynamics of an exotic action for gravity in three dimensions, Annals Phys

    Alberto Escalante and J. Manuel-Cabrera, Hamiltonian dynamics of an exotic action for gravity in three dimensions, Annals Phys. 343 (2014) 27-39

    2014

  10. [10]

    Carlip and J.E

    S. Carlip and J.E. Nelson, Equivalent quantizations of (2 + 1)-dimensional gravity, Phys. Lett. B 324 (1994) 299

    1994

  11. [11]

    Carlip, Quantum Gravity in 2+1 Dimensions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998)

    S. Carlip, Quantum Gravity in 2+1 Dimensions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998)

    1998

  12. [12]

    K. Noui, A. Perez, Three-dimensional loop quantum gravity: physical scalar product and spin foam models. Class. Quantum Gravity 22, 1739–1762 (2005)

    2005

  13. [13]

    Kim and M

    J. Kim and M. Porrati, On a Canonical Quantization of 3d Anti de Sitter Pure Gravity, JHEP 10 (2015) 096

    2015

  14. [14]

    6 (1989) L185

    Abhay Ashtekar, Viqar Husain, Carlo Rovelli, Joseph Samuel, Lee Smolin, (2+1)-Quantum Gravity as a Toy Model for the (3+1) Theory, Class.Quant.Grav. 6 (1989) L185

    1989

  15. [15]

    8 (1991) 5-18

    Steven Carlip, Measuring the metric in (2+1)-dimensional quantum gravity, Class.Quant.Grav. 8 (1991) 5-18

    1991

  16. [16]

    Steven Carlip, Observables, Gauge Invariance, and Time in (2+1)-dimensional Quantum Gravity, Phys.Rev.D 42 (1990) 2647-2654

    1990

  17. [17]

    Boulware, S

    D. Boulware, S. Deser, Can gravitation have a finite range?, Phys. Rev. D6 (1972) 3368

    1972

  18. [18]

    H.Leutwyler, A 2+1 dimensional model for the quantum theory of gravity, Nuo. Cim. 42A (1966) 159

    1966

  19. [19]

    Hawking and R

    S.W. Hawking and R. Penrose, The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and Cosmology, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 314 (1970) 529

    1970

  20. [20]

    Perlmutter et al., Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae, Astrophys

    S. Perlmutter et al., Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae, Astrophys. J. 517 (1999) 565

    1999

  21. [21]

    Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes, Commun

    S.W. Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes, Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975) 199

    1975

  22. [22]

    Almheiri, T

    A . Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, S. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini, The entropy of Hawking radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93 (2021) 035002

    2021

  23. [23]

    Marletto and V

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, Gravitationally Induced Entanglement between Two Massive Particles is Sufficient Evidence of Quantum Effects in Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 240402

    2017

  24. [24]

    Bose et al., Spin Entanglement Witness for Quantum Gravity, Phys

    S. Bose et al., Spin Entanglement Witness for Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 240401

    2017

  25. [25]

    Vera N. Smolyaninova, Jonathon Cartelli, Nathaniel Christopher, Benjamin Kist, Jonathan Perry et al., Study of Effective 2+1 Dimensional Gravity in Ferrofluid-Based Hyperbolic Metamaterials, Annalen Phys. 536 (2024) 3, 2300408

    2024

  26. [26]

    Hyperbolic metamaterials and massive Klein-Gordon equation in (2+1)-dimensional de Sitter spacetime, Phys

    Tekin B. Hyperbolic metamaterials and massive Klein-Gordon equation in (2+1)-dimensional de Sitter spacetime, Phys. Rev. D 2021, 104, 105004

    2021

  27. [27]

    Haldane, Geometrical Description of the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect, Phys.Rev.Lett

    F.D.M. Haldane, Geometrical Description of the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect, Phys.Rev.Lett. 107 (2011) 116801

    2011

  28. [28]

    Smolyaninov, Vera N

    Igor I. Smolyaninov, Vera N. Smolyaninova, Analogue Quantum Gravity in Hyperbolic Metamaterials, Universe 8 (2022) 4

    2022

  29. [29]

    Ashtekar and J

    A. Ashtekar and J. D. Romano, Chern-Simons and Palatini Actions and (2+1) Gravity, Phys. Lett. B 229 (1989) 56-60

    1989

  30. [30]

    T. T. Burwick, A. H. Chamseddine and K. Meissner, Matter Coupling and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking in Topological Gravity, Phys. Lett. B 284 (1992) 11-16

    1992

  31. [31]

    C´ ardenas, O

    M. C´ ardenas, O. Fuentealba, C. Mart´ ınez and R. Troncoso, Gravity coupled to a scalar field from a Chern-Simons action, JHEP 02 (2023) 058

    2023

  32. [32]

    Carlip and J

    S. Carlip and J. Gegenberg, Gravitating Topological Matter in (2+1)-Dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 424-432

    1991

  33. [33]

    Gegenberg, G

    J. Gegenberg, G. Kunstatter and H. P. Leivo, Topological matter coupled to gravity in (2+1)-dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 252 (1990) 381-386

    1990

  34. [34]

    Gegenberg and R

    J. Gegenberg and R. B. Mann, Gravity from topological field theory, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 024010

    1999

  35. [35]

    G. T. Horowitz: Exactly soluble diffeomorphism invariant theories. Comm. Math. Phys. 125, No. 3 (1989) 417–437

    1989

  36. [36]

    G. T. Horowitz and Mark Srednicki, A Quantum Field Theoretic Description of Linking Numbers and Their Generalization, Commun.Math.Phys. 130 (1990) 83-94

    1990

  37. [37]

    Shou-Cheng Zhang, To see a world in a grain of sand, ArXiv:hep-th/0210162

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  38. [38]

    Xiao-Gang Wen, Colloquium: Zoo of quantum-topological phases of matter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 042004 (2017)

    2017

  39. [39]

    Hasan and J.E

    M.Z. Hasan and J.E. Moore, Three-Dimensional Topological Insulators, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 2,55 (2011). 15

    2011

  40. [40]

    Palumbo, Fractional quantum hall effect for extended objects: from skyrmionic membranes to dyonic strings, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 124 (2022)

    G. Palumbo, Fractional quantum hall effect for extended objects: from skyrmionic membranes to dyonic strings, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, 124 (2022)

    2022

  41. [41]

    Giandomenico Palumbo and Nathan Goldman, Tensor Berry connections and their topological invariants, Phys.Rev.B 99 (2019) 4, 045154

    2019

  42. [42]

    M. Kalb, P. Ramond, Classical direct interstring action, Phys.Rev.D 9 (1974) 2273-2284

    1974

  43. [43]

    Freidel, S

    L. Freidel, S. Speziale, et al., SIGMA. Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications 8, 032 (2012)

    2012

  44. [44]

    Salam, E

    A. Salam, E. Sezgin, Supergravities in Diverse Dimensions (World Scientific, Singapore, 1989)

    1989

  45. [45]

    Meseret Asrat, Kalb-Ramond field, black holes and black strings in (2+1)D, JHEP 08 (2025) 135

    2025

  46. [46]

    J. C. Baez, in Geometry and Quantum Physics, edited by H. Gausterer, L. Pittner, and H. Grosse (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2000) pp. 25–93

    2000

  47. [47]

    Medeiros, R.R

    D.M. Medeiros, R.R. Landim and C.A.S. Almeida, Mass generation for nonAbelian antisymmetric tensor fields in a three- dimensional space-time, Phys.Rev.D 63 (2001) 127702

    2001

  48. [48]

    Aurilia, Y

    A. Aurilia, Y. Takahashi, Generalized Maxwell Equations and the Gauge Mixing Mechanism of Mass Generation, Prog.Theor.Phys. 66 (1981) 693

    1981

  49. [49]

    Cirio, G

    M. Cirio, G. Palumbo, and J. K. Pachos, (3+1)-dimensional topological quantum field theory from a tight-binding model of interacting spinless fermions, Phys. Rev. B 90, 085114 (2014)

    2014

  50. [50]

    A. Chan, T. L. Hughes, S. Ryu, and E. Fradkin, Effective field theories for topological insulators by functional bosonization, Phys. Rev. B 87, 085132 (2013)

    2013

  51. [51]

    Michael Pretko, Subdimensional particle structure of higher rankU(1) spin liquids, Phys. Rev. B 95, 115139 (2017)

    2017

  52. [52]

    Kristian Tyn Kai Chung and Michel J. P. Gingras, 2-Form U(1) Spin Liquids: Classical Model and Quantum Aspects, Phys. Rev. B 111, 064417 (2025)

    2025

  53. [53]

    Giandomenico Palumbo, Topological phases for extended objects: Semiclassical phase-space approach with tensorial coor- dinates, Phys.Rev.D 111 (2025) 2, 026010

    2025

  54. [54]

    82 (2010) 1959-2007

    Di Xiao, Ming-Che Chang and Qian Niu, Berry Phase Effects on Electronic Properties, Rev.Mod.Phys. 82 (2010) 1959-2007

    2010

  55. [55]

    Tomoya Hayata and Yoshimasa Hidaka, Kinetic derivation of generalized phase-space Chern-Simons theory, Phys.Rev.B 95 (2017) 12, 125137

    2017

  56. [56]

    P. M. A. Dirac, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics, Yeshiva University (1965)

    1965

  57. [57]

    P. M. A. Dirac, Generalized Hamiltonian dynamics. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 246, 326 (1958)

    1958

  58. [58]

    Bergmann, Non-linear field theories

    P.G. Bergmann, Non-linear field theories. Phys. Rev. 75, 680 (1949)

    1949

  59. [59]

    Bergmann, J.H.M

    P.G. Bergmann, J.H.M. Brunings, Non-linear field theories II. Canonical equations and quantization. Rev. Mod. Phys. 21, 480 (1949)

    1949

  60. [60]

    Bergmann, R

    P.G. Bergmann, R. Penfield, R. Schiller, H. Zatzkis, The Hamiltonian of the general theory of relativity with electromagnetic field. Phys. Rev. 80, 81 (1950)

    1950

  61. [61]

    Anderson and Peter G

    James L. Anderson and Peter G. Bergmann, Constraints in covariant field theories, Phys.Rev. 83 (1951) 1018-1025

    1951

  62. [62]

    Henneaux, C

    M. Henneaux, C. Teitelboim, Quantization of Gauge Systems (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992)

    1992

  63. [63]

    H. J. Rothe, K.D.Rothe, Classical and Quantum Dynamics of Constrained Hamiltonian Systems (World Scientific, Singa- pore, 2010)

    2010

  64. [64]

    Mann and Eugeniu M

    Robert B. Mann and Eugeniu M. Popescu, Scalar and tensorial topological matter coupled to (2+1)-dimensional gravity: A Classical theory and global charges, Class.Quant.Grav. 23 (2006) 3721-3746

    2006

  65. [65]

    and Pfeiffer, H

    Girelli, F. and Pfeiffer, H. and Popescu, E. M., Topological Higher Gauge Theory - from BF to BFCG theory, J.Math.Phys. 49 (2008) 032503

    2008

  66. [66]

    Mann and Eugeniu M

    Robert B. Mann and Eugeniu M. Popescu, Higher Gauge Theory and Gravity in (2+1) Dimensions, Int.J.Mod.Phys.A 22 (2007) 5155-5172

    2007

  67. [67]

    Blagojevic, Gravitation and gauge symmetries, IoP Publishing, Bristol, 2002

    M. Blagojevic, Gravitation and gauge symmetries, IoP Publishing, Bristol, 2002

    2002

  68. [68]

    Rabin Banerjee, Debraj Roy, Poincare gauge symmetries, hamiltonian symmetries and trivial gauge transformations, Phys.Rev.D 84 (2011) 124034

    2011

  69. [69]

    Utiyama, Invariant theoretical interpretation of interaction, Phys

    R. Utiyama, Invariant theoretical interpretation of interaction, Phys. Rev. 101 1597 (1956)

    1956

  70. [70]

    T. W. B. Kibble, Lorentz invariance and the gravitational field, J. Math. Phys. 2 212, (1961)

    1961

  71. [71]

    E. W. Mielke and P. Baekler, Topological gauge model of gravity with torsion, Phys. Lett. 156A, 399 (1991)

    1991

  72. [72]

    Blagojevic and M

    M. Blagojevic and M. Vasilic, 3-D gravity with torsion as a Chern-Simons gauge theory, Phys.Rev.D 68 (2003) 104023

    2003

  73. [73]

    Andrianopoli, B.L

    L. Andrianopoli, B.L. Cerchiai, R. Noris, L. Ravera and M. Trigiante, New torsional deformations of locally AdS3 space, Phys.Rev.D 108 (2023) 4, 4

    2023

  74. [74]

    A. C. da Silva, Lectures on Symplectic Geometry, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer (2008)

    2008

  75. [75]

    Jan Govaerts, Hamiltonian Reduction of First Order Actions, Int.J.Mod.Phys.A 5 (1990) 3625-3640

    1990

  76. [76]

    ‘t Hooft and M.J.G

    G. ‘t Hooft and M.J.G. Veltman, Regularization and Renormalization of Gauge Fields, Nucl. Phys. B 44 (1972) 189

    1972

  77. [77]

    Banerjee, H

    R. Banerjee, H. J. Rothe and K. D. Rothe, Phys. Lett. B 463 (1999) 248; J. Phys. A 33 (2000) 2059

    1999

  78. [78]

    Pons, D.C

    J.M. Pons, D.C. Salisbury, L.C. Shepley, Gauge transformations in the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formalisms of generally covariant theories, Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 658

    1997

  79. [79]

    Castellani, Symmetries in constrained Hamiltonian systems, Annals Phys

    L. Castellani, Symmetries in constrained Hamiltonian systems, Annals Phys. 143 (1982) 357

    1982

  80. [80]

    Ort´ ın, Gravity and strings, Cambridge University Press (2004)

    T. Ort´ ın, Gravity and strings, Cambridge University Press (2004)

    2004

Showing first 80 references.