REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 63 references
Magnetic Catalysis and Fermion Mass Generation in de Sitter Spacetime
T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read In de Sitter space, a uniform magnetic field can generate a dynamical fermion mass even for arbitrarily weak attraction, while Hubble expansion competes by restoring chiral symmetry.
desk verdict Solid NJL calculation with a qualitative result that survives scrutiny; the weak-coupling headline is a formal extrapolation, not a controlled prediction. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing object is the one-loop chiral condensate $\langle \bar\psi\psi\rangle$ of a free massive charged fermion in the Bunch–Davies vacuum, decomposed into Landau levels. Its mode functions involve Hankel functions $H^{(1,2)}_{1/2-im/H}(-\omega_n\eta)$, curved-space analogues of plane waves chosen to satisfy the Bunch–Davies vacuum condition; the index encodes curvature while the argument encodes the magnetic Landau energy $\omega_n^2=k_z^2+2neB$. In the large-field limit only the lowest Landau level survives, the condensate grows linearly in $eB$, and the UV divergence becomes logarithmic, a dimensional reduction that makes an arbitrarily weak attractive interaction sufficient. Feeding this condensate into the mean-field gap equation $\Delta_*/G = -\langle \bar\psi\psi\rangle|_{\Delta_*}$ produces the analytic phase boundaries and the numerical phase diagram.
What would settle it
Compute the gap using a running coupling instead of the constant NJL coupling, for example by solving the ladder Schwinger–Dyson equation for QED in a strong magnetic field on de Sitter space. If no nonzero condensate appears for $G\Lambda^2\to 0$ and large $eB$, or if the phase transition becomes first-order anywhere in the $(H/\Lambda, eB/\Lambda^2)$ plane, the paper's central claim would be contradicted by a more controlled calculation.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper establishes that in de Sitter space a uniform magnetic field catalyzes chiral symmetry breaking in the NJL model, while Hubble curvature acts to restore it. In the large-field regime the condensate survives in the limit $G\Lambda^2\to 0$ as long as $G e B_{\mathrm{phys}}\gg 1$, with gap $\Delta_* = e^{-\gamma_E/2}\,\Lambda\,e^{-2\pi^2/(G eB_{\mathrm{phys}})}$ as $H\to 0$. The phase boundary in this regime is governed analytically by $G H^2 e\tilde{B}\,(2\log\tilde{\Lambda}+\gamma_E)/(4\pi^2)=1$, and numerical solution of the gap equation shows continuous, second-order transitions for variations of both the magnetic field and the Hubble parameter.
Load-bearing premise
The argument assumes the attractive four-fermion interaction has exactly the same strength at every energy scale; if instead the interaction weakens as energy rises, the strong-field gap at arbitrarily weak coupling could be much smaller or vanish.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- At $eB_{\mathrm{phys}}\gg H^2$, the gap equation admits a nonzero solution even for $G\Lambda^2\to 0$, so the flat-space critical coupling $G\Lambda^2>4\pi^2$ is not required in a strong magnetic field.
- For fixed magnetic field, increasing $H$ drives $\Delta_*$ continuously to zero, so the phase transition in the Hubble parameter is second order, matching the expectation of a thermal bath at temperature $H/2\pi$.
- Varying $eB$ at fixed $H$ also gives a continuous transition, and the analytic large-field phase boundary agrees with the numerical solution of the full gap equation.
- The phase diagram implies a condensed phase at $G\Lambda^2=10$ for sufficiently large $eB/\Lambda^2$ even when no condensate exists at $B=0$.
- Within the model, a magnetic field generated during inflation with $\tilde{B}\sim 10^3$–$10^6$ could induce chiral condensation inside a Hubble patch, though the authors emphasize that quantitative cosmological predictions require going beyond the NJL model.
Reading between the lines
- Beyond the paper: because lowest-Landau-level dimensional reduction is kinematic, the same competition between $H$ and $B$ should appear for other four-fermion interactions or charged scalar fields; a direct calculation in those models would test the generalization.
- Beyond the paper: the fixed-time phase diagram treats $B_{\mathrm{phys}}$ as constant, but a realistic inflationary magnetic field decays with time; the system would sweep across the phase diagram, and whether the condensate tracks the instantaneous equilibrium or lags behind is left open.
- Beyond the paper: the exponentially small gap at weak coupling implies that if the only attraction is a running gauge interaction, the mass produced during inflation is likely negligible; a quantitative statement would require a UV completion and an account of higher-dimensional operators.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. This paper studies chiral symmetry breaking in the Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model for a charged Dirac fermion in de Sitter spacetime in the presence of a uniform comoving magnetic field. The authors derive the Bunch--Davies mode functions of the fermion, compute the regularized chiral condensate, and solve the mean-field gap equation analytically in the small- and large-magnetic-field limits and in the large-curvature limit, with numerical phase diagrams for intermediate parameters. Their main findings are that the Hubble expansion tends to restore chiral symmetry, that the magnetic field enhances the condensate through the lowest-Landau-level mechanism, that the resulting transitions are continuous, and that in the formal large-B limit condensation can occur for arbitrarily weak four-fermion coupling.
Significance. If the results are correct, the paper provides a treatment of magnetic catalysis in de Sitter space without a small-curvature approximation, and it supplies explicit mode-function and proper-time identities that reproduce known flat-space results in the H\to 0 limit. Strengths include the analytic control in the limiting regimes, the numerical search for multiple solutions, and the unusually candid discussion of the effective-theory limitations in Secs. 2.2 and 4. The significance is tempered by the fact that the weak-coupling regime that makes the headline claim striking lies outside the controlled domain of the NJL contact interaction, and by the scheme dependence of the finite part of the condensate.
major comments (3)
- [Sec. 3.1.2, Eq. (3.12), and Sec. 3.2] The claim that condensation occurs 'even when GΛ²→0' is not a controlled consequence of the NJL model. For fixed H/Λ, Eq. (3.12) requires eB_phys/Λ² ≳ 4π²/[GΛ²(2log(Λ/H)+γ_E)], which for GΛ² ≪ 1 pushes the critical field far above the cutoff scale. This violates the condition √(eB_phys) ≪ Λ stated in Sec. 2.2, and Sec. 4 concedes that constant G is unjustified for eB_phys ≫ Λ². The 'remarkable point' in Sec. 3.2 is therefore an extrapolation of the lowest-Landau-level formula beyond its domain rather than a prediction of the controlled effective theory. Please either move this statement to the formal-diagnostic discussion with the domain restriction stated immediately beside it, or supply a UV completion that justifies constant G at eB_phys ≫ Λ².
- [Sec. 2.1.2, Eqs. (2.25)-(2.27)] The resummation that replaces the asymptotic 1/z and 1/z³ terms by 1/√(z²+m̃²) and m̃/(z²+m̃²)^{3/2} is an ad hoc IR regulator choice. In particular, the coefficient of the 1/z³ term in Eq. (2.25) changes from (1+m̃²)m̃ to m̃, which is legitimate for the UV-divergent part but contributes to the finite part. Since the gap equation uses this finite part directly, the constants γ_E and 2log(Λ/H) appearing in the phase-boundary conditions (3.4) and (3.12) are scheme-dependent. The authors note one consequence (the nonmonotonicity near Λ̃=1 in Sec. 3.1.1) but do not quantify the sensitivity of the phase boundary. Please demonstrate that the qualitative phase structure—existence of a transition and its second-order character—is stable under alternative choices of the IR subtraction, or state the resulting uncertainty in the critical couplings.
- [Sec. 3, fixed-time mean-field approximation] The phase diagram is obtained by evaluating the gap equation at a fixed conformal time η with B_phys(η) treated as a parameter. Because the physical magnetic field decays as a^{-2}, this is a quasi-static approximation. The paper should state more explicitly that the diagram describes instantaneous minima of a fixed-time effective potential, not a dynamical transition, and should comment on the conditions under which the quasi-static approximation is reliable.
minor comments (3)
- [Fig. 2 caption] The caption reads 'dependence of the chiral condensate oneB/Λ²'; this should read 'on eB/Λ²'.
- [Sec. 3.1.2, after Eq. (3.16)] The sentence 'Taking H→0 directly in Eq. (3.13)' would benefit from a short explanation of the asymptotic scaling Δ/H→∞ used to evaluate the digamma functions, since the limit involves a ratio of two small quantities.
- [Sec. 2.2, paragraph on controlled regimes] The caveat that H/Λ→∞ and eB/Λ²→∞ are formal diagnostic limits is welcome and should be referenced again in Sec. 4 when the 'interesting observation' about weak coupling is summarized, so that the domain restriction is not lost in the conclusion.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the gap equation and phase boundaries are derived from explicit mode-function computations, not fitted inputs or self-citations.
full rationale
The paper's derivation chain is self-contained: mode functions are solved from the Dirac equation in de Sitter with the Bunch-Davies condition (Sec. 2.1.1); the chiral condensate is computed by point-splitting with an explicit two-step regularization (Sec. 2.1.2); the NJL effective potential and gap equation are obtained by a standard Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation and mean-field approximation (Sec. 2.3); and the analytic phase-boundary conditions (3.4) and (3.12) follow by expansion of these computed expressions, with the numerical phase diagram obtained by solving Eq. (3.18). No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. The only self-citation is ref. [54], used as a contextual comparison ('This behavior was also reported in previous studies without a magnetic field [53, 54]'), not as load-bearing justification for the new magnetic-field computation. The paper's own caveats about eB > Lambda^2 and the constant-G assumption (Secs. 2.2 and 4) restrict the domain of controlled validity but do not make any step circular; they are external-validity limitations. The flat-space limits (e.g., Eqs. (3.7) and (3.16)) are checked against known independent results, confirming rather than presupposing consistency. The claimed result therefore has independent content relative to its inputs.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (2)
- Four-fermion coupling G
- UV cutoff Lambda
assumptions (6)
- domain assumption Bunch-Davies vacuum is the correct vacuum for quantizing the charged fermion
- domain assumption The NJL model with a constant local four-fermion coupling describes the chiral interaction
- domain assumption Mean-field approximation: auxiliary fields sigma and pi_a are treated as constants
- ad hoc to paper The IR subtraction in Eq. (2.25) with regulator sqrt(z^2 + mtilde^2) defines the finite part of the condensate
- ad hoc to paper Fixed-time effective potential with B_phys treated as constant describes the phase structure
- standard math Point-splitting with Wilson line gives the gauge-invariant fermion bilinear
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Magnetic Catalysis and Fermion Mass Generation in de Sitter Spacetime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CBX2KOYL
@misc{pith2026260807270,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Magnetic Catalysis and Fermion Mass Generation in de Sitter Spacetime},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CBX2KOYL}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07270}
}
read the original abstract
We consider the dynamics of a charged fermion in de Sitter space in the presence of a uniform background magnetic field, and discuss magnetic catalysis of chiral symmetry breaking using the Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model. We evaluate the mode functions of the charged fermion field in this background by imposing the Bunch--Davies vacuum condition. The gap equation is solved in the mean-field approximation. We derive analytic expressions for the gap in several limiting regimes, such as the large-magnetic-field and large-curvature limits. We find that the curvature effect restores chiral symmetry, whereas the magnetic field enhances chiral symmetry breaking through the conventional mechanism of magnetic catalysis. The phase structure associated with chiral symmetry breaking is revealed by numerical calculations.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
R. Durrer and A. Neronov,Cosmological Magnetic Fields: Their Generation, Evolution and Observation,Astron. Astrophys. Rev.21(2013) 62 [1303.7121]
arXiv 2013
-
[2]
A. Kandus, K.E. Kunze and C.G. Tsagas,Primordial magnetogenesis,Phys. Rept.505 (2011) 1 [1007.3891]
arXiv 2011
-
[3]
M.S. Turner and L.M. Widrow,Inflation-produced, large-scale magnetic fields,Phys. Rev. D 37(1988) 2743
work page 1988
-
[4]
Ratra,Cosmological ’seed’ magnetic field from inflation,Astrophys
B. Ratra,Cosmological ’seed’ magnetic field from inflation,Astrophys. J. Lett.391(1992) L1
1992
-
[5]
V. Demozzi, V. Mukhanov and H. Rubinstein,Magnetic fields from inflation?,JCAP08 (2009) 025 [0907.1030]
arXiv 2009
-
[6]
M.M. Anber and L. Sorbo,Naturally inflating on steep potentials through electromagnetic dissipation,Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 043534 [0908.4089]
arXiv 2010
-
[7]
N. Barnaby, E. Pajer and M. Peloso,Gauge Field Production in Axion Inflation: Consequences for Monodromy, non-Gaussianity in the CMB, and Gravitational Waves at Interferometers,Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 023525 [1110.3327]
arXiv 2012
-
[8]
P. Adshead, J.T. Giblin, T.R. Scully and E.I. Sfakianakis,Magnetogenesis from axion inflation,JCAP1610(2016) 039 [1606.08474]
arXiv 2016
Show all 63 references
-
[9]
Talebian, A
A. Talebian, A. Nassiri-Rad and H. Firouzjahi,Primordial helical magnetic fields from inflation?,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 023528 [2111.02147]
2022 arXiv
-
[10]
Giovannini and M.E
M. Giovannini and M.E. Shaposhnikov,Primordial hypermagnetic fields and triangle anomaly,Phys. Rev. D57(1998) 2186 [hep-ph/9710234]
1998 arXiv
-
[11]
Giovannini and M.E
M. Giovannini and M.E. Shaposhnikov,Primordial magnetic fields, anomalous isocurvature fluctuations and big bang nucleosynthesis,Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 22 [hep-ph/9708303]
1998 arXiv
-
[12]
Kamada and A.J
K. Kamada and A.J. Long,Baryogenesis from decaying magnetic helicity,Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 063501 [1606.08891]
2016 arXiv
-
[13]
Domcke, B
V. Domcke, B. von Harling, E. Morgante and K. Mukaida,Baryogenesis from axion inflation,JCAP10(2019) 032 [1905.13318]
2019 arXiv
-
[14]
Kamada, F
K. Kamada, F. Uchida and J. Yokoyama,Baryon isocurvature constraints on the primordial hypermagnetic fields,JCAP04(2021) 034 [2012.14435]
2021 arXiv
-
[15]
Yanagihara, F
K. Yanagihara, F. Uchida, T. Fujita and S. Tsujikawa,Low-scale inflationary magnetogenesis without baryon isocurvature problem,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 083506 [2312.07938]
2024 arXiv
-
[16]
Y. Di, L. Bian and R.-G. Cai,Baryogenesis Induced by Magnetic Field Effects During the Electroweak Phase Transition,2409.16124
-
[17]
Boyer and A
T. Boyer and A. Neronov,Baryon asymmetry constraints on magnetic field from the Electroweak epoch,2504.07937
-
[18]
Hamada, K
Y. Hamada, K. Mukaida and F. Uchida,Symmetries of hot SM, magnetic flux baryogenesis from helicity decay,JHEP01(2026) 040 [2507.01576]
2026
-
[19]
Hamada, K
Y. Hamada, K. Mukaida and F. Uchida,Revisiting constraints on magnetogenesis from baryon asymmetry,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 083522 [2509.23858]. – 24 –
2026 arXiv
-
[20]
Fukuda, Y
H. Fukuda, Y. Hamada, K. Kamada, K. Mukaida and F. Uchida,Magnetic helicity, magnetic monopoles, and Higgs winding,JHEP03(2026) 127 [2509.25734]
2026
-
[21]
Caprini and L
C. Caprini and L. Sorbo,Adding helicity to inflationary magnetogenesis,JCAP10(2014) 056 [1407.2809]
2014 arXiv
-
[22]
Sharma, K
R. Sharma, K. Subramanian and T.R. Seshadri,Gravitational wave generation in a viable scenario of inflationary magnetogenesis,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 103526 [1912.12089]
2020 arXiv
-
[23]
Okano and T
S. Okano and T. Fujita,Chiral Gravitational Waves Produced in a Helical Magnetogenesis Model,JCAP03(2021) 026 [2005.13833]
2021 arXiv
-
[24]
Brandenburg, Y
A. Brandenburg, Y. He and R. Sharma,Simulations of Helical Inflationary Magnetogenesis and Gravitational Waves,Astrophys. J.922(2021) 192 [2107.12333]
2021 arXiv
-
[25]
Maiti, D
S. Maiti, D. Maity and L. Sriramkumar,Constraining inflationary magnetogenesis and reheating via GWs in light of PTA data,2401.01864
-
[26]
Atkins, D
B. Atkins, D. Chowdhury, A. Marriott-Best and G. Tasinato,Inflationary magnetogenesis beyond slow-roll and its induced gravitational waves,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 063534 [2507.01772]
2025 arXiv
-
[27]
Domcke and K
V. Domcke and K. Mukaida,Gauge Field and Fermion Production during Axion Inflation, JCAP11(2018) 020 [1806.08769]
2018 arXiv
-
[28]
Domcke, Y
V. Domcke, Y. Ema and K. Mukaida,Chiral Anomaly, Schwinger Effect, Euler-Heisenberg Lagrangian, and application to axion inflation,JHEP02(2020) 055 [1910.01205]
2020 arXiv
-
[29]
Gorbar, A.I
E.V. Gorbar, A.I. Momot, I.V. Rudenok, O.O. Sobol, S.I. Vilchinskii and I.V. Oleinikova, Chirality Production during Axion Inflation,Ukr. J. Phys.68(2023) 717 [2111.05848]
2023 arXiv
-
[30]
Gorbar, A.I
E.V. Gorbar, A.I. Momot, O.O. Prikhodko and O.M. Teslyk,Hydrodynamical approach to chirality production during axion inflation,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 023536 [2311.07429]
2024 arXiv
-
[31]
Kobayashi and N
T. Kobayashi and N. Afshordi,Schwinger Effect in 4D de Sitter Space and Constraints on Magnetogenesis in the Early Universe,JHEP10(2014) 166 [1408.4141]
2014 arXiv
-
[32]
Sobol, E.V
O.O. Sobol, E.V. Gorbar, M. Kamarpour and S.I. Vilchinskii,Influence of backreaction of electric fields and Schwinger effect on inflationary magnetogenesis,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 063534 [1807.09851]
2018 arXiv
-
[33]
Sobol, E.V
O.O. Sobol, E.V. Gorbar and S.I. Vilchinskii,Backreaction of electromagnetic fields and the Schwinger effect in pseudoscalar inflation magnetogenesis,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 063523 [1907.10443]
2019 arXiv
-
[34]
Gorbar, K
E.V. Gorbar, K. Schmitz, O.O. Sobol and S.I. Vilchinskii,Hypermagnetogenesis from axion inflation: Model-independent estimates,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 043530 [2111.04712]
2022 arXiv
-
[35]
Cado and M
Y. Cado and M. Quir´ os,Numerical study of the Schwinger effect in axion inflation,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 123527 [2208.10977]
2022 arXiv
-
[36]
Gusynin, V.A
V.P. Gusynin, V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Catalysis of dynamical flavor symmetry breaking by a magnetic field in (2+1)-dimensions,Phys. Rev. Lett.73(1994) 3499 [hep-ph/9405262]
1994 arXiv
-
[37]
Gusynin, V.A
V.P. Gusynin, V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Dynamical flavor symmetry breaking by a magnetic field in (2+1)-dimensions,Phys. Rev. D52(1995) 4718 [hep-th/9407168]
1995 arXiv
-
[38]
Shovkovy,Magnetic Catalysis: A Review,Lect
I.A. Shovkovy,Magnetic Catalysis: A Review,Lect. Notes Phys.871(2013) 13 [1207.5081]. – 25 –
2013 arXiv
-
[39]
Kharzeev, K
D.E. Kharzeev, K. Landsteiner, A. Schmitt and H.-U. Yee,’Strongly interacting matter in magnetic fields’: an overview,Lect. Notes Phys.871(2013) 1 [1211.6245]
2013 arXiv
-
[40]
Miransky and I.A
V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Quantum field theory in a magnetic field: From quantum chromodynamics to graphene and Dirac semimetals,Phys. Rept.576(2015) 1 [1503.00732]
2015 arXiv
-
[41]
Andersen, W.R
J.O. Andersen, W.R. Naylor and A. Tranberg,Phase diagram of QCD in a magnetic field: A review,Rev. Mod. Phys.88(2016) 025001 [1411.7176]
2016 arXiv
-
[42]
Mizher, M.N
A.J. Mizher, M.N. Chernodub and E.S. Fraga,Phase diagram of hot QCD in an external magnetic field: possible splitting of deconfinement and chiral transitions,Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 105016 [1004.2712]
2010 arXiv
-
[43]
Fukushima, M
K. Fukushima, M. Ruggieri and R. Gatto,Chiral magnetic effect in the PNJL model,Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 114031 [1003.0047]
2010 arXiv
-
[44]
G.S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S.D. Katz, S. Krieg et al.,The QCD phase diagram for external magnetic fields,JHEP02(2012) 044 [1111.4956]
2012 arXiv
-
[45]
G.S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S.D. Katz and A. Schafer,QCD quark condensate in external magnetic fields,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 071502 [1206.4205]
2012 arXiv
-
[46]
Gibbons and S.W
G.W. Gibbons and S.W. Hawking,Cosmological Event Horizons, Thermodynamics, and Particle Creation,Phys. Rev. D15(1977) 2738
1977
-
[47]
Geyer, L.N
B. Geyer, L.N. Granda and S.D. Odintsov,Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model in curved space-time with magnetic field,Mod. Phys. Lett. A11(1996) 2053 [hep-th/9605195]
1996 arXiv
-
[48]
Flachi, K
A. Flachi, K. Fukushima and V. Vitagliano,Geometrically induced magnetic catalysis and critical dimensions,Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 181601 [1502.06090]
2015 arXiv
-
[49]
Nambu and G
Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio,Dynamical Model of Elementary Particles Based on an Analogy with Superconductivity. I,Phys. Rev.122(1961) 345
1961
-
[50]
Nambu and G
Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio,Dynamical Model of Elementary Particles Based on an Analogy with Superconductivity. II,Phys. Rev.124(1961) 246
1961
-
[51]
Bunch and P.C.W
T.S. Bunch and P.C.W. Davies,Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space: Renormalization by Point-Splitting,Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A360(1978) 117
1978
-
[52]
Hashida, S
J. Hashida, S. Mukaigawa, T. Muta, K. Ohkura and K. Yamamoto,Curvature induced phase transitions in the inflationary universe: Supersymmetric Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model in de Sitter space-time,Phys. Rev. D61(2000) 044015 [gr-qc/9907014]
2000 arXiv
-
[53]
X. Tong, Y. Wang, C. Zhang and Y. Zhu,BCS in the sky: signatures of inflationary fermion condensation,JCAP04(2024) 022 [2304.09428]
2024 arXiv
-
[54]
Fujikura and T
K. Fujikura and T. Noumi,Inflationary QCD phase diagram,2512.24024
-
[55]
Schwinger,On Gauge Invariance and Vacuum Polarization,Phys
J. Schwinger,On Gauge Invariance and Vacuum Polarization,Phys. Rev.82(1951) 664
1951
-
[56]
Coleman,There are no Goldstone bosons in two-dimensions,Commun
S.R. Coleman,There are no Goldstone bosons in two-dimensions,Commun. Math. Phys.31 (1973) 259
1973
-
[57]
Mermin and H
N.D. Mermin and H. Wagner,Absence of ferromagnetism or antiferromagnetism in one-dimensional or two-dimensional isotropic Heisenberg models,Phys. Rev. Lett.17(1966) 1133
1966
-
[58]
Gusynin, V.A
V.P. Gusynin, V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Dimensional reduction and dynamical – 26 – chiral symmetry breaking by a magnetic field in (3+1)-dimensions,Phys. Lett. B349(1995) 477 [hep-ph/9412257]
1995 arXiv
-
[59]
Gusynin, V.A
V.P. Gusynin, V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Dimensional reduction and catalysis of dynamical symmetry breaking by a magnetic field,Nucl. Phys. B462(1996) 249 [hep-ph/9509320]
1996 arXiv
-
[60]
Weinberg,Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,Phys
S. Weinberg,Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 043514 [hep-th/0506236]
2005 arXiv
-
[61]
Iarygina, E.I
O. Iarygina, E.I. Sfakianakis and A. Brandenburg,Schwinger effect in axion inflation on a lattice,2506.20538
-
[62]
Gusynin, V.A
V.P. Gusynin, V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Theory of the magnetic catalysis of chiral symmetry breaking in QED,Nucl. Phys. B563(1999) 361 [hep-ph/9908320]
1999 arXiv
-
[63]
Miransky and I.A
V.A. Miransky and I.A. Shovkovy,Magnetic catalysis and anisotropic confinement in QCD, Phys. Rev. D66(2002) 045006 [hep-ph/0205348]. – 27 –
2002 arXiv
Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.