Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 4 cited by

Discretely Evanescent Dark Energy

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proposes that dark energy is not a cosmological constant or a slowly rolling scalar field, but a top-form flux in a hidden QCD-like sector whose membrane-nucleated discharge removes it in discrete steps, making cosmic…

desk verdict A genuinely different transient-dark-energy mechanism from a hidden QCD sector, but the decay-rate prediction hangs on a thin-wall bounce calculation that looks outside its valid regime. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.04317 v1 pith:5KHNVGLU submitted 2025-06-04 hep-th astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph

Nemanja Kaloper This is my paper
classification hep-thastro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph PACS 95.36.+x
keywords darkenergytopformmembranenucleationchiralsymmetrybreakingsectorCPviolationdiscretevacuumdecayQCD-likehiddencosmologicalconstantproblem
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 proposes a UV-complete dark energy model in which the observed vacuum energy is a dynamical transient rather than a permanent cosmological constant. A hidden non-Abelian gauge theory confines at a chiral symmetry breaking scale around $10^{-3}$ eV, and the resulting dark chiral condensate breaks CP and generates a vacuum energy $V_{\rm dark}\sim 10^{-12}$ eV$^4$, matching the observed dark energy density. That vacuum energy is carried by the flux of a top form, and the flux can be discharged by quantum nucleation of membranes, reducing the effective dark $\theta$ angle by one unit at a time. Because the decay rate is tuned close to the current Hubble scale, dark energy decays in discrete, random steps and the universe need not keep accelerating forever.

What carries the argument

The central object is the top form: the Hodge-dual three-form potential $A_{\mu\nu\lambda}$ whose four-form field strength $F_{\mu\nu\lambda\sigma}$ is built from the dark gauge field's Chern-Simons current, so its flux is equivalent to the dark $\theta$-angle. After dark chiral symmetry breaking this flux carries the vacuum energy $V_{\rm dark}=X_{\rm dark}\theta_{\rm dark}^2/2$. The mechanism that erases it is membrane nucleation: spherical domain walls separating confined and deconfined phases carry charge $Q=-\sqrt{X_{\rm dark}}\,\hat\theta$ and tension $T\simeq1.2\,\Lambda_{\rm dark}^3$. A nucleated membrane changes $\theta_{\rm dark}$ by $\Delta\theta_{\rm dark}=Q/\sqrt{X_{\rm dark}}=\hat\theta$, discharging the flux in one unit; the bounce action $B=27\pi^2 T^4/(2\,\Delta V^3)$ and the flat-space prefactor give the rate $\Gamma\sim H_0^4$. This combination of flux quantization and charge balance is what makes the terminal value exactly $\theta_{\rm dark}=0$, not just a small residual energy.

What would settle it

The most direct check is the membrane charge-to-flux relation: the terminal cancellation to $\theta_{\rm dark}=0$ holds only if $Q=-\sqrt{X_{\rm dark}}\,\hat\theta$ and $F=NQ$, so a lattice or analytic computation showing that the quantized discharge step differs from one unit of $\hat\theta$ would leave a residual cosmological constant. Observationally, a null detection of the predicted $f<10^{-12}\,\mathrm{Hz}$ gravitational-wave background at $\Omega_{\rm GW}\sim10^{-9}$ would rule out the bubble-collision signature, while continued constant acceleration with $w=-1$ over a time comparable to $1/H_0$ would contradict the claimed decay rate.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, dark energy is the vacuum energy of a dark CP-violating sector, equal to $V_{\rm dark}=\frac12 X_{\rm dark}(\theta_{\rm dark})^2$, with $X_{\rm dark}\simeq\Lambda_{\rm dark}^4\sim(10^{-3}\,\mathrm{eV})^4$ the topological susceptibility and $\theta_{\rm dark}$ the total dark CP-violating phase. Dark chiral symmetry breaking fixes $\theta_{\rm dark}$ at an order-one value, generating the observed dark energy density. The same dynamics produces an emergent top form whose flux $F=NQ$ is quantized in units of the membrane charge $Q=-\sqrt{X_{\rm dark}}\,\hat\theta$. Nucleation of membranes discharges this flux, each event shifting $\theta_{\rm dark}$ by one unit toward zero, so the dark energy disappears in discrete steps; when $\theta_{\rm dark}=0$, the only CP-invariant superselection sector, the vacuum energy exactly vanishes. The model therefore claims that dark energy is a transient that decays on a timescale of order $1/H_0$, and the universe need not suffer a future event horizon.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that before dark chiral symmetry breaking the vacuum energy is exactly zero and that no other contribution remains, so membrane discharge can erase the whole dark energy and leave the universe in Minkowski space.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, the universe currently has a dark energy component set by dimensional transmutation at $\Lambda_{\rm dark}\sim10^{-3}\,\mathrm{eV}$, with no ultralight scalar field and no anthropic tuning of the late-time dark energy value.
  • The dark energy is decaying now: bubbles of true vacuum about a millimeter across nucleate at a rate $\Gamma\sim H_0^4$, and their growth removes dark energy from increasing volumes, so cosmic acceleration has a finite duration.
  • Within roughly a Hubble time the decay can percolate and drive the universe to a state with $\theta_{\rm dark}=0$ and $V_{\rm dark}=0$, so there is no future event horizon in our light cone.
  • Collisions of growing membranes produce dark pions and a stochastic gravitational-wave background at very low frequencies, $f\lesssim10^{-12}\,\mathrm{Hz}$ with $\Omega_{\rm GW}\lesssim10^{-9}$, potentially accessible to future pulsar-timing searches.
  • If the decay began recently enough, dark energy is spatially inhomogeneous on large scales now, with empty bubbles growing at the speed of light, while the CMB remains largely unaffected because typical bubbles are younger than $z\sim0.01$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: if dark energy is being erased by growing bubbles, the local expansion rate should vary across our Hubble volume during the transition, so future large-scale-structure surveys could look for late-time cosmic variance in $H_0$ that a permanent cosmological constant would not produce.
  • Beyond the paper: the same topological-discharge mechanism could apply to other fine-tuning problems now handled by light scalars, since the top form needs no propagating light degree of freedom; a natural extension is to search data for step-like changes in the effective dark energy density rather than a smooth quintessence roll.
  • Beyond the paper: the paper does not construct the full post-percolation state, so one could extend it by computing the residue of gravitational radiation and dark pion showers after all bubbles collide, which might leave a distinctive low-frequency 'afterglow' distinguishable from primordial backgrounds.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a UV-complete dark energy model in which the dark energy is not a cosmological constant or a rolling scalar, but the flux of a 3-form top form in a hidden QCD-like SU(N) gauge theory. After dark chiral symmetry breaking at a scale Λ_dark ~ 10^-3 eV, the θ-dependent vacuum energy V_dark ~ 1/2 X_dark θ_dark^2 is generated, with the topological susceptibility X_dark ~ Λ_dark^4. The theory is argued to contain charged membranes that nucleate and discharge the top-form flux in discrete steps, reducing θ_dark and V_dark toward zero. The paper claims that this generates a transient dark energy with the observed density, that the decay rate can be comparable to H0^4, and that the universe may cease accelerating and avoid a future event horizon. The quantitative discussion fixes the initial θ_dark, the susceptibility scale Λ_dark, and the membrane tension and charge coefficients to match observations, and derives late-time signatures including bubble percolation, inhomogeneous dark energy, and low-frequency gravitational waves.

Significance. If the quantitative claims hold, the model offers a qualitatively new mechanism for dark energy that is UV-complete as a quantum field theory, avoids ultralight scalars, and provides a dynamical avenue toward a universe without a future event horizon. The top-form derivation from the chiral anomaly and the membrane discharge picture are coherent and follow the earlier literature, and the paper spells out falsifiable signatures: discrete random decays, millimeter-scale nucleated bubbles, and gravitational waves with f < 10^-12 Hz and Ω_GW < 10^-9. The main caveats are that the observed dark energy density is obtained by choosing Λ_dark and θ_dark, and the decay rate Γ ~ H0^4 is obtained by adjusting the membrane tension coefficient ζ; neither quantity is an ab initio prediction. The final Minkowski state also assumes the 'big' cosmological constant problem is solved independently, as the paper explicitly acknowledges.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5, Eqs. (33)-(35), benchmark after Eq. (40)] The thin-wall approximation is not under control at the benchmark parameters. With Λ_dark ~ 10^-3 eV, ζ ~ 1.2, and ΔV ~ Λ_dark^4, the nucleated radius is r0 = 3T/ΔV ~ 3.6/Λ_dark ~ 0.7 mm, while the composite membrane thickness is l ~ 1/Λ_dark ~ 0.2 mm. The bubble is only a few wall thicknesses across, so the thin-wall bounce action B = 27π^2 T^4/(2 ΔV^3) and the Garriga prefactor in Eq. (35) receive uncontrolled O(1) corrections. Since Γ depends exponentially on B, these corrections change the predicted lifetime by orders of magnitude. A finite-thickness calculation of the composite-wall bounce is needed before the quantitative claim Γ ~ H0^4 can be assessed.
  2. [Sec. 5, Eq. (32) and Eq. (30)] The energy difference used in the bounce action is incorrect by a factor of 2. Equation (30) defines V_dark = (1/2) X_dark θ_dark^2, so discharging from θ_dark to zero gives ΔV = (1/2) X_dark θ_dark^2, not ΔV = X_dark θ_dark Δθ_dark as stated after Eq. (32). For Δθ_dark = θ_dark, the true ΔV is half the value used in the paper. Because B scales as (ΔV)^-3, this changes the bounce action by a factor of 8 and shifts the concordance condition (40) from ζ^4 ≈ 2 to ζ^4 ≈ 0.6 (for ξ = θ_dark = 1). The claimed match Γ ~ H0^4 is therefore an artifact of this algebraic error, and the numerical condition should be re-evaluated with the correct ΔV.
  3. [Sec. 4, Eqs. (23)-(25)] The exact terminal cancellation θ_dark = 0 relies on the membrane charge being exactly Q = -√X_dark θhat and the flux quantization being exactly F = NQ. These relations are asserted 'by comparison' with bag models and Brown-Teitelboim, not derived for the composite domain walls of the dark gauge theory. If the charge is not exactly -√X_dark θhat, or if the flux quantization receives corrections, the discharge sequence may stop at a nonzero θ_dark, leaving residual dark energy and a future event horizon. The paper should either derive these relations for the composite walls or quantify how model-dependent deviations affect the terminal state.
  4. [Sec. 2, paragraph beginning 'Since we are merely interested...'] The paper explicitly assumes that the vacuum energy before dark chiral symmetry breaking is exactly zero, so that the 'big' cosmological constant problem is solved independently. This assumption is load-bearing for the central claims of transience and the final Minkowski state: if any other vacuum energy contribution remains, the universe will not reach V = 0 and may retain a horizon. The authors disclose this limitation, but the abstract and summary state the no-horizon conclusion unconditionally. The final-state claims should be framed as conditional on this assumption, and the paper should state what residual acceleration would result if an uncancelled bare cosmological constant is present.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5, after Eq. (40)] There is a typo: 'natiral' should be 'natural'.
  2. [Sec. 4, Eqs. (15)-(21)] The symbol F is used both for the 4-form field strength and for the magnetic dual integration constant, which is confusing; a distinct notation such as F_dual would improve clarity.
  3. [Sec. 4, penultimate paragraph] The paper states that questions about native nucleation rates are 'of lesser concern to us here,' but the entire quantitative claim in Sec. 5 depends on these rates; a more careful discussion of the comparison with QCD domain-wall suppression estimates would be helpful.
  4. [Sec. 6, Eq. (44)] The statement that 'already at the redshift of z ~ 1 the probability for a membrane to nucleate is reduced by about an order of magnitude' is an estimate based on a specific ΛCDM Hubble law; it should be labeled as an illustrative estimate rather than a robust prediction.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the quantitative dark-energy scale and decay rate are explicit consistency choices, and the discharge mechanism rests on independent gauge-theory and membrane-nucleation results.

full rationale

The paper's central mechanism is not circular. The top-form description follows Luscher's independent work, the membrane discharge follows Brown-Teitelboim and Coleman/Garriga, and the terminal minimum at theta=0 is supported by the external Vafa-Witten theorem. The numerical inputs Lambda_dark ~ 10^-3 eV (Sec. 2, yielding V_dark ~ (10^-3 eV)^4 in Eq. 36) and Gamma ~ H0^4 (Sec. 5, Eq. 39) are explicitly stated as requirements imposed to fit observations, not as independently derived predictions; the paper then solves for the O(1) parameter zeta^4 ~ 2 in Eq. (40). This is a consistency condition, not a hidden reduction of an output to an input. The author's prior work [19,20] is load-bearing for the specific top-form action and charged-membrane construction, but those papers target strong-CP restoration rather than dark energy, and the key physics is also anchored in independent references [28,32,36-43]. The paper also candidly acknowledges limitations (footnote 2 on non-minimal models, footnote 3 on parameter readjustment, and the assumption that the 'big' cosmological constant problem is solved independently). No step was found where a claimed prediction is equivalent to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central claim rests on a hidden QCD-like sector (axiom 1), zero other vacuum energy (axiom 2), exact membrane charge/flux quantization (axiom 3), the Vafa-Witten minimum (axiom 4), and semiclassical nucleation rates (axiom 5). Four numerical inputs, Λ_dark, θ_dark, ζ and ξ, are chosen so the generated potential and decay rate match the observed dark energy density and Hubble time. The only truly new entities are the hidden sector and its membranes; their observational handles are indirect, through dark radiation, warm dark matter, and low-frequency gravitational waves.

free parameters (4)
  • Λ_dark (dark chiral symmetry breaking scale) = ~10^-3 eV
    Set so that V_dark ~ (Λ_dark)^4 ~ 10^-12 eV^4 matches the observed dark energy density (Eqs. 36 and 42). The scale is technically natural via dimensional transmutation, but the specific numerical value is an input.
  • θ_dark (initial dark vacuum angle) = ~O(1)
    Chosen O(1) so the generated vacuum energy has the observed magnitude; smaller values give smaller dark energy and are dismissed as less common (Sec. 5, around Eq. 36).
  • ζ (membrane tension coefficient) = ζ^4≈2, T≈1.2(Λ_dark)^3
    Chosen to satisfy Γ~H0^4 in Eq. (40), i.e., to make the dark energy decay on the current Hubble time. This is a fit to the observed age of the universe, not a prediction.
  • ξ (membrane charge coefficient) = ξ=1, Q=(Λ_dark)^2
    Fixed to 1 in Eq. (40) to obtain the numerical condition; O(1) values are plausible but set by hand.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The hidden SU(N) gauge theory with dark quarks confines and breaks chiral symmetry at Λ_dark~10^-3 eV, producing topological susceptibility X_dark~Λ_dark^4.
    Lagrangian (1) and Secs. 2-3; this is the core physical setup, not derived from a more fundamental principle.
  • ad hoc to paper The 'big' cosmological constant problem is solved independently and the vacuum energy before dark chiral symmetry breaking is exactly zero.
    Sec. 2 paragraph 'Since we are merely interested...'; without this assumption, the dark-sector potential is not the whole dark energy.
  • domain assumption The membranes charged under the top form have charge Q=-√X_dark θhat and the magnetic flux is quantized F=NQ, permitting discrete discharge steps that end at θ_dark=0.
    Eqs. (23)-(25), based on comparison with [32,38,40-43]; central to the claim that dark energy is exactly cancelled and CP is restored.
  • domain assumption θ_dark=0 modulo 2π is the unique CP-invariant minimum of the potential (Vafa-Witten).
    Sec. 4, cited [35]; needed for the terminal state to have zero dark energy.
  • domain assumption The semiclassical flat-space membrane nucleation rate with Garriga's prefactor applies, with gravitational corrections negligible.
    Eqs. (34)-(35) and (41); justified by r0H0~10^-30, but still an assumption in the strong-coupling regime.
invented entities (3)
  • Hidden QCD-like sector with dark quarks and gluons independent evidence
    purpose: Produces dark energy via chiral symmetry breaking and the θ_dark-dependent vacuum energy.
    The sector is new physics beyond the Standard Model. It predicts dark radiation constrained by ΔN_eff, warm dark matter candidates at ~10^-3 eV, and late bubble collisions that could generate gravitational waves, giving in-principle falsifiable handles.
  • Top form (3-form) flux in the dark sector
    purpose: Carries the dark energy; its discrete discharge by membranes is the mechanism of transient dark energy.
    The top form is an emergent dual description of the gauge theory's CP-violating phase; no direct observable exists beyond the collective dark-energy decay and gravitational-wave signatures.
  • Charged membranes (domain walls) nucleated in the dark sector
    purpose: Discharge the top form flux in discrete steps, relaxing θ_dark and the vacuum energy to zero.
    No independent handle outside the model; their existence, tension, and charge are inferred by analogy with QCD glueballs and Brown-Teitelboim systems.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Discretely Evanescent Dark Energy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5KHNVGLU

@misc{pith2026250604317,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Discretely Evanescent Dark Energy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5KHNVGLU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.04317}
}
abstract

We propose a new UV-complete dark energy model which is \underbar{\it neither} a cosmological constant nor a slowly rolling scalar field. Our dark energy is the flux of a top form in a hidden sector gauge theory similar to QCD. The top form controls the vacuum energy generated by dark sector CP violation. Its flux discharges by the nucleation of membranes that source it. The tension and charge of the membranes are set by the chiral symmetry breaking scale $\sim 10^{-3} eV$, and the dark energy is a transient. It decays on the order of the current age of the universe. The decays decrease dark energy discretely and randomly, instead of gradually like rolling scalars. Since the decay rate is close to the present Hubble scale, $\Gamma \ga H_0^4$, in a time $\sim {\cal O}(1/H_0)$ the cosmic acceleration may even cease altogether.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. CMB Birefringence from Vacuum Interfaces

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    CMB polarization rotation emerges as a Pancharatnam phase localized at dark sector vacuum interfaces, independent of redshift, frequency, and the presence of light axions.

  2. Boiling After the Dust Settles: Constraining First-Order Phase Transitions During Dark Energy Domination

    hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    CMB anisotropies from stochastic bubble nucleation constrain late-time phase transitions to release less than ~1% of dark energy when β/H⋆≲25, much tighter than Hubble-budget limits.

  3. Wading the String Bog: CMB Birefringence in the Swampland

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Ultralight-axion explanations of cosmic birefringence sit in tension with Swampland bounds, while thin axionic domain walls predict exactly isotropic birefringence, so anisotropy measurements can discriminate the alte...

  4. Electromagnetic Couplings of Dark Domain Walls

    hep-th 2026-02 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A Chern–Simons coupling between photons and a dark 3-form is claimed to rotate CMB polarization by ~10^-3 rad when light crosses dark domain walls, but the derivation has boundary-condition errors and the signal is fi...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the mea- surements of baryon acoustic oscillations,

    A. G. Adameet al.[DESI], “DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the mea- surements of baryon acoustic oscillations,” JCAP02, 021 (2025) [arXiv:2404.03002 [astro-ph.CO]]. 16

    arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Anthropic Bound on the Cosmological Constant,

    S. Weinberg, “Anthropic Bound on the Cosmological Constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett.59, 2607 (1987)

    work page 1987

  3. [3]

    Likely values of the cosmological constant,

    H. Martel, P. R. Shapiro and S. Weinberg, “Likely values of the cosmological constant,” Astrophys. J.492, 29 (1998) [arXiv:astro-ph/9701099 [astro-ph]]

    arXiv 1998

  4. [4]

    The Cosmon model for an asymptotically vanishing time dependent cos- mological ’constant’,

    C. Wetterich, “The Cosmon model for an asymptotically vanishing time dependent cos- mological ’constant’,” Astron. Astrophys.301, 321-328 (1995) [arXiv:hep-th/9408025 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1995

  5. [5]

    Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmological constant,

    I. Zlatev, L. M. Wang and P. J. Steinhardt, “Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 896-899 (1999) [arXiv:astro-ph/9807002 [astro-ph]]

    arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    The Cosmological Constant Problem,

    S. Weinberg, “The Cosmological Constant Problem,” Rev. Mod. Phys.61, 1-23 (1989)

    work page 1989

  7. [7]

    The Cosmological Constant and the String Landscape,

    J. Polchinski, “The Cosmological Constant and the String Landscape,” [arXiv:hep- th/0603249 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv

  8. [8]

    The String landscape, black holes and gravity as the weakest force,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, L. Motl, A. Nicolis and C. Vafa, “The String landscape, black holes and gravity as the weakest force,” JHEP06, 060 (2007) [arXiv:hep-th/0601001 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2007

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Cosmology with ultralight pseudo Nambu-Goldstone bosons,

    J. A. Frieman, C. T. Hill, A. Stebbins and I. Waga, “Cosmology with ultralight pseudo Nambu-Goldstone bosons,” Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 2077-2080 (1995) [arXiv:astro- ph/9505060 [astro-ph]]

    1995

  2. [10]

    Model for the cosmological constant,

    M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, “Model for the cosmological constant,” YITP-K-1098

  3. [11]

    Mass generation for an ultralight axion,

    Y. Nomura, T. Watari and T. Yanagida, “Mass generation for an ultralight axion,” Phys. Rev. D61, 105007 (2000) [arXiv:hep-ph/9911324 [hep-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  4. [12]

    A Dynamical solution to the problem of a small cosmological constant and late time cosmic acceleration,

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt, “A Dynamical solution to the problem of a small cosmological constant and late time cosmic acceleration,” Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 4438-4441 (2000) [arXiv:astro-ph/0004134 [astro-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Essentials of k essence,

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt, “Essentials of k essence,” Phys. Rev. D63, 103510 (2001) [arXiv:astro-ph/0006373 [astro-ph]]

    2001 arXiv

  6. [14]

    A Quintessential axion,

    J. E. Kim and H. P. Nilles, “A Quintessential axion,” Phys. Lett. B553, 1-6 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0210402 [hep-ph]]

    2003 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Where in the String Landscape is Quintessence,

    N. Kaloper and L. Sorbo, “Where in the String Landscape is Quintessence,” Phys. Rev. D79, 043528 (2009) [arXiv:0810.5346 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Strongly Coupled Quintessence,

    G. D’Amico, N. Kaloper and A. Lawrence, “Strongly Coupled Quintessence,” Phys. Rev. D100, no.10, 103504 (2019) [arXiv:1809.05109 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  9. [17]

    String theory and quintessence,

    S. Hellerman, N. Kaloper and L. Susskind, “String theory and quintessence,” JHEP06, 003 (2001) [arXiv:hep-th/0104180 [hep-th]]. 17

    2001 arXiv

  10. [18]

    The Acceleration of the universe, a challenge for string theory,

    W. Fischler, A. Kashani-Poor, R. McNees and S. Paban, “The Acceleration of the universe, a challenge for string theory,” JHEP07, 003 (2001) [arXiv:hep-th/0104181 [hep-th]]

    2001 arXiv

  11. [19]

    An Alternative to Axion,

    N. Kaloper, “An Alternative to Axion,” [arXiv:2504.21078 [hep-ph]]

  12. [20]

    A Quantal Theory of Restoration of Strong CP Symmetry,

    N. Kaloper, “A Quantal Theory of Restoration of Strong CP Symmetry,” [arXiv:2505.04690 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Parker, Phys

    L. Parker, Phys. Rev. Lett.21, 562-564 (1968)

    1968

  14. [22]

    T. S. Bunch and P. C. W. Davies, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A360, 117-134 (1978)

    1978

  15. [23]

    Particle physics and inflationary cosmology,

    A. D. Linde, “Particle physics and inflationary cosmology,” Contemp. Concepts Phys. 5, 1-362 (1990) [arXiv:hep-th/0503203 [hep-th]]

    1990 arXiv

  16. [24]

    The Early mirror universe: Inflation, baryogenesis, nucleosynthesis and dark matter,

    Z. Berezhiani, D. Comelli and F. L. Villante, “The Early mirror universe: Inflation, baryogenesis, nucleosynthesis and dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B503, 362-375 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0008105 [hep-ph]]

    2001 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Massive Black Holes from Dissipative Dark Matter,

    G. D’Amico, P. Panci, A. Lupi, S. Bovino and J. Silk, “Massive Black Holes from Dissipative Dark Matter,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.473, no.1, 328-335 (2018) [arXiv:1707.03419 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2018 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Improved Constraints on Primordial Grav- itational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season,

    P. A. R. Adeet al.[BICEP and Keck], “Improved Constraints on Primordial Grav- itational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, no.15, 151301 (2021) [arXiv:2110.00483 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2021

  19. [27]

    Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory,

    H. Georgi, “Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory,” Benjamin-Cummings Pub Co, 1984

    1984

  20. [28]

    The Secret Long Range Force in Quantum Field Theories With Instan- tons,

    M. L¨ uscher, “The Secret Long Range Force in Quantum Field Theories With Instan- tons,” Phys. Lett. B78, 465-467 (1978)

    1978

  21. [29]

    Three-form gauging of axion symmetries and gravity,

    G. Dvali, “Three-form gauging of axion symmetries and gravity,” [arXiv:hep-th/0507215 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    A Vacuum accumulation solution to the strong CP problem,

    G. Dvali, “A Vacuum accumulation solution to the strong CP problem,” Phys. Rev. D 74, 025019 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0510053 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  23. [31]

    A Classical Interpretation of the Bag Model for Hadrons,

    A. Aurilia, D. Christodoulou and F. Legovini, “A Classical Interpretation of the Bag Model for Hadrons,” Phys. Lett. B73, 429-432 (1978)

    1978

  24. [32]

    Hidden Constants: The Theta Parameter of QCD and the Cosmological Constant of N=8 Supergravity,

    A. Aurilia, H. Nicolai and P. K. Townsend, “Hidden Constants: The Theta Parameter of QCD and the Cosmological Constant of N=8 Supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B176, 509-522 (1980)

    1980

  25. [33]

    Quantum Inequivalence of Different Field Rep- resentations,

    M. J. Duff and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Quantum Inequivalence of Different Field Rep- resentations,” Phys. Lett. B94, 179-182 (1980). 18

    1980

  26. [34]

    The U(1) Problem and the Higgs Mech- anism in Two-dimensions and Four-dimensions,

    A. Aurilia, Y. Takahashi and P. K. Townsend, “The U(1) Problem and the Higgs Mech- anism in Two-dimensions and Four-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B95, 265-268 (1980)

    1980

  27. [35]

    Parity Conservation in QCD,

    C. Vafa and E. Witten, “Parity Conservation in QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett.53, 535 (1984)

    1984

  28. [36]

    Modeling the glueball spectrum by a closed bosonic membrane,

    G. Gabadadze, “Modeling the glueball spectrum by a closed bosonic membrane,” Phys. Rev. D58, 094015 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9710402 [hep-ph]]

    1998 arXiv

  29. [37]

    QCD vacuum and axions: What’s happening?,

    G. Gabadadze and M. Shifman, “QCD vacuum and axions: What’s happening?,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A17, 3689-3728 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0206123 [hep-ph]]

    2002 arXiv

  30. [38]

    The Problem of Confinement: From Two-dimensions to Four-dimensions,

    A. Aurilia, “The Problem of Confinement: From Two-dimensions to Four-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B81, 203-206 (1979)

    1979

  31. [39]

    The Quark Bag Model with Surface Tension,

    P. Gnadig, P. Hasenfratz, J. Kuti and A. S. Szalay, “The Quark Bag Model with Surface Tension,” Phys. Lett. B64, 62-66 (1976)

    1976

  32. [40]

    Dynamical Neutralization of the Cosmological Con- stant,

    J. D. Brown and C. Teitelboim, “Dynamical Neutralization of the Cosmological Con- stant,” Phys. Lett. B195, 177-182 (1987)

    1987

  33. [41]

    Neutralization of the Cosmological Constant by Mem- brane Creation,

    J. D. Brown and C. Teitelboim, “Neutralization of the Cosmological Constant by Mem- brane Creation,” Nucl. Phys. B297, 787-836 (1988)

    1988

  34. [42]

    Hidden variables of gravity and geometry and the cosmological constant problem,

    N. Kaloper, “Hidden variables of gravity and geometry and the cosmological constant problem,” Phys. Rev. D106, no.6, 065009 (2022) [arXiv:2202.06977 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Pancosmic Relativity and Nature’s Hierarchies,

    N. Kaloper, “Pancosmic Relativity and Nature’s Hierarchies,” Phys. Rev. D106, no.4, 044023 (2022) [arXiv:2202.08860 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    On gauge invariance and vacuum polarization,

    J. S. Schwinger, “On gauge invariance and vacuum polarization,” Phys. Rev.82, 664- 679 (1951)

    1951

  37. [45]

    Domain walls and decay rate of the excited vacua in the large N Yang-Mills theory,

    M. A. Shifman, “Domain walls and decay rate of the excited vacua in the large N Yang-Mills theory,” Phys. Rev. D59, 021501 (1999) [arXiv:hep-th/9809184 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Domain walls in QCD,

    M. M. Forbes and A. R. Zhitnitsky, “Domain walls in QCD,” JHEP10, 013 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0008315 [hep-ph]]

    2001 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Large N domain walls as D-branes for N=1 QCD string,

    G. R. Dvali and Z. Kakushadze, “Large N domain walls as D-branes for N=1 QCD string,” Nucl. Phys. B537, 297-316 (1999) [arXiv:hep-th/9807140 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Axion monodromy in a model of holo- graphic gluodynamics,

    S. Dubovsky, A. Lawrence and M. M. Roberts, “Axion monodromy in a model of holo- graphic gluodynamics,” JHEP02, 053 (2012) [arXiv:1105.3740 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  41. [49]

    The Fate of the False Vacuum. 1. Semiclassical Theory,

    S. R. Coleman, “The Fate of the False Vacuum. 1. Semiclassical Theory,” Phys. Rev. D15, 2929-2936 (1977) [erratum: Phys. Rev. D16, 1248 (1977)]

    1977

  42. [50]

    The Fate of the False Vacuum. 2. First Quantum Corrections,

    C. G. Callan, Jr. and S. R. Coleman, “The Fate of the False Vacuum. 2. First Quantum Corrections,” Phys. Rev. D16, 1762-1768 (1977). 19

    1977

  43. [51]

    Nucleation rates in flat and curved space,

    J. Garriga, “Nucleation rates in flat and curved space,” Phys. Rev. D49, 6327-6342 (1994) [arXiv:hep-ph/9308280 [hep-ph]]

    1994 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Could the Universe Have Recovered from a Slow First Order Phase Transition?,

    A. H. Guth and E. J. Weinberg, “Could the Universe Have Recovered from a Slow First Order Phase Transition?,” Nucl. Phys. B212, 321-364 (1983)

    1983

  45. [53]

    Bubble nucleation in first order inflation and other cosmological phase transitions,

    M. S. Turner, E. J. Weinberg and L. M. Widrow, “Bubble nucleation in first order inflation and other cosmological phase transitions,” Phys. Rev. D46, 2384-2403 (1992)

    1992

  46. [54]

    Quantum Cosmic No-Hair Theorem and Inflation,

    N. Kaloper and J. Scargill, “Quantum Cosmic No-Hair Theorem and Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D99, no.10, 103514 (2019) [arXiv:1802.09554 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Gravitational waves from first order cosmological phase transitions,

    A. Kosowsky, M. S. Turner and R. Watkins, “Gravitational waves from first order cosmological phase transitions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2026-2029 (1992)

    1992

  48. [56]

    Gravitational radiation from first order phase transitions,

    M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky and M. S. Turner, “Gravitational radiation from first order phase transitions,” Phys. Rev. D49, 2837-2851 (1994) [arXiv:astro-ph/9310044 [astro-ph]]

    1994 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Cosmological Consequences of the Spontaneous Breakdown of Discrete Symmetry,

    Y. B. Zeldovich, I. Y. Kobzarev and L. B. Okun, “Cosmological Consequences of the Spontaneous Breakdown of Discrete Symmetry,” Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.67, 3-11 (1974)

    1974

  50. [58]

    The international pulsar timing array project: using pulsars as a gravitational wave detector,

    G. Hobbs, A. Archibald, Z. Arzoumanian, D. Backer, M. Bailes, N. D. R. Bhat, M. Bur- gay, S. Burke-Spolaor, D. Champion and I. Cognard,et al.“The international pulsar timing array project: using pulsars as a gravitational wave detector,” Class. Quant. Grav.27, 084013 (2010) [a...

    2010 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Searching for stochastic gravitational waves below a nanohertz,

    W. DeRocco and J. A. Dror, “Searching for stochastic gravitational waves below a nanohertz,” Phys. Rev. D108, no.10, 103011 (2023) [arXiv:2304.13042 [astro-ph.HE]]. 20

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.