Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Nonperturbative quantum gravity unlocked through computation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read Causal dynamical triangulations turn quantum gravity into a computable theory.

desk verdict A well-written review of CDT that makes a spirited case for lattice quantum gravity, but the central Planckian-window claim rests on an unproven continuum limit that the paper itself only conditions on 'favourable circumstances.' read the letter →

arxiv 2501.17972 v1 pith:5SPWVNZU submitted 2025-01-29 hep-th gr-qchep-lat

classification hep-thgr-qchep-lat PACS 04.60.-m04.60.Nc
keywords causaldynamicaltriangulationsnonperturbativequantumgravitylatticeemergentspacetimedeSitteruniversePlanckscaleobservables
open problems Quantum Gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that quantum gravity has become computable through causal dynamical triangulations (CDT), a lattice formulation that builds the dynamical and Lorentzian nature of spacetime into the lattice. It claims that Monte Carlo simulations now open a quantitative window on Planck-scale geometry, producing measurable observables and strong evidence that a macroscopic, four-dimensional spacetime with de Sitter-like properties emerges from the quantum superposition. The author contends that this is the gravitational analogue of lattice QCD and the most promising route to deriving early-universe physics from first principles.

What carries the argument

The central object is the causal dynamical triangulation: a piecewise-flat Lorentzian spacetime assembled from four-simplices with two fixed edge lengths (spacelike squared length $a^2$ and timelike squared length $-\alpha a^2$), glued together so that each triangulation has a global time ordering. The two load-bearing mechanisms are the analytic continuation of $\alpha$ to $-\alpha$ through the lower-half complex plane, which converts the complex path integral into a real partition function usable in Monte Carlo simulations, and universality, which is supposed to guarantee that the continuum limit is independent of the details of the lattice regularization.

What would settle it

Compute the de Sitter volume profile and spectral dimension on sequences of lattices with decreasing spacing $a$; if the extracted macroscopic observables drift with $a$ or the de Sitter phase disappears as $a \to 0$, the claimed Planckian window is a lattice artifact and the central claim is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that CDT is a functioning nonperturbative computational framework for quantum gravity. By summing over triangulated Lorentzian spacetimes with a built-in causal ordering, and analytically continuing a parameter to convert the complex path integral into a real partition function, the theory becomes amenable to Monte Carlo simulation. These simulations measure geometric observables such as dimensionality, volume profiles, curvature, and spectral dimension, and they show the dynamical generation of a quantum spacetime whose large-scale properties match those of a semiclassical de Sitter space. The paper further claims that this emergence is not generic: without causal structure, the path integral is dominated by degenerate phases like branched polymers, so requiring causality is the key to obtaining a four-dimensional world.

Load-bearing premise

The continuum limit exists and is universal: results obtained at finite lattice spacing survive, with renormalized couplings, as the lattice spacing is sent to zero, rather than being dominated by lattice artifacts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • CDT provides the first quantitative measurements of quantum spacetime observables near the Planck scale, moving quantum gravity beyond formalism to concrete numerical results.
  • The evidence for a dynamically generated four-dimensional de Sitter-like spacetime indicates that classical spacetime can emerge from a nonperturbative quantum superposition without being put in by hand.
  • The failure of causal-structure-free lattice models shows that emergence is not automatic; imposing causal ordering is the crucial ingredient for obtaining a macroscopic spacetime.
  • A concrete path now exists to connect CDT results to early-universe physics, potentially justifying or correcting the assumption of a de Sitter background from first principles.
  • The notion of solving quantum gravity is reshaped: quantitative computation of observables, rather than purely formal or perturbative arguments, becomes the primary goal.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the CDT continuum limit holds, the measured volume-profile correlator could be used to fix the effective cosmological action, opening a parameter-free route to early-universe fluctuation spectra.
  • The paper's insistence on nonlocal observables suggests that many semiclassical questions, such as the black hole information loss problem, are not merely difficult but operationally undefined in this framework.
  • A natural next test is to couple standard matter fields to CDT and check whether the de Sitter phase survives with realistic matter content, which would strengthen the case that the result is physical.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper is a nontechnical review essay arguing that causal dynamical triangulations (CDT) provide the first working nonperturbative lattice framework for quantum gravity, in which Monte Carlo simulations can measure Planckian geometric observables and obtain quantitative evidence for an emergent, effectively four-dimensional de Sitter-like spacetime. The text explains why lattice quantum gravity requires dynamical and causal lattices, distinguishes lattice regularization from fundamental discreteness, surveys observable measurements such as the volume profile, spectral dimension, and effective cosmological action, and outlines a research path toward early-universe physics. The central claim is that CDT has opened an unprecedented computational window near the Planck scale and that this changes what it means to solve quantum gravity.

Significance. If the CDT continuum limit is eventually established, this program would indeed be a major step: a QCD-style computational approach to nonperturbative quantum gravity, with concrete geometric observables and falsifiable predictions within the regularized theory. The paper has clear strengths as an essay: it gives an accessible and largely honest account of the challenges, explicitly warns against generic pathologies such as polymerization and crumpling, carefully distinguishes lattice regularization from fundamental spacetime discreteness, and connects its claims to published peer-reviewed work. It also makes useful conceptual points about the nonlocal nature of diffeomorphism-invariant observables in the Planckian regime. However, as a scientific claim, the significance is constrained by the fact that the paper contains no original numerical data and, more importantly, by its own repeated acknowledgment that the continuum limit is only assumed to exist under favorable circumstances. The headline assertions therefore outrun the evidence actually supplied.

major comments (3)
  1. [Lattice quantum gravity is not discrete quantum gravity; Emergence: aspirations and reality] The central claim of the paper is that CDT has produced strong, quantitative evidence for an emergent de Sitter spacetime, but the text itself states that sending the cutoff to zero leads to a continuum theory only 'under favourable circumstances' and that the continuum limit 'cannot be reached in practice, but is extrapolated systematically from sequences of ever finer lattices.' No concrete multi-spacing extrapolation or finite-size scaling analysis for the de Sitter observables is presented or cited. Since the paper also warns, in the same section, that the lattice resolution must be significantly smaller than the Planck scale to avoid domination by discretization artifacts, the reader cannot tell whether the reported volume profiles, spectral dimensions, and effective actions are continuum physics or artifacts of simulations with only 10^5 to 10^6 four-simplices. The manuscript should either include a dedicated discussion of the status of the continuum limit for four-dimensional CDT or explicitly downgrade the wording from 'strong, quantitative evidence' to evidence within the regularized theory whose continuum interpretation remains an open working assumption.
  2. [Emergence: aspirations and reality] The quantitative evidence cited for the headline claim is drawn almost exclusively from papers by the same research group, in many cases by the author herself or close collaborators (Refs. [10]-[12], [14], [29]-[32], [36]-[38], [43]-[46]). No independent replication or critical assessment of these results is mentioned. For a review essay this is not by itself disqualifying, but the paper should explicitly state that the evidence is currently program-internal and has not yet been independently reproduced. As written, the phrase 'strong, quantitative evidence' suggests an external validation that the cited literature does not demonstrate.
  3. [Abstract; Lattice quantum gravity: unlocking the early universe] The title, abstract, and concluding sections assert that quantum gravity has been 'unlocked through computation' and that an 'unprecedented computational window' is open, yet the body repeatedly concedes that major steps remain: the text speaks of 'highly nontrivial investigations' still required before connecting to early-universe physics, and describes the program as 'still at a much more exploratory stage.' The categorical framing should be matched to these qualifications, for example by replacing 'unlocked' with 'made computationally approachable' and by adding a sentence to the abstract noting that the continuum limit remains under investigation. This matters because the abstract is the part most likely to be quoted as a definitive claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Lattice quantum gravity is not discrete quantum gravity] In the footnote defining the spectral dimension and volume profile, the phrase 'and and' contains a duplicated conjunction and should be corrected.
  2. [Emergence: aspirations and reality] The sentence 'no matter how they are weighed or coarse-grained' uses 'weighed' where the context requires 'weighted'.
  3. [Lattice quantum gravity is not discrete quantum gravity] Footnote 7 is a sentence fragment ('depending on at most a small number of parameters...'); it should be completed, for example by beginning 'This uniqueness is up to at most a small number of parameters...'.
  4. [CDT and the challenges of lattice quantum gravity] Equation (1) uses the symbol G for the configuration space without explicit definition; the surrounding text should state that G denotes the space of Lorentzian geometries.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the review summarizes published CDT numerics and hedges the continuum-limit premise; no prediction reduces by construction to a fit or to a self-citation.

full rationale

This is a nontechnical review, not a derivation. Its central claims, such as the existence of a de Sitter-like phase and of a Planckian computational window, are presented as summaries of earlier CDT papers (e.g., refs. [31, 36, 32, 37, 38]), which contain the actual numerical experiments. The text does not fit a parameter and then relabel that fit as a prediction: the one reconstructed quantity, the effective cosmological action, is explicitly described as 'reverse-engineered' from measured three-volume correlators [43]. The formal input is the path integral (1), and CDT is proposed as its regularization; the claimed output is a measured property of the regularized ensemble. The continuum-limit requirement is explicitly conditional ('under favourable circumstances leads to an essentially unique continuum quantum theory without infinities [16]') and is supported by textbook universality [17]; this is a stated assumption and an acknowledged open condition, and the paper itself says 'highly nontrivial investigations' remain before early-universe connections. The paper cites the author's own prior work heavily, and in that bibliographic sense the evidence is self-generated, but the cited results are published, peer-reviewed numerical experiments with stated methods, and no equation or claim in this text is shown to be equivalent by construction to an input of the same text. Self-citation without a demonstrated reduction is not circularity under the review rules.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This ledger records the background assumptions on which the CDT case rests, none of which are established inside this paper. The paper itself introduces no fitted parameters, but the framework depends on a small number of bare constants and on the analytic continuation prescription taken from prior work.

free parameters (2)
  • alpha (timelike edge squared-length parameter) = Not stated in this paper; it is a fixed positive lattice parameter, later continued to -alpha.
    The text in 'CDT: lattices going causal' treats alpha as a parameter that can be chosen arbitrarily from the classical point of view; the existence of the simulated phase structure and the Wick rotation both depend on it.
  • bare gravitational couplings of the simplicial action = Not specified in this paper.
    The CDT path integral and its phase structure depend on bare couplings that must be tuned near phase transitions; the review does not give their values or fitting procedure.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Feynman path integral over geometries is the correct starting point for quantum gravity.
    Adopted without argument in 'CDT and the challenges of lattice quantum gravity'; it is a standard postulate but not derived.
  • domain assumption Analytic continuation of alpha to -alpha in the lower half-plane converts the Lorentzian CDT path integral into a real, Monte-Carlo-samplable partition function.
    Asserted with citation [25] in 'CDT: lattices going causal'; no derivation is reproduced, and its nonperturbative validity is assumed.
  • domain assumption The lattice theory has a continuum limit and is universal, so details of the regularization do not affect the continuum theory.
    Invoked in 'Lattice quantum gravity is not discrete quantum gravity' via refs [16,17]; for four-dimensional CDT this remains a conjecture, as the text's 'under favourable circumstances' admits.
  • domain assumption The discrete relabeling invariance of triangulations exactly implements diffeomorphism invariance for observables.
    Stated in 'CDT: lattices going dynamical' as an analogue of coordinate invariance; its sufficiency for defining physical observables is assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonperturbative quantum gravity unlocked through computation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5SPWVNZU

@misc{pith2026250117972,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonperturbative quantum gravity unlocked through computation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5SPWVNZU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.17972}
}
read the original abstract

Being able to perform explicit computations in a nonperturbative, Planckian regime is key to understanding quantum gravity as a fundamental theory of gravity and spacetime. Rather than a variety of different approaches to quantum gravity, what we primarily need is a gravitational analogue of the highly successful lattice treatment of nonperturbative quantum chromodynamics. Unsurprisingly, however, lattice quantum gravity is not simple. The crucial insight that has finally led to success is to build the dynamical and Lorentzian nature of spacetime into the lattices from the outset. Lattice quantum gravity based on causal dynamical triangulations (CDT) puts this idea into practice and is producing new and exciting physical results from numerical experiments. This largely nontechnical account describes the challenges and achievements of modern lattice quantum gravity, which has opened an unprecedented computational window on quantum spacetime in a Planckian regime and is reshaping our understanding of what it means to "solve" quantum gravity. This methodology is well placed to unlock the physics of the early universe from first principles. Related topics discussed are the difference between lattice and discrete quantum gravity, and the role of spacetime emergence in the light of computational results.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [10]

    Ambjørn, A

    J. Ambjørn, A. G¨ orlich, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll,Nonperturbative quantum gravity, Phys. Rept. 519 (2012) 127-210, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2012.03.007 [arXiv:1203.3591, hep-th]

  2. [12]

    Ambjørn and R

    J. Ambjørn and R. Loll, Causal dynamical triangulations: Gateway to non- perturbative quantum gravity, in Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics (2nd Edition), eds. M. Bojowald and R. Szabo, Elsevier (2025) vol. 1, 555-567, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-95703-8.00109-9 [arXiv:2401.09399, hep-th]

  3. [14]

    Ambjørn, J

    J. Ambjørn, J. Gizbert-Studnicki, A. G¨ orlich and D. N´ emeth,Is lattice quan- tum gravity asymptotically safe? Making contact between causal dynamical triangulations and the functional renormalization group , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 126006, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.126006 [arXiv:2408.07808, hep- lat]

  4. [29]

    Ambjørn, S

    J. Ambjørn, S. Jordan, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, A second-order phase transition in CDT , Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 211303, doi: 10.1103/Phys- RevLett.107.211303 [arXiv:1108.3932, hep-th]

  5. [32]

    Ambjørn, A

    J. Ambjørn, A. G¨ orlich, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, Planckian birth of the quantum de Sitter universe , Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 091304, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.091304 [arXiv:0712.2485, hep-th]

  6. [36]

    Ambjørn, J

    J. Ambjørn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, Reconstructing the universe , Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 064014, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.72.064014 [arXiv:hep- th/0505154, hep-th]

  7. [38]

    Klitgaard and R

    N. Klitgaard and R. Loll, How round is the quantum de Sitter universe? , Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) no.10, 990, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08569-5 [arXiv:2006.06263, hep-th]

  8. [43]

    The effective action in 4-dim CDT. The transfer matrix approach

    J. Ambjørn, J. Gizbert-Studnicki, A. G¨ orlich and J. Jurkiewicz,The effective action in 4-dim CDT. The transfer matrix approach , JHEP 06 (2014) 034, doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2014)034 [arXiv:1403.5940, hep-th]

  9. [46]

    Measuring the Homogeneity (or Otherwise) of the Quantum Universe

    R. Loll and A. Silva, Measuring the homogeneity of the quantum uni- verse, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 086013, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.107.086013 [arXiv:2302.10256, hep-th]. 20

Show all 46 references
  1. [1]

    Goroff and A

    M.H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, Quantum gravity at two loops , Phys. Lett. B 160 (1985) 81-86, doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(85)91470-4

  2. [2]

    van de Ven, Two loop quantum gravity , Nucl

    A.E.M. van de Ven, Two loop quantum gravity , Nucl. Phys. B 378 (1992) 309-366, doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(92)90011-Y

  3. [3]

    Loll, Discrete approaches to quantum gravity in four dimensions , Living Rev

    R. Loll, Discrete approaches to quantum gravity in four dimensions , Living Rev. Rel. 1 (1998) 13, doi: 10.12942/lrr-1998-13 [arXiv:gr-qc/9805049, gr- qc]

  4. [4]

    Armas, Conversations on quantum gravity , Cambridge University Press (2021), doi: 10.1017/9781316717639

    J. Armas, Conversations on quantum gravity , Cambridge University Press (2021), doi: 10.1017/9781316717639

  5. [5]

    Stephani, D

    H. Stephani, D. Kramer, M. MacCallum, C. Hoenselaers and E. Herlt, Exact solutions of Einstein ’s field equations , 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press (2009), doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511535185

  6. [6]

    Baumgarte and S.L

    T.W. Baumgarte and S.L. Shapiro, Numerical relativity: Starting from scratch, Cambridge University Press (2021), doi: 10.1017/9781108933445

  7. [7]

    Workman et al

    R.L. Workman et al. [Particle Data Group], Review of particle physics, PTEP 2022 (2022), 083C01, Sec. 17, doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptac097

  8. [8]

    Budd, Lessons from the mathematics of two-dimensional Euclidean quan- tum gravity, in Handbook of Quantum Gravity, eds

    T. Budd, Lessons from the mathematics of two-dimensional Euclidean quan- tum gravity, in Handbook of Quantum Gravity, eds. C. Bambi, L. Modesto and I.L. Shapiro, Springer, Singapore (2023) 3329-3383, doi: 10.1007/978- 981-99-7681-2 85 [arXiv:2212.03031, gr-qc]. 16

  9. [9]

    R. Loll, G. Fabiano, D. Frattulillo and F. Wagner, Quantum grav- ity in 30 questions , PoS (CORFU2021) 316, doi: 10.22323/1.406.0316 [arXiv:2206.06762, hep-th]

  10. [11]

    Loll, Quantum gravity from causal dynamical triangulations: A re- view, Class

    R. Loll, Quantum gravity from causal dynamical triangulations: A re- view, Class. Quant. Grav. 37 (2020) 013002, doi: 10.1088/1361-6382/ab57c7 [arXiv:1905.08669, hep-th]

  11. [13]

    Surya, The causal set approach to quantum gravity , Living Rev

    S. Surya, The causal set approach to quantum gravity , Living Rev. Rel. 22 (2019) no.1, 5, doi: 10.1007/s41114-019-0023-1 [arXiv:1903.11544, gr-qc]

  12. [15]

    Reuter and F

    M. Reuter and F. Saueressig, Quantum gravity and the func- tional renormalization group , Cambridge University Press (2019), doi: 10.1017/9781316227596

  13. [16]

    Montvay and G

    I. Montvay and G. M¨ unster,Quantum fields on a lattice , Cambridge Univer- sity Press (1994), doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511470783

  14. [17]

    Goldenfeld, Lectures on phase transitions and the renormalization group , Addison-Wesley, Boston (1992), doi: 10.1201/9780429493492

    N. Goldenfeld, Lectures on phase transitions and the renormalization group , Addison-Wesley, Boston (1992), doi: 10.1201/9780429493492

  15. [18]

    Bambi, L

    C. Bambi, L. Modesto and I. Shapiro (eds.), Handbook of quantum gravity , Springer, Singapore (2024), doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-7681-2

  16. [19]

    Dasgupta and R

    A. Dasgupta and R. Loll, A proper time cure for the conformal sickness in quantum gravity , Nucl. Phys. B 606 (2001) 357-379, doi: 10.1016/S0550- 3213(01)00227-9 [arXiv:hep-th/0103186, hep-th]

  17. [20]

    Smolin, Quantum gravity on a lattice , Nucl

    L. Smolin, Quantum gravity on a lattice , Nucl. Phys. B 148 (1979) 333-372, doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(79)90140-8. 17

  18. [21]

    Williams, Quantum Regge calculus , in Approaches to Quantum Grav- ity, ed

    R. Williams, Quantum Regge calculus , in Approaches to Quantum Grav- ity, ed. D. Oriti, Cambridge University Press (2009) 360-377, doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511575549.023

  19. [22]

    Ambjørn, B

    J. Ambjørn, B. Durhuus and T. Jonsson, Quantum geometry: A sta- tistical field theory approach , Cambridge University Press (1997), doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511524417

  20. [23]

    Ambjørn and R

    J. Ambjørn and R. Loll, Nonperturbative Lorentzian quantum gravity, causality and topology change , Nucl. Phys. B 536 (1998) 407-434, doi: 10.1016/S0550-3213(98)00692-0 [arXiv:hep-th/9805108, hep-th]

  21. [24]

    Wilson, Confinement of quarks, Phys

    K.G. Wilson, Confinement of quarks, Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 2445-2459, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.10.2445

  22. [25]

    Ambjørn, J

    J. Ambjørn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, Dynamically triangulating Lorentzian quantum gravity , Nucl. Phys. B 610 (2001) 347-382, doi: 10.1016/S0550- 3213(01)00297-8 [arXiv:hep-th/0105267, hep-th]

  23. [26]

    David, Planar diagrams, two-dimensional lattice gravity and surface mod- els, Nucl

    F. David, Planar diagrams, two-dimensional lattice gravity and surface mod- els, Nucl. Phys. B 257 (1985) 45-58, doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(85)90335-9

  24. [27]

    Agishtein and A.A

    M.E. Agishtein and A.A. Migdal, Critical behavior of dynamically triangu- lated quantum gravity in four-dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B 385 (1992) 395-412 doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(92)90106-L [arXiv:hep-lat/9204004, hep-lat]

  25. [28]

    Ambjørn, Lattice quantum gravity: EDT and CDT , in Handbook of Quan- tum Gravity, eds

    J. Ambjørn, Lattice quantum gravity: EDT and CDT , in Handbook of Quan- tum Gravity, eds. C. Bambi, L. Modesto and I.L. Shapiro, Springer, Singa- pore (2024), doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-3079-9 84-1 [arXiv:2209.06555, hep- lat]

  26. [30]

    Coumbe, J

    D.N. Coumbe, J. Gizbert-Studnicki and J. Jurkiewicz, Exploring the new phase transition of CDT , JHEP 02 (2016) 144, doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2016)144 [arXiv:1510.08672, hep-th]

  27. [31]

    Ambjørn, J

    J. Ambjørn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, Emergence of a 4-D world from causal quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 131301, doi: 10.1103/Phys- RevLett.93.131301 [arXiv:hep-th/0404156, hep-th]. 18

  28. [33]

    Barcel´ o, S

    C. Barcel´ o, S. Liberati and M. Visser,Analogue gravity, Living Rev. Rel. 14 (2011) 3, doi: 10.12942/lrr-2011-3 [arXiv:gr-qc/0505065, gr-qc]

  29. [34]

    Ambjørn, J

    J. Ambjørn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll, The spectral dimension of the universe is scale-dependent, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 171301, doi: 10.1103/Phys- RevLett.95.171301 [arXiv:hep-th/0505113, hep-th]

  30. [35]

    Ambjørn, A

    J. Ambjørn, A. G¨ orlich, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll,CDT - an entropic theory of quantum gravity , Proceedings, Workshop on Continuum and Lattice Ap- proaches to Quantum Gravity, CLAQG08, Brighton, UK, Sep. 17-19 (2008) [arXiv:1007.2560, hep-th]

  31. [37]

    Ambjørn, A

    J. Ambjørn, A. G¨ orlich, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll,The nonperturbative quan- tum de Sitter universe , Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 063544, doi: 10.1103/Phys- RevD.78.063544 [arXiv:0807.4481, hep-th]

  32. [39]

    Brunekreef, A

    J. Brunekreef, A. G¨ orlich and R. Loll, Simulating CDT quantum gravity , Comput. Phys. Commun. 300 (2024) 109170, doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109170 [arXiv:2310.16744, hep-th]

  33. [40]

    Clemente and J

    G. Clemente and J. Gizbert-Studnicki, private communication

  34. [41]

    Mathur, The information paradox: A pedagogical introduction , Class

    S.D. Mathur, The information paradox: A pedagogical introduction , Class. Quant. Grav. 26 (2009) 224001, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/26/22/224001 [arXiv:0909.1038, hep-th]

  35. [42]

    Ambjørn, Z

    J. Ambjørn, Z. Drogosz, J. Gizbert-Studnicki, A. G¨ orlich, J. Jurkiewicz and D. N´ emeth,Scalar fields in causal dynamical triangulations , Class. Quant. Grav. 38 (2021) 195030, doi: 10.1088/1361-6382/ac2135 [arXiv:2105.10086, gr-qc]. 19

  36. [44]

    van der Duin and R

    J. van der Duin and R. Loll, Curvature correlators in nonperturbative 2D Lorentzian quantum gravity , Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) no.7, 759, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13110-z [arXiv:2404.17556, hep-th]

  37. [45]

    Glaser and R

    L. Glaser and R. Loll, CDT and cosmology , Comptes Rendus Physique 18 (2017) 265-274, doi: 10.1016/j.crhy.2017.04.002 [arXiv:1703.08160, gr-qc]

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.