Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

This paper claims that symmetry breaking of a multicomponent W3 algebra over a Jordan algebra, through the singular point of a modified Friedmann curve, produces 4D spacetime, the Planck scale, the 10^60 hierarchy, late-time acceleration, a

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 10:17 UTC pith:DNSUZ6I4

load-bearing objection Ambitious W3/Jordan-algebra cosmology with one genuinely nice algebraic-curve result, but the bridge to the modified Friedmann equation is assumed, not derived, and the hierarchy 'explanation' is partly circular. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2601.10499 v2 pith:DNSUZ6I4 submitted 2026-01-15 gr-qc hep-th

The emergence of the universe

Jan Ambjorn , Yoshiyuki Watabiki This is my paper
classification gr-qc hep-th
keywords W3 algebraJordan algebrasknitting mechanismwormhole webmodified Friedmann equationalgebraic curvecosmological hierarchyscale-invariant spectrum
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper claims that the universe can emerge from a symmetry-broken multicomponent W3 algebra whose components form a Jordan algebra, with no initial singularity: time appears first, then one-dimensional universes of different flavors knit together through wormholes into higher-dimensional spacetime. The effective expansion is governed by a modified Friedmann equation, H_eff = V[-3/4(P^2 + 2g/P)], whose solution lies on an algebraic curve with a singular node at (λ,h) = (1,1) that fixes a natural reference scale. The same wormhole-web dynamics renormalizes the bare coupling g0 down to g ≈ 10^-180 g0, converting a Planck-scale vacuum term into the observed tiny one and thereby 'explaining' the 10^60 hierarchies of time, size, and energy density. A sympathetic reader would care because a single mechanism is claimed to produce 4D spacetime, the Planck length, late-time acceleration without a cosmological constant, the low-entropy initial state, and scale-invariant primordial fluctuations, all tied to one algebraic curve.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the observed universe is the macroscopic endpoint of a knitting process: symmetry breaking in a multicomponent W3 algebra over a Jordan algebra produces one-dimensional spatial universes (flavors) that propagate in time, and wormhole interactions knit them into a condensate that is an effective higher-dimensional spacetime. The large-scale dynamics is supposed to be the modified Friedmann equation (Eq. 60), H_eff = V[-3/4(P^2+2g/P)], with the cosmological constant set to zero by the Coleman mechanism; the extra 2g/P term, inherited from baby-universe absorption, drives late-time acceleration. The solution of this equation is shown to lie on the algebraic cur

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the modified Friedmann Hamiltonian H_eff = V[-3/4(P^2 + 2g/P)] (Eq. 60), obtained by assuming maximal symmetry of the effective condensation of baby universes. Its dimensionless solution lies on the algebraic curve f(λ,h)=2λ^3 - 3λ^2h^2 + 2h^3 - 1 = 0, and the only real singular point, the node (λ,h)=(1,1), defines a reference epoch through the exact numbers τ_s=1.639, Ω_m,s=2/3, L_s/t_s=1.294 — all independent of g. A second piece of machinery is the wormhole-web amplitude (Eqs. 96-101): tree graphs of CDT wormhole propagators, with 2d-3 internal lines, that give A* ≈ 10^61 for d=25 and rescale the coupling g = g0 A*^{-3} and lengths L = L0 A*^{1/d}, dynamically g

Load-bearing premise

The promotion of the 1+1D baby-universe Hamiltonian (Eq. 59) to the higher-dimensional effective Hamiltonian H_eff = V[-3/4(P^2+2g/P)] (Eq. 60) rests on 'maximal symmetry' plus the assumption that the Coleman mechanism drives the cosmological constant to zero; the paper itself labels the knitting arguments 'in no way rigorous' (Sec. 3.2.2), and if that promotion fails, the algebraic-curve singular point, the g-hierarchy derivation, and every cosmological prediction collapse.

What would settle it

Compute the full wormhole-web amplitude (Eq. 100) numerically with exact CDT wormhole propagators instead of the short-height approximation Δ ~ sqrt(L_wh/t_wh): if A* for d=25 deviates from ~10^61 by even an order of magnitude, the 10^60 hierarchy and the derived smallness of g fail. Alternatively, a precise measurement of the primordial tilt n_s differing from 1 by more than the current ~0.03 uncertainty would directly contradict Eq. 113.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • If correct, the model produces exactly four extended spacetime dimensions from the H3(C) Jordan algebra (with six compact toroidal dimensions), and the H3(O) algebra leaves between three and ten extended dimensions, matching the observed 4D world.
  • The modified Friedmann equation, fitted with CDM, accommodates a local Hubble constant H0 = 73 km/s/Mpc alongside other late-time data, providing a resolution of the Hubble tension without a cosmological constant.
  • The singular point of the algebraic curve predicts that t0/t_Planck, L0/L_Planck, and E_univ/E_Planck are all of order 10^60 whenever the present epoch is close to the node, thereby 'understanding' the three large-number coincidences.
  • The wormhole-web estimate fixes g ≈ 10^-180 g0, converting a bare Planckian cosmological constant into the observed tiny value, with the small-g phase playing the role of an order parameter for the spacetime condensate.
  • Primordial perturbations inherit a 1/k spectrum from the one-dimensional pre-knitting modes, giving a scale-invariant spectrum n_s ≈ 1 without an inflaton or horizon-crossing mechanism.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the algebraic-curve singularity is a genuine feature rather than a coincidence of the parametrization, the epoch (λ_s,h_s)=(1,1) should leave a g-independent imprint in the expansion history at some redshift; a future measurement of H(z) and Ω_m(z) could search for the predicted Ω_m=2/3 crossing.
  • The hierarchy factor hinges on the d=25 estimate (Eq. 101); computing the full sum over tree diagrams with the exact (non-approximate) CDT propagators, rather than Δ ~ sqrt(L_wh/t_wh), would test whether A* remains ≈10^61 and hence whether the octonionic H3(O) choice is really forced.
  • The same one-dimensional-mechanics origin of fluctuations suggests a calculable small running of n_s from finite wormhole-length corrections; deriving that correction from Eq. (111) would distinguish this model from single-field inflation on observational grounds.
  • Because the Coleman mechanism is invoked to zero out the ordinary cosmological constant but not the wormhole-web contribution, a sharp in-principle target is the split between Λ (which vanishes) and g (which does not); a direct computation of Coleman's probability distribution within this W3/CDT setting would decide whether the two assumptions are compatible.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a multiverse model in which a symmetry-breaking of a multicomponent W3 algebra over Jordan algebras H3(C) and H3(O) generates one-dimensional "flavored" universes. These universes interact through wormholes in a process called knitting, producing a higher-dimensional spacetime condensate. The paper claims that the effective dynamics of the emergent space is governed by a modified Friedmann equation derived from the minisuperspace Hamiltonian H_eff = V[-3/4(P^2 + 2g/P)] (Eq. 60), and that the solution lies on an algebraic curve whose singular point defines a natural cosmological scale. This scale is used to "explain" the observed 10^60 hierarchies, the smallness of the effective coupling g, the low-entropy initial state, and the near scale-invariance of primordial fluctuations. The paper is explicitly exploratory: it acknowledges in Sec. 3.2.2 that the knitting arguments are "in no way rigorous" and in Sec. 6 that constructing the tau-function for the condensate is a "major open goal."

Significance. If the central claim were established, the paper would present a unified origin of spacetime, the Planck scale, the large-number hierarchy, late-time acceleration, and the primordial spectrum from a single algebraic structure. This would be highly significant. However, the load-bearing bridge from the W3/Jordan-algebra dynamics to the higher-dimensional effective Hamiltonian (60) is not derived; it is assumed. The paper's strengths are its transparency about this gap, its explicit statement of open goals, and its prior quantitative comparison of the resulting Friedmann equation with cosmological data (Refs. [4,5,6]). The algebraic-curve reformulation and the singular-point relations (71) are elegant and internally consistent given Eq. (60). But because the central derivation is unfinished and part of the small-g argument is circular, the claims as they stand go beyond what the manuscript actually demonstrates.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4, Eq. (60)] Equation (60) is the pivotal result: the algebraic curve (66), the singular point (71), the hierarchy (88), the small-g estimate (101), and the fluctuation spectrum all follow from it. Yet it is not derived from the knitting Hamiltonian (38) or the Virasoro-like constraints (40)-(41). The text asserts that "maximal symmetry of the effective Hamiltonian" plus the Coleman mechanism leads to Eq. (60). Maximal symmetry can fix the P^2 (Hartle-Hawking) term, but it does not explain why the baby-universe absorption term 2g/P, which in the 1+1D GCDT model has a specific one-dimensional meaning (Eqs. (10)-(13), (59)), survives in exactly that functional form in the higher-dimensional volume variable V. This is a nontrivial dynamical assumption. The paper itself states in Sec. 3.2.2 that the knitting arguments are "in no way rigorous" and in Sec. 6 that constructing the tau-function for the conde
  2. [Sec. 5.1, Eqs. (83)-(88)] The claimed explanation of the 10^60 hierarchy is partly circular. The effective coupling g was previously obtained by fitting the same modified Friedmann equation to cosmological data (Refs. [4,5,6]), as the paper itself notes. Equation (88) then uses the observed ratios t0/t_planck ~ L0/L_planck ~ 10^60 to infer g^{-1/3} ~ 10^60 sqrt(G_N), and the paper states that the fit "indeed" gives this value. This is not an independent prediction: the observed ratios fix g, and the singular point translates that fitted value into a statement that the present epoch is near (lambda_s,h_s)=(1,1). To break the circularity, g would need to be derived from microscopic parameters (for example from A* in Sec. 5.2) before the cosmological observations are used, rather than being fitted and then re-derived.
  3. [Sec. 5.2, Eqs. (96)-(101)] The estimate A* ~ 10^61, which is used to explain the smallness of g, rests on several unproven assumptions: (i) tree diagrams dominate and the short-wormhole propagator is Delta ~ sqrt(L_wh/t_wh); (ii) t_wh ~ t_unit/d and t_unit ~ L_planck; (iii) g0 L^3_planck ~ 1; and (iv) the number of flavors d=25 in the H3(O) model is the relevant d in the amplitude. The result is highly sensitive to these choices; under the same assumptions, d=3 would give A* of order unity rather than 10^61. Moreover, the paper argued in Sec. 3.2 that H3(O) leads to 9 extended and 16 compact directions; using d=25 in the amplitude while later selecting D=3 macroscopic dimensions requires the exchange mechanism of Sec. 3.2.2, which the paper labels non-rigorous. Thus the derivation of the smallness of g is not robust.
  4. [Sec. 5.5, Eqs. (111)-(112)] The scale-invariant spectrum is asserted rather than derived. Starting from the 1D mode normalization <|delta f_k|^2> ~ 1/k, the paper states that knitting "distributes the original 1/k scaling" to give P(k) = const. No concrete transformation from one-dimensional fluctuations to higher-dimensional curvature perturbations is provided, and no calculation of the transfer through the knitting process is shown. Since scale-invariance is one of the paper's observational claims, this step needs at least a schematic derivation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 4, footnote 2] The footnote substantially qualifies the H0-tension claim: if one does not impose the local H0 measurement, standard LCDM fits the data better. This caveat should appear in the main text, because the current phrasing overstates the model's success.
  2. [Sec. 4, text before Eq. (61)] Typo: "km/mp/s" should be "km/s/Mpc" where it appears.
  3. [Sec. 4, Eqs. (68)-(69)] The variable z is introduced in Eq. (68) but used before its definition is fully clear; also the incomplete beta function B(z^3; 1/3, 0) involves a singular second parameter and deserves a comment on convergence or a limiting prescription.
  4. [Sec. 5.2, Eq. (96)] The step A* ~ gamma^d is motivated only by dimensional counting; the proportionality constant and the statement that the matrix element is of order unity are not justified. This should be flagged as an assumption even if the scaling argument is accepted.
  5. [Fig. 5] The text refers to a "magenta tree graph," but the figure is not clearly labeled in black-and-white print; please add labels or a caption explicitly identifying the wormhole web and the correspondence to Eq. (103).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Partial circularity: the g-hierarchy is inferred from the observed 10^60 ratios via the already-fitted effective Hamiltonian, then confirmed by the authors' own prior fit; the wormhole-web amplitude estimate is independent but post-dictive.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (88), using Eqs. (83)-(86) and (70)]
    "We thus obtain that g^{-1/3} ~ 10^{60} sqrt(G_N). In [4, 5, 6] we determined from cosmological observations the value of g that gave the best fit to the data, and we found indeed that g^{-1/3} ~ 10^{60} sqrt(G_N)."

    Equation (88) is not an independent derivation of the large-number hierarchy: it takes the observed ratios t0/t_planck ~ 10^60 and L0/L_planck ~ 10^60 as inputs and reads them through the singular-point relations (70) of the effective Hamiltonian (60), the same Hamiltonian whose coupling g was fitted to cosmological data in the authors' own prior work [4,5,6]. The 'prediction' g^{-1/3} ~ 10^60 is therefore a re-parametrization of the observed age/size hierarchies in terms of a previously fitted parameter, and the agreement with the cited fit is a self-consistency check, not an independent confirmation. The later wormhole-web estimate A* ~ 10^61 (Eq. 101) is a separate amplitude calculation, but it is presented as deriving the same number that Sec. 5.1 already inferred from the observed rat

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that a symmetry-broken multicomponent W3 algebra over a Jordan algebra produces the effective Hamiltonian (60)—is not itself circular: it is an asserted, largely conjectural promotion of the 1+1D baby-universe Hamiltonian (59) via 'maximal symmetry' and the Coleman mechanism, and the paper honestly flags the lack of rigor ('the above arguments are in no way rigorous', Sec. 3.2.2; construction of the tau-function is 'a major open goal', Sec. 6). Lack of derivation is a correctness risk, not circularity. The singular-point ratios in Eq. (71), Omega_m,s = 2/3 and L_s/t_s = 1.294, are parameter-free mathematical consequences of the assumed Hamiltonian and are independent content. The A* ~ 10^61 estimate uses d=25 from the H3(O) flavor count rather than the observed 10^60, so the small-g computation is not wholly fitted. However, Sec. 5.1 explicitly uses the observed hierarchy to locate the universe near the singular point and to infer g^{-1/3} ~ 10^60, then cites the authors' own earlier fit of the same effective Hamiltonian to confirm that value. That step is a fitted input presented as an explained coincidence, and many of the cosmological 'predictions' inherit the previously fitted model. Weighing the independent A* and singular-point content against this fitted-input conflation, the net circularity is partial rather than total.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 7 axioms · 2 invented entities

The model imports a long chain of unproven components from previous papers: the W3/GCDT correspondence, the coherent-state vacuum, the knitting condensate, the Coleman mechanism, and the effective minisuperspace Hamiltonian. The new hierarchy estimate depends on several ad hoc normalizations. This ledger lists the free choices and postulated structures that are load-bearing for the central claims.

free parameters (4)
  • g0 (bare W3 coupling) = ~1 in units with L_planck=1 (g0 L_planck^3 ~ 1)
    Introduced in Eq. (8) with mass dimension 3; set to O(1) by hand in Eq. (101). The smallness of g = g0/A*^3 follows from this normalization.
  • mu0, mu8, mu3 (symmetry-breaking vacuum parameters) = chosen so that Eq. (37) ordering holds
    Specified in Eq. (33); these choices decide which flavors expand and which stay compact, and therefore determine whether the emergent spacetime is 4D or higher-dimensional.
  • effective coupling g = g ≈ 10^-180 g0 (≈10^-180 if g0 ~ 1)
    Appears in the modified Friedmann equation (60). Its magnitude was previously fitted to late-time cosmology in refs. [4,5,6]; Sec. 5.2 attempts to derive it from A*, but the chain is not independent of the fit.
  • wormhole propagation time t_wh = t_wh ~ t_unit/d = L_planck/d
    A 'natural choice' in Sec. 5.2 used to evaluate A*. Because A* scales as (Lwh/twh)^((2d-3)/2), this choice contributes the 25^23.5 factor that helps produce 10^61.
axioms (7)
  • ad hoc to paper The physical vacuum is a coherent state with nonzero expectation values as in Eqs. (23) and (33).
    All subsequent emergence of time, space, and flavors follows from this choice of vacuum; no derivation from the absolute vacuum is supplied.
  • ad hoc to paper The knitting end-state is a time-independent condensate satisfying H_kn Z_kn = 0 (Eq. 20) with Virasoro-like constraints (40)-(41), described by a generalized tau-function.
    Equation (20) is introduced as 'tentative', and construction of the tau-function is listed as a major open goal in Sec. 6.
  • domain assumption The Coleman mechanism acts after knitting and drives the ordinary cosmological constant to zero.
    Invoked in Sec. 4 to remove Lambda from H_eff; imported from ref. [13] without derivation within this model.
  • ad hoc to paper Maximal symmetry of the knitted spacetime gives H_eff = V[-3/4(P^2 + 2g/P)] in any dimension d > 1.
    Sec. 4 makes this promotion by analogy with the Hartle-Hawking minisuperspace Hamiltonian; this is the key step carrying the 1/P baby-universe term into 4D.
  • ad hoc to paper Wormhole tree diagrams dominate; the short-wormhole propagator is Delta ~ sqrt(Lwh/twh); t_wh ~ t_unit/d and g0 L_planck^3 ~ 1.
    These approximations fix A* in Eqs. (100)-(101). The text itself calls the choices 'natural' and the argument approximate.
  • ad hoc to paper One-dimensional vacuum fluctuations have power 1/k and knitting distributes them to give P(k) = constant.
    Sec. 5.5 asserts Eqs. (111)-(112) without a transfer calculation linking 1D modes to the observed 4D spectrum.
  • ad hoc to paper The 24 flavor spaces are created independently and with equal probability.
    Used in Sec. 3.2.3 to compute dimensionality probabilities; stated as a simplifying assumption with no dynamical support.
invented entities (2)
  • Wormhole web (Planck-scale spacetime condensate) no independent evidence
    purpose: Knits one-dimensional flavor universes into a higher-dimensional spacetime and carries the amplitude A* that sets g and the effective vacuum energy.
    No direct observational signature; its properties are fixed by the heuristic estimate (100), not by an independent mechanism.
  • Flavored one-dimensional universes (with wormholes as small universes) no independent evidence
    purpose: Microscopic pre-spacetime degrees of freedom whose merging via knitting generates d-dimensional space and whose quantum fluctuations seed the primordial spectrum.
    Postulated by the W3/GCDT framework; no external evidence beyond the model's own cosmological consistency arguments.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22061 in / 20994 out tokens · 201907 ms · 2026-08-03T10:17:04.648365+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The emergence of the universe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DNSUZ6I4

@misc{pith2026260110499,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The emergence of the universe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DNSUZ6I4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.10499}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We show how our Universe can emerge from a symmetry breaking of a multicomponent $W_3$ algebra, where the components in addition form a Jordan algebra. We discuss how symmetry breaking related to the Jordan algebras $H_3(C)$ and $H_3(O)$ over the complex and octonion numbers can lead to an extended four-dimensional spacetime, where the expansion of the Universe is governed by a modified Friedmann equation. We finally discuss how this modified Friedmann equation might explain a number of puzzling cosmological observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.10499 by Jan Ambjorn, Yoshiyuki Watabiki.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Points of two one-dimensional universes with different flavors (here different colors) are identified via knitting, i.e. by exchange of wormholes. In this way the two T 1 spatial universes merge into a a two-dimensional T 2 universe that propagates in time (the direction of the arrow). For combinatorial convenience a point on the entrance loop of each of the two universes is marked (see [8, 3] for a discus… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: On the left picture three one-dimensional universes with different flavors (here different colors) are identified via knitting, i.e. by exchange of wormholes. The wormholes forms a tree￾diagram made possible by the cubic interaction term of the α (0) mode in (24) . In this way three T 1 spatial universes merge into T 3 , a three-dimensional toroidal universe. The generalization to higher dimensional toroid… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The figure is similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The algebraic curve (66) plotted in the (λ, h) plane. The branch of the curve parametrized by negative p starts at the left at (λ, h) → (−∞,∞) for p → −0 and move to the right for decreasing p. The branch of the curve parametrized by positive p goes to (∞, ∞) for p → +0, and to (∞, −∞) for p → ∞. The two branches intersect in (1,1). The two branches intersect in a singular point or node in the framework of… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The graphical representation of Eq. (103), which describes the knitting mechanism from the viewpoint of the wormhole web (magenta tree graph). Here each thick magenta segment represents a cylindrical one–dimensional universe connected through wormholes, even though it is drawn as a line in the figure. The full magenta network corresponds to a single wormhole web with quantum weight A. The Planck–scale worm… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Can a late-time cosmological model based on baby universe absorption explain the z-variation of w?

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Baby-universe absorption model accounts for late-time acceleration and yields w(z) < -1 without a cosmological constant.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 16 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Ambjørn and Y

    J. Ambjørn and Y. Watabiki, Phys. Lett. B770(2017), 252-256, [arXiv:1703.04402 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  2. [2]

    Ambjørn and Y

    J. Ambjørn and Y. Watabiki, Nucl. Phys. B955(2020), 115044, [arXiv:2003.13527 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  3. [3]

    Y. Watabiki, The Causality Road from Dynamical Triangulations to Quantum Gravity that Describes Our Universe, In *Handbook of Quantum Gravity*, edited by Cosimo Bambi, Leonardo Modesto, Ilya Shapiro, Springer, 2025, [arXiv:2212.13109 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Ambjørn and Y

    J. Ambjørn and Y. Watabiki, Phys. Lett. B749(2015), 149-152, [arXiv:1505.04353 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    Ambjørn and Y

    J. Ambjørn and Y. Watabiki, Mod. Phys. Lett. A32(2017) no.40, 1750224, [arXiv:1709.06497 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  6. [6]

    Ambjorn and Y

    J. Ambjorn and Y. Watabiki, JCAP12(2023), 011, [arXiv:2308.10924 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    H. Fuji, M. Manabe, Y. Watabiki, [arXiv:2509.18916 [hep-th]]. H. Fuji, M. Manabe, Y. Watabiki, [arXiv:2512.10519 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [8]

    Ambjorn and R

    J. Ambjorn and R. Loll, Nucl.Phys.B536(1998) 407-434, [hep-th/9805108]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  9. [9]

    Ambjørn, L

    J. Ambjørn, L. Glaser, Y. Sato and Y. Watabiki, Phys. Lett. B722(2013), 172-175, [arXiv:1302.6359 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  10. [10]

    Hoˇ rava, Phys

    P. Hoˇ rava, Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 084008, [arXiv:0901.3775, hep-th]. 31

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  11. [11]

    Ambjorn, R

    J. Ambjorn, R. Loll, W. Westra and S. Zohren, JHEP0712(2007) 017, [arXiv:0709.2784 [gr-qc]]. J. Ambjorn, R. Loll, Y. Watabiki, W. Westra and S. Zohren, Phys. Lett. B665 (2008) 252, [arXiv:0804.0252 [hep-th]]. J. Ambjorn and T. G. Budd, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.46(2013) 315201, [arXiv:1302.1763 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  12. [12]

    Ambjorn, R

    J. Ambjorn, R. Loll, Y. Watabiki, W. Westra and S. Zohren, JHEP05(2008), 032, [arXiv:0802.0719 [hep-th]]. J. Ambjorn, R. Loll, Y. Watabiki, W. Westra and S. Zohren, Phys. Lett. B665 (2008), 252-256, [arXiv:0804.0252 [hep-th]]. J. Ambjorn, R. Loll, Y. Watabiki, W. Westra and S. Zohren, Phys. Lett. B670 (2008), 224-230, [arXiv:0810.2408 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  13. [13]

    S. R. Coleman, Nucl. Phys. B310(1988) 643

    1988

  14. [14]

    Muralidharan and J

    V. Muralidharan and J. M. Cline, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no.2, 2, [arXiv:2408.13306 [astro-ph.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Ambjørn and Y

    J. Ambjørn and Y. Watabiki, Mod. Phys. Lett. A38(2023) no.12n13, 2350068,

    2023

  16. [16]

    Ambjorn and Y

    J. Ambjorn and Y. Watabiki, Mod. Phys. Lett. A37(2022) no.07, 2250041, [arXiv:2111.05087 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s −1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,

    A. G. Riess, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, D. Scolnic, D. Brout, S. Casertano, D. O. Jones, Y. Murakami, L. Breuval and T. G. Brink,et al. “A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s −1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,” Astrophys. J. Lett.934(2022) no.1, L7, arXiv:2112.04510 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020), arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]. 32

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018