pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.31678 · v1 · pith:DVTS7ZGZnew · submitted 2026-06-30 · 🪐 quant-ph · gr-qc

Relativistic Gravity-Induced Entanglement via Frame Dragging

Eyuri Wakakuwa , Luciano Petruzziello , Trinidad B. Lanta\~no , Susana F. Huelga , Martin B. Plenio This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 05:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph gr-qc
keywords gravity-induced entanglementframe draggingLense-Thirring effectquantum gravityinterferometryrelativistic effectsnon-classical gravityproper time
0
0 comments X

The pith

Frame dragging produces an entanglement phase between a rotating mass and interferometer paths that matches proper time difference and incorporates gravitational retardation.

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

The paper examines gravity-induced entanglement arising specifically from the frame-dragging effect rather than Newtonian gravity. It computes the resulting phase shift in two independent ways: by evolving a quantized Lense-Thirring Hamiltonian in the large-angular-momentum limit and by applying the stationary-phase approximation to the on-shell action of linearized quantum gravity. Both calculations agree and reproduce the proper-time difference between the interferometer arms, while the path-integral route additionally shows how retardation keeps the interaction local and causal. The authors conclude that, under the locality and mediator assumptions standard in the gravity-induced-entanglement literature, observation of this entanglement would indicate that gravity itself is non-classical.

Core claim

Both the Schrödinger evolution under the quantized Lense-Thirring Hamiltonian and the on-shell action of linearized quantum gravity in the stationary-phase approximation yield identical entanglement phases for the rotational degrees of freedom of the source and the paths of the test particle; this common phase equals the proper-time difference between the arms and is modified by gravitational retardation, thereby furnishing an explicit, relativistically causal description within linearized gravity.

What carries the argument

The entanglement phase generated by the frame-dragging (Lense-Thirring) interaction in an interferometric geometry, evaluated equivalently via quantized Hamiltonian dynamics and via the stationary-phase path integral of linearized quantum gravity.

If this is right

  • The entanglement phase remains consistent with the proper-time difference between interferometer arms.
  • Gravitational retardation appears explicitly in the path-integral derivation and preserves relativistic causality.
  • The effect accesses post-Newtonian features of gravity unavailable in Newtonian-limit proposals.
  • Under the invoked locality assumptions, the entanglement would witness non-classicality of the gravitational field.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same frame-dragging mechanism could be adapted to other rotational quantum systems, such as atomic clocks or superconducting rings, to produce analogous entanglement signatures.
  • Because the two derivations agree, the result supplies a cross-check that could be used to validate future numerical or approximate treatments of relativistic quantum gravity.
  • If the mediator-locality premise holds, tabletop rotation-based experiments become viable complements to existing Newtonian gravity-induced-entanglement proposals.

Load-bearing premise

That the standard locality and mediator assumptions from earlier gravity-induced-entanglement arguments continue to apply, so that observed entanglement can be read as evidence for non-classical gravity.

What would settle it

An experimental measurement showing either zero entanglement phase or a phase that deviates from the calculated proper-time difference in a rotating-mass interferometer setup would falsify the central prediction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.31678 by Eyuri Wakakuwa, Luciano Petruzziello, Martin B. Plenio, Susana F. Huelga, Trinidad B. Lanta\~no.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic picture of the considered setting, involving [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Gravity-induced entanglement has been proposed as a method for testing the non-classical nature of gravity via tabletop experiments. While most existing proposals are restricted to the Newtonian limit, the frame dragging effect offers access to genuinely post-Newtonian features of the gravitational interaction and remains comparatively less explored. Here, we study gravity-induced entanglement generated by frame dragging in an interferometric setting and compute the entanglement phase between the rotational degrees of freedom of a source mass and the paths of a particle in two complementary ways: (i) via Schr\"odinger evolution with a quantized Lense-Thirring Hamiltonian in the large angular momentum limit, and (ii) via the on-shell action of linearized quantum gravity within the stationary phase approximation. Both approaches yield the same entanglement phase, consistent with the proper time difference between the interferometer arms. The path integral derivation further reveals how gravitational retardation modifies the entanglement phase, thereby making the local, relativistically causal linearized-gravity description explicit. Under the standard locality/mediator assumptions used in existing arguments, the resulting entanglement would witness non-classicality of the gravitational interaction.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes the entanglement phase generated by frame dragging in an interferometric GIE setup via two routes: (i) Schrödinger evolution under a quantized Lense-Thirring Hamiltonian in the large angular-momentum limit and (ii) the stationary-phase on-shell action of linearized quantum gravity. Both routes produce identical phases that match the proper-time difference between arms; the path-integral route additionally exhibits explicit retardation and local causality. The non-classicality interpretation is stated conditionally on the locality/mediator assumptions standard in the Newtonian GIE literature.

Significance. If the two calculational routes are independent, the work supplies a concrete post-Newtonian observable whose phase is shown to be consistent with proper time while also displaying retardation. The dual-method agreement and explicit treatment of causality constitute a strength that partially addresses concerns about whether the result is tautological. The conditional non-classicality claim follows the same logical structure already accepted in the Newtonian GIE literature.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the two methods are 'independent' and 'complementary,' but the manuscript would benefit from an explicit sentence (e.g., near the end of the introduction) clarifying which steps in each derivation are logically independent of the proper-time difference.
  2. Notation for the large-J limit and the stationary-phase approximation should be cross-referenced between the Hamiltonian and path-integral sections to make the agreement easier to trace.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript, including recognition of the independent calculational routes, the explicit retardation effects, and the conditional non-classicality claim under standard locality assumptions. We are pleased that the work is recommended for acceptance.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained

full rationale

The manuscript derives the entanglement phase via two independent routes (quantized Lense-Thirring Hamiltonian in large-J limit; stationary-phase on-shell action of linearized quantum gravity) and reports exact numerical agreement plus explicit retardation in the path-integral route. This agreement is presented as a consistency check against the known proper-time difference, not as a prediction derived from that difference. The non-classicality claim is explicitly conditional on locality/mediator assumptions imported from prior GIE literature rather than re-derived or self-cited as load-bearing. No step reduces by construction to its own inputs, no fitted parameter is relabeled a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. The calculation is therefore externally falsifiable against the two distinct formalisms and against the geometric proper-time benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the imported locality/mediator assumptions from earlier GIE papers and on the validity of the large-angular-momentum limit and linearized gravity approximations; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard locality/mediator assumptions suffice to interpret entanglement as evidence of non-classical gravity
    Explicitly invoked in the final sentence to connect the calculated phase to non-classicality.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5735 in / 1199 out tokens · 24547 ms · 2026-07-01T05:48:30.897336+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The entangling phase is thus given by ∆ = ∆S/ℏ

    The initial state of the whole system is then given by |Ψi⟩= 1√ 2 (| ↑⟩+| ↓⟩)⊗ 1√ 2 (|L⟩+|R⟩).(29) Applying the unitary evolution (28) to the above, the state becomes |Ψf ⟩= 1 2 h | ↑⟩ e iS−J ℏ |L⟩+e iS+J ℏ |R⟩ +| ↓⟩ e iS+J ℏ |L⟩+e iS−J ℏ |R⟩ i =1 2 e iS+J ℏ h | ↑⟩ e i∆S ℏ |L⟩+|R⟩ +| ↓⟩ |L⟩+e i∆S ℏ |R⟩ i .(30) Note that the factor exp[iS+J /ℏ] in the fron...

  2. [2]

    Calculation ofS sp Substituting the energy-momentum tensor of the probe particle, Eq. (10), into the integral (21), we have Ssp = m0 4 Z dtd3rhsource µν (r, t)V µν probe(t)δ(3)(r−q(t)).(A1) From the metric perturbation (16)-(19), it follows that hsource µν (t,r)V µν probe(t) = 2GM γ(t) |r| 1 + v(t)2 c2 + 4GJ(t− |r|/c)γ(t) c2|r|3 (yvx(t)−xv y(t)).(A2) Henc...

  3. [3]

    Calculation ofS ps From (12) and (22), we have Sps = Gm0 c4 Z dtd3r T source µν (t,r) ¯V µν probe(˜t) | ˜d| − ˜d·v( ˜t)/c ,(A7) where ˜t= ˜t(t,r) is the solution ofc(t− ˜t) =|r−q( ˜t)|, and ˜d= ˜d(t,r) =r−q( ˜t(t,r)). Using (13) and (15), the numerator in the integral is calculated to be T source µν (t,r) ¯V µν probe(˜t) =γ( ˜t) 1 2 c2(c2 +v( ˜t)2)M+c 2J(...

  4. [4]

    Proof of Eq. (A12) To prove (A12), we start with the definition of ˜t: c(t− ˜t) =|r−q( ˜t)|.(A15) Taking the total differential of the above equation yields c(dt−d ˜t) = r−q( ˜t) |r−q( ˜t)| ·(dr−v( ˜t)d˜t),(A16) which gives c− (r−q( ˜t))·v( ˜t) |r−q( ˜t)| d˜t=cdt− (r−q( ˜t))·dr |r−q( ˜t)| .(A17) Hence, ∂˜t ∂x =− x−x p(˜t) c|r−q( ˜t)| −(r−q( ˜t))·v( ˜t) =−...

  5. [5]

    Rosenfeld, ¨Uber die gravitationswirkungen des lichtes, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik65, 589 (1930)

    L. Rosenfeld, ¨Uber die gravitationswirkungen des lichtes, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik65, 589 (1930)

    1930

  6. [6]

    Rosenfeld, Zur quantelung der wellenfelder, Annalen 12 der Physik397, 113 (1930)

    L. Rosenfeld, Zur quantelung der wellenfelder, Annalen 12 der Physik397, 113 (1930)

    1930

  7. [7]

    DeWitt-Morette and D

    C. DeWitt-Morette and D. Rickles,The Role of Gravita- tion in Physics: Report from the 1957 Chapel Hill Con- ference(Edition Open Access (Max Planck Research Li- brary for the History and Development of Knowledge), 2011)

    1957

  8. [8]

    Colella, A

    R. Colella, A. W. Overhauser, and S. A. Werner, Obser- vation of gravitationally induced quantum interference, Physical Review Letters34, 1472 (1975)

    1975

  9. [9]

    L. Lami, J. S. Pedernales, and M. B. Plenio, Testing the quantumness of gravity without entanglement, Physical Review X14, 021022 (2024)

    2024

  10. [10]

    A noise inequality for classical forces

    D. Kafri and J. M. Taylor, A noise inequality for classical forces (2013), arXiv:1311.4558 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  11. [11]

    Kafri, J

    D. Kafri, J. M. Taylor, and G. J. Milburn, A classical channel model for gravitational decoherence, New Jour- nal of Physics16, 065020 (2014)

    2014

  12. [12]

    N. H. Lindner and A. Peres, Testing quantum superpo- sitions of the gravitational field with Bose–Einstein con- densates, Physical Review A71, 024101 (2005)

    2005

  13. [13]

    S. Bose, A. Mazumdar, G. W. Morley, H. Ulbricht, M. Toroˇ s, M. Paternostro, A. A. Geraci, P. F. Barker, M. Kim, and G. Milburn, Spin entanglement witness for quantum gravity, Physical Review Letters119, 240401 (2017)

    2017

  14. [14]

    Marletto and V

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, Gravitationally induced en- tanglement between two massive particles is sufficient evidence of quantum effects in gravity, Physical Review Letters119, 240402 (2017)

    2017

  15. [15]

    Marletto and V

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, When can gravity path- entangle two spatially superposed masses?, Physical Re- view D98, 046001 (2018)

    2018

  16. [16]

    Marletto and V

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, Witnessing non-classicality beyond quantum theory, Physical Review D102, 086012 (2020)

    2020

  17. [17]

    M. J. W. Hall and M. Reginatto, On two recent proposals for witnessing nonclassical gravity, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical51, 085303 (2018)

    2018

  18. [18]

    R. J. Marshman, A. Mazumdar, and S. Bose, Locality and entanglement in table-top testing of the quantum na- ture of linearized gravity, Physical Review A101, 052110 (2020)

    2020

  19. [19]

    T. D. Galley, F. Giacomini, and J. H. Selby, A no-go theorem on the nature of the gravitational field beyond quantum theory, Quantum6, 779 (2022)

    2022

  20. [20]

    Belenchia, R

    A. Belenchia, R. M. Wald, F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, ˇC. Brukner, and M. Aspelmeyer, Quantum superposition of massive objects and the quantization of gravity, Phys- ical Review D98, 126009 (2018)

    2018

  21. [21]

    Rydving, E

    E. Rydving, E. Aurell, and I. Pikovski, Do gedanken ex- periments compel quantization of gravity?, Physical Re- view D104, 086024 (2021)

    2021

  22. [22]

    Carney, Newton, entanglement, and the graviton, Physical Review D105, 024029 (2022)

    D. Carney, Newton, entanglement, and the graviton, Physical Review D105, 024029 (2022)

    2022

  23. [23]

    D. L. Danielson, G. Satishchandran, and R. M. Wald, Gravitationally mediated entanglement: Newtonian field versus gravitons, Physical Review D105, 086001 (2022)

    2022

  24. [24]

    Mart´ ın-Mart´ ınez and T

    E. Mart´ ın-Mart´ ınez and T. R. Perche, What gravity me- diated entanglement can really tell us about quantum gravity, Physical Review D108, L101702 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    Christodoulou and C

    M. Christodoulou and C. Rovelli, On the possibility of laboratory evidence for quantum superposition of geome- tries, Physics Letters B792, 64 (2019)

    2019

  26. [26]

    Christodoulou, A

    M. Christodoulou, A. Di Biagio, R. Howl, and C. Rov- elli, Gravity entanglement, quantum reference systems, degrees of freedom, Classical and Quantum Gravity40, 047001 (2023)

    2023

  27. [27]

    Christodoulou and C

    M. Christodoulou and C. Rovelli, On the possibility of experimental detection of the discreteness of time, Fron- tiers in Physics8, 207 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    L.-Q. Chen, F. Giacomini, and C. Rovelli, Quantum states of fields for quantum split sources, Quantum7, 958 (2023)

    2023

  29. [29]

    Fragkos, M

    V. Fragkos, M. Kopp, and I. Pikovski, On inference of quantization from gravitationally induced entanglement, AVS Quantum Science4, 045601 (2022)

    2022

  30. [30]

    Aziz and R

    J. Aziz and R. Howl, Classical theories of gravity produce entanglement, Nature646, 813 (2025)

    2025

  31. [31]

    Di Biagio, The simple reason why classical gravity can entangle (2025), arXiv:2511.02683 [gr-qc]

    A. Di Biagio, The simple reason why classical gravity can entangle (2025), arXiv:2511.02683 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Marletto and V

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, Classical gravity can- not mediate entanglement by local means (2025), arXiv:2510.19969 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    When does entanglement through gravity imply gravitons?

    N. Mitrakos, M. Papageorgiou, T. R. Perche, and M. Christodoulou, When does entanglement through gravity imply gravitons?, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.03214 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    Trillo and M

    D. Trillo and M. Navascu´ es, Di´ osi-penrose model of clas- sical gravity predicts gravitationally induced entangle- ment, Physical Review D111, L121101 (2025)

    2025

  35. [35]

    Spaventa, L

    G. Spaventa, L. Lami, and M. B. Plenio, On tests of the quantum nature of gravitational interactions in presence of non-linear corrections to quantum mechanics, Quan- tum7, 1157 (2023)

    2023

  36. [36]

    Anastopoulos, M

    C. Anastopoulos, M. Lagouvardos, and K. Savvidou, Gravitational effects in macroscopic quantum systems: a first-principles analysis, Classical and Quantum Gravity 38, 155012 (2021)

    2021

  37. [37]

    S. L. Ludescher, L. D. Loveridge, T. D. Galley, and M. P. M¨ uller, Gravity-mediated entanglement via infinite- dimensional systems, Journal of Physics A: Mathemat- ical and Theoretical59, 215302 (2026)

    2026

  38. [38]

    Weller-Davies, Is there a ‘smoking gun’ test for quan- tum gravity?, Nature646, 809 (2025)

    Z. Weller-Davies, Is there a ‘smoking gun’ test for quan- tum gravity?, Nature646, 809 (2025)

    2025

  39. [39]

    Angeli and M

    O. Angeli and M. Carlesso, Entanglement in markovian hybrid classical-quantum theories of gravity, Physical Re- view D112, 024047 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    Oppenheim and Z

    J. Oppenheim and Z. Weller-Davies, Covariant path inte- grals for quantum fields back-reacting on classical space- time, arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07283 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  41. [41]

    Marletto, J

    C. Marletto, J. Oppenheim, V. Vedral, and E. Wilson, Classical gravity cannot mediate entanglement, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.07348 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Aspelmeyer, Quantum entanglement by gravity as tests of gravitational collapse models ` a la di´ osi and pen- rose, Comptes Rendus

    M. Aspelmeyer, Quantum entanglement by gravity as tests of gravitational collapse models ` a la di´ osi and pen- rose, Comptes Rendus. Physique27, 1 (2026)

    2026

  43. [43]

    T. Feng, V. Vedral, and C. Marletto, Collapse-based models for gravity do not violate the entanglement-based witness of nonclassicality, Physical Review D113, 104055 (2026)

    2026

  44. [44]

    Can classical theories of gravity produce entanglement?

    A. Gundhi, G. Infantino, and A. Bassi, Can classical the- ories of gravity produce entanglement?, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.19696 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    M. D. Schneider, N. Huggett, and N. Linnemann, A demonstration that classical gravity does not pro- duce entanglement, Classical and Quantum Gravity 10.1088/1361-6382/ae6f62 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ae6f62 2025

  46. [46]

    Lin and S

    F.-L. Lin and S. Mondal, Can newtonian gravity pro- 13 duce quantum entanglement?, Physical Review D113, L061901 (2026)

    2026

  47. [47]

    No, classical gravity does not entangle quantized matter fields

    L. Di´ osi, No, classical gravity does not entangle quantized matter fields, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.00852 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Boulle and G

    N. Boulle and G. Franzmann, Subsystems (in) depen- dence in gie proposals, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.17024 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    H. Xue, Z. Tang, C. Yang, Z. Han, Z. Kan, and Y. Liu, Aziz and howl’s gravity-induced entanglement channel is essentially classical mechanics, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.16276 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  50. [50]

    M. J. Hall and M. Reginatto, On two recent proposals for witnessing nonclassical gravity, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical51, 085303 (2018)

    2018

  51. [51]

    Huggett, N

    N. Huggett, N. Linnemann, and M. D. Schneider,Quan- tum Gravity in a Laboratory?(Cambridge University Press, 2023)

    2023

  52. [52]

    S. Bose, I. Fuentes, A. A. Geraci, S. M. Khan, S. Qvar- fort, M. Rademacher, M. Rashid, M. Toroˇ s, H. Ulbricht, and C. C. Wanjura, Massive quantum systems as inter- faces of quantum mechanics and gravity, Reviews of Mod- ern Physics97, 015003 (2025)

    2025

  53. [53]

    Carney, P

    D. Carney, P. C. E. Stamp, and J. M. Taylor, Tabletop experiments for quantum gravity: a user’s manual, Clas- sical and Quantum Gravity36, 034001 (2019)

    2019

  54. [54]

    Christodoulou, A

    M. Christodoulou, A. Di Biagio, M. Aspelmeyer, ˇC. Brukner, C. Rovelli, and R. Howl, Locally mediated entanglement in linearized quantum gravity, Physical Re- view Letters130, 100202 (2023)

    2023

  55. [55]

    T. B. Lanta˜ no, L. Petruzziello, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Angular Momentum Entanglement Mediated By General Relativistic Frame Dragging, Quantum10, 2042 (2026)

    2042

  56. [56]

    Petruzziello, T

    L. Petruzziello, T. B. Lanta˜ no Pinto, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Experimental witness for general relativis- tic effects in quantum mechanics, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 34, 2544026 (2025)

    2025

  57. [57]

    Wakakuwa, Detectability of post-newtonian classical and quantum gravity via quantum clock interferometry, Phys

    E. Wakakuwa, Detectability of post-newtonian classical and quantum gravity via quantum clock interferometry, Phys. Rev. D113, 086008 (2026)

    2026

  58. [58]

    M. Zych, F. Costa, I. Pikovski, and ˇC. Brukner, Quantum interferometric visibility as a witness of general relativis- tic proper time, Nature Communications2, 505 (2011)

    2011

  59. [59]

    Roura, Gravitational redshift in quantum-clock inter- ferometry, Physical Review X10, 021014 (2020)

    A. Roura, Gravitational redshift in quantum-clock inter- ferometry, Physical Review X10, 021014 (2020)

    2020

  60. [60]

    Chen and F

    L.-Q. Chen and F. Giacomini, Quantum effects in gravity beyond the newton potential from a delocalised quantum source, Physical Review X15, 031063 (2025)

    2025

  61. [61]

    J. M. Cohen and B. Mashhoon, Standard clocks, inter- ferometry, and gravitomagnetism, Physics Letters A181, 353 (1993)

    1993

  62. [62]

    Ciufolini and J

    I. Ciufolini and J. A. Wheeler,Gravitation and inertia (Princeton university press, 1995)

    1995

  63. [63]

    R. M. Wald, Gravitational spin interaction, Physical Re- view D6, 406 (1972)

    1972

  64. [64]

    C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler,Gravi- tation(W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1973)

    1973

  65. [65]

    B. M. Barker and R. F. O’Connell, Gravitational two-body problem with arbitrary masses, spins, and quadrupole moments, Physical Review D12, 329 (1975)

    1975

  66. [66]

    Weinberg,Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity(John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972)

    S. Weinberg,Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity(John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972)

    1972

  67. [67]

    G¨ ull¨ u and B

    I. G¨ ull¨ u and B. Tekin, Spin-spin interactions in massive gravity and higher derivative gravity theories, Physics Letters B728, 268 (2014)

    2014