Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 73 references

Poisson electrodynamics on $\kappa$-Minkowski space-time

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In κ-Minkowski spacetime, charged-particle orbits around a static charge are not closed, because the deformed Lorentz force breaks the conserved Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector.

desk verdict The central non-closed orbit claim is undone by a cancellation error in Eq. (59), but the paper's explicit potential and force results are solid and worth a corrected revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.17202 v3 pith:F7NHZ37O submitted 2024-12-23 hep-th

O. Abla , M. J. Neves This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th MSC 81R6081T75 PACS 11.10.Nx
keywords κ-MinkowskispacetimePoissonelectrodynamicsdeformedLorentzforceLaplace-Runge-Lenzvectornoncommutativegaugetheoryorbitequationcentral
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 claims that in the semi-classical limit of non-commutative $U(1)$ gauge theory on $\kappa$-Minkowski spacetime, a charged point particle moving in the electrostatic field of a static charge does not follow a closed orbit. The authors derive the deformed Lorentz force and a radial central force that depends on a free parameter $\alpha$, and they show that the orbital equation reduces to the Kepler problem only when the non-commutativity parameter $\kappa$ goes to zero. If correct, this would give a concrete trajectory-level prediction of $\kappa$-Minkowski electrodynamics, tying the loss of closed orbits to the absence of a conserved Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the deformed phase-space structure of $\kappa$-Minkowski: brackets $\{x_0,x_i\}=\kappa x_i$ and the symplectic-groupoid construction of gauge-invariant momenta $\pi_0=p_0-A_0$, $\pi_i=e^{\kappa A_0}(p_i-A_i)$. From this action the paper derives the deformed Lorentz force (46) and, for $A=0$ with $A_0=V(r)$, the central force $f(r)=\frac{c_\kappa Q}{r^2}\left[1+\frac{2\kappa Q(1+3\alpha)}{r}\right]^{-1}$. The conserved deformed angular momentum $L=e^{-2\kappa V} r\times v$ reduces the motion to a plane and produces a radial effective force whose orbital equation (59) is the object whose integration gives open orbits.

What would settle it

Evaluate the left-hand side of (34), $\nabla^2 V+\kappa(1+6\alpha)(\nabla V)^2$, for the potential (36) in the sense of distributions on $\mathbb{R}^3$. If the result is not $-\rho\,e^{-2\kappa V}$ with $\rho=Q\delta^3(r)$ (or differs by a $\kappa$-dependent coefficient multiplying $\delta^3$), then identifying $Q$ as the physical point charge fails, and the central force (53) and the orbit plot do not describe a point particle.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Poisson gauge field of a static point charge in $\kappa$-Minkowski spacetime produces a deformed electrostatic potential $V(r)=\frac{1}{\kappa(1+6\alpha)}\ln\left(1+\frac{(1+6\alpha)\kappa Q}{r}\right)$ and a deformed Lorentz force $\frac{d}{d\tau}\left[e^{-2\kappa V(r)}v\right]=-\frac{c_\kappa\nabla V}{1-\kappa\,r\cdot \nabla V}$. The paper proves that the deformed angular momentum $L=e^{-2\kappa V(r)}r\times v$ is conserved while the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector is not, and it integrates the resulting orbital equation numerically to show an open, non-periodic trajectory for $\kappa\neq0$. The same force law is rewritten as $\ddot{x}^i+\Gamma^i_{jl}\dot{x}^j\dot{x}^l=f^i$, which the authors read as an emergent gravity-like term generated by noncommutativity.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes that the field equation (31) with the arbitrary parameter $\alpha$ and its electrostatic reduction are correct, and that the solution (36) really represents the field of a point charge with source $\rho=Q\delta^3(r)$, even though the nonlinear term $\kappa(1+6\alpha)(\nabla V)^2$ is not defined as a distribution at $r=0$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $\kappa\neq0$, the orbit of a charged particle around a static charge is open; the paper's numerical solution shows the radial distance decaying after $\theta>3\pi$.
  • In the commutative limit $\kappa\to0$ and for the special value $\alpha=-1/6$, the standard Coulomb potential, the standard Lorentz force, and closed Kepler orbits are recovered.
  • The deformed equations of motion can be recast as a geodesic-like equation with a connection-like term $\Gamma^i_{jl}$, so noncommutativity may masquerade as an emergent gravitational field acting on the particle.
  • Because the orbital equation depends on the free parameter $\alpha$ of the field equations, different choices of $\alpha$ give different effective potentials and orbit shapes within the same central-force framework.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the point-charge identification can be made rigorous despite the singular nonlinear term, the model predicts a $\kappa$-dependent precession of the perihelion, a signature that could in principle be tested with high-precision orbital timing if $\kappa$ is at the Planck scale.
  • The same symplectic-groupoid construction could be applied to other Lie-Poisson structures such as $\rho$-Minkowski to see whether the loss of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector is generic or special to $\kappa$-Minkowski.
  • Comparing the gravity-like term in (46) with the geodesic equation of $\kappa$-Minkowski studied in the literature would reveal whether the deformed Lorentz force is a geometric effect rather than a new force.
  • Quantizing the orbital equation would connect these classical open orbits to hydrogen-atom spectral shifts in noncommutative QED, giving an observable sharper than the orbit shape.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops Poisson electrodynamics on κ-Minkowski spacetime in the symplectic-groupoid framework. It reviews the gauge-invariant action and covariant momentum, writes the Maxwell-Poisson field equations with a free parameter α, solves the electrostatic potential for a point-like charge, derives a deformed Lorentz force, and then studies planar orbits of a charged particle in the κ-deformed Coulomb field. The central claim is that these orbits are not closed because the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector is not conserved, and that the deformed force law contains a term suggestive of emergent gravity.

Significance. If the main result were correct, it would be a concrete classical-mechanics prediction of κ-Minkowski noncommutativity: deformed Coulomb orbits and an emergent gravity-like coupling in the particle equation of motion. The manuscript's explicit derivations and closed-form potential (36) are a strength, since they make independent verification possible. However, the central quantitative claim rests on an algebraically incorrect orbital equation, and the point-charge interpretation of the solution (36) is not justified at the distributional level. Until those two issues are resolved, the significance of the paper cannot be assessed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, Eq. (59)] Equation (59) is not derivable from Eq. (57). Substituting r = 1/u and θdot = L e^{2κV} u^2 into (57) gives rdot = -L e^{2κV} u' and rddot = -L^2 e^{4κV} u^2 [u'' + 2κ (dV/du) u'^2]. Since dV/dr = - (dV/du) u^2, the term -2κ rdot^2 dV/dr equals +2κ L^2 e^{4κV} u^2 (dV/du) u'^2, which cancels the velocity-dependent part of rddot exactly. The correct reduction is u'' + u = - (cκ Q/L^2) e^{-2κV(u^{-1})} / [1 + 2κQ(1+3α) u], with no (du/dθ)^2 term. Therefore the plotted non-closed orbits in Fig. 2 and the associated conclusion that κ-Minkowski spacetime forbids closed orbits are not consequences of the model's equations; the orbital equation and the numerical analysis must be redone.
  2. [§3, Eqs. (34)–(36)] The identification of the solution (36) with the electrostatic field of a point charge Q is not established. Equation (35) is solved only for r ≠ 0, and the nonlinear term κ(1+6α)(∇V)^2 prevents the usual Green's-function argument for the delta source. Near the origin the solution behaves as V ~ -[1/κ(1+6α)] ln r (for α ≠ -1/6), so both ∇²V and (∇V)^2 are singular as 1/r^2 and their distributional combination with the factor e^{-2κV} is not checked. The paper should either provide a regularized computation showing that the source term reproduces Q δ^3(r), or state explicitly that Q is defined by the asymptotic Coulomb tail rather than by the delta-source equation. As written, the physical interpretation of the force (53) is an assumption.
  3. [§4, Eq. (52)] The statement that Eq. (52) 'shows that it is not possible to obtain a conserved Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector' is too strong. Equation (52) is a generic identity for any central force; the standard Kepler derivation also starts from a similar relation and then constructs the conserved vector because f(r) r^2 is constant. Here f(r) r^2 is not constant, but the absence of a conserved vector of the standard form does not follow merely from the non-vanishing of the right-hand side. This point should be argued more carefully, especially since it is used to invoke Bertrand's theorem.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption mentions a curve for α = -1/2, but the legend lists α = -1, -2, -3; this appears to be a typo.
  2. [Text after Eq. (58)] The sentence 'The corresponding effective potential V_eff is plotted ... in the Fig. 2' should refer to Fig. 1, since Fig. 2 shows the orbit.
  3. [Fig. 2] No numerical details are given for the plotted orbit: initial conditions, integration scheme, or accuracy tolerances are all absent, so the curve cannot be reproduced independently.
  4. [Notation, Eqs. (54)–(57)] The derivative variable is inconsistent: Eqs. (54a)–(54c) use d/dt with dots, while Eqs. (56)–(57) use dots for τ-derivatives; the relation between t and τ through x^0 = c_κ τ should be stated explicitly.
  5. [Eq. (38)] The parameter w is introduced in Eq. (38) but set to 1 immediately afterwards and never used again; please clarify its role or remove it.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central derivation is self-contained once the externally cited Poisson-electrodynamics framework is granted; the only self-citation is a non-load-bearing group citation.

full rationale

This paper is a worked application of an existing Poisson-electrodynamics framework. The field equations (31)-(34) are quoted from [42], the symplectic-realization and action input (6)-(22) from [34] and [44], and the covariant-momentum Hamiltonian and first-order equations (38)-(46) from [48]; none of these references includes the present authors. The only self-citation, [41] (Abla and Neves), appears in the broad citation range [34]-[48] and is never used to justify a central step. The electrostatic solution (36) is a direct solution of (35), and the deformed force (53) and radial equation (57) follow algebraically from (48) and (56). These steps do not assume the non-closed-orbit conclusion. Two serious non-circular defects should be flagged. First, Eq. (59) is not algebraically entailed by (57): substituting r = 1/u and theta-dot = L e^{2 kappa V} u^2 makes the term -2 kappa r-dot^2 dV/dr cancel the velocity-dependent part of r-double-dot, so the printed -2 kappa (dV/du)(du/d-theta)^2 term is spurious; the plotted orbits in Fig. 2 are therefore not consequences of the model as written. Second, the identification of (36) as the field of a point charge Q delta^3(r) is not distributionally verified at r=0; the nonlinear equation is solved pointwise for r != 0 and the source term requires separate control. Both are correctness or physical-assumption problems, not circular reductions. The circularity score is therefore low.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on a chain of equations imported from the authors' prior work, with several free parameters chosen by hand. The point-charge solution and the orbit equation are the most fragile steps; the former lacks a distributional check, and the latter contains an algebraic error.

free parameters (5)
  • α = not fitted; arbitrary real parameter; plots use -1, -2, -3
    Introduced in the Maxwell-Poisson equation (31) as a free constant of the non-Lagrangian formalism; the potential (36), force (53), and orbits all depend on it.
  • w = set to 1
    Real parameter in the covariant momentum (38); fixed to w=1 in (41) without physical justification.
  • c_κ = 0.99 in plots
    Constant in the worldline parametrization x0 = cκ τ; its value affects the central force (53) and the numerical orbit.
  • κ = 0.5 in plots; deformation scale of κ-Minkowski
    Noncommutativity parameter of the spacetime; a model input rather than a fitted constant, but quantitative results depend on its chosen value.
  • Q = -1 in plots
    Test charge magnitude chosen for the plots; affects the potential and force.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Maxwell-Poisson equations (31)-(32) from [42] correctly describe the semi-classical limit of U(1) gauge theory on κ-Minkowski
    Section 3 uses equation (31) as the starting point without derivation in this paper.
  • domain assumption The symplectic realization γ (19) and the covariant momentum π (20)/(38) satisfy the gauge invariance condition (18)
    Taken from [34] and [48]; the paper relies on the existence and uniqueness of the solution to (18).
  • ad hoc to paper The solution (36) satisfies the point-charge Poisson equation (34) including the delta source at r=0
    Only the homogeneous equation (35) for r≠0 is solved; the distributional source term is not checked.
  • ad hoc to paper The orbit equation (59) is derived correctly from (57)
    Direct derivation shows the term -2κ(dV/du)(du/dθ)² cancels; the paper's equation contains a spurious term.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Poisson electrodynamics on $\kappa$-Minkowski space-time." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F7NHZ37O

@misc{pith2026241217202,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Poisson electrodynamics on $\kappa$-Minkowski space-time},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F7NHZ37O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.17202}
}
abstract

Poisson electrodynamics is the semi-classical limit of $U(1)$ non-commutative gauge theory. It has been studied so far as a theoretical model, where an external field would be the source of the non-commutative effects in space-time. Being the Standard Model of fundamental interactions a local theory, the prediction of observables within it would be drastically altered by such effects. The natural question that arises is: how do particles interact with this field ? In this work, we will answer this question using point-like charged particles interacting with the Poisson gauge field, investigating how their trajectories are affected using the $\kappa$-Minkowski structure. The interaction arises from the construction of a gauge-invariant action. Using the field solutions, we find the second-order equation for the deformed Lorentz force, indicating possible effects of an emergent gravity due to non-commutativity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.17202 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The effective potential as a function of radial distance. We plot this figure for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The numerical solution for the orbital equation with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

  1. [42]

    Lie-Poisson gauge theories and κ- Minkowski electrodynamics,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, M. A. Kurkov and P. Vitale, “Lie-Poisson gauge theories and κ- Minkowski electrodynamics,” JHEP 2023 (2023), 200

    work page 2023

  2. [48]

    Charged particle in Lie–Poisson electrodynamics,

    B. S. Basilio, V. G. Kupriyanov and M. A. Kurkov, “Charged particle in Lie–Poisson electrodynamics,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 175 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [1]

    Bronstein, Phys

    M. Bronstein, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion 9 (1936), 140; [Quantum theory of weak gravitational fields, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 44 (2012), 267-283]

    work page 1936

  4. [2]

    Noncommutative field theory,

    M. R. Douglas and N. A. Nekrasov, “ Noncommutative field theory,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 73 (2001), 977

    work page 2001

  5. [3]

    Space-time quantization induced by classical gravity,

    S. Doplicher, K. Fredenhagen and J. E. Roberts, “Space-time quantization induced by classical gravity,” Phys. Lett. B 331 (1994), 39-44

    work page 1994

  6. [4]

    The quantum structure of spacetime at the Planck scale and quantum fields,

    S. Doplicher, K. Fredenhagen and J. E. Roberts, “The quantum structure of spacetime at the Planck scale and quantum fields,” Commun. Math. Phys. 172 (1995), 187

    work page 1995

  7. [5]

    String Theory and Noncommutative Geometry,

    N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “String Theory and Noncommutative Geometry,” JHEP 09 (1999), 032

    work page 1999

  8. [6]

    Mixed Branes and M(atrix) Theory on Noncommutative Torus,

    F. Ardalan, H. Arfaei and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Mixed Branes and M(atrix) Theory on Noncommutative Torus,” [arXiv:hep-th/9803067]

    arXiv

Show all 73 references
  1. [7]

    Noncommutative Geometry From Strings and Branes,

    F. Ardalan, H. Arfaei and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Noncommutative Geometry From Strings and Branes,” JHEP 02 (1999), 016

    1999

  2. [8]

    Hydrogen Atom Spectrum and the Lamb Shift in Noncommutative QED,

    M. Chaichian, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and A. Tureanu, “Hydrogen Atom Spectrum and the Lamb Shift in Noncommutative QED,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001), 2716

    2001

  3. [9]

    Non-commutativity of space-time and the hydrogen atom spectrum,

    M. Chaichian, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and A. Tureanu, “Non-commutativity of space-time and the hydrogen atom spectrum,” Eur. Phys. J. C 36 (2004), 251-252

    2004

  4. [10]

    Pair production by a constant external field in noncommutative QED,

    N. Chair and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Pair production by a constant external field in noncommutative QED,” Phys. Lett. B 504 (2001), 141-146

    2001

  5. [11]

    Noncommutative field theories on R3 λ: Toward UV/IR mixing freedom,

    P. Vitale and J. C. Wallet, “Noncommutative field theories on R3 λ: Toward UV/IR mixing freedom,” JHEP 04 (2013), 115

    2013

  6. [12]

    Noncommutative field theory on R3 λ,

    P. Vitale, “Noncommutative field theory on R3 λ,” Fortsch. Phys. 62 (2014), 825-834

    2014

  7. [13]

    3D Quantum Gravity and Effective Noncommutative Quan- tum Field Theory,

    L. Freidel and E. R. Livine, “3D Quantum Gravity and Effective Noncommutative Quan- tum Field Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006), 221301

    2006

  8. [14]

    Deformation quantization of Poisson manifolds,

    M. Kontsevich, “Deformation quantization of Poisson manifolds,” Lett. Math. Phys. 66 (2003), 157-216. 12

    2003

  9. [15]

    Star products made (somewhat) easier,

    V. G. Kupriyanov and D. V. Vassilevich, “Star products made (somewhat) easier,” Eur. Phys. J. C 58 (2008), 627-637

    2008

  10. [16]

    Quantum Field Theory on Noncommutative Spaces,

    R. J. Szabo, “Quantum Field Theory on Noncommutative Spaces,” Phys. Rep. 378 (2003), 207

    2003

  11. [17]

    Gauge theories on quantum spaces,

    K. Hersent, P. Mathieu and J. C. Wallet, “Gauge theories on quantum spaces,” Phys. Rept. 1014 (2023), 1-83

    2023

  12. [18]

    Noncommutative Gauge Field Theories: A No-Go Theorem,

    M. Chaichian, P. Preˇ snajder, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and A. Tureanu, “Noncommutative Gauge Field Theories: A No-Go Theorem,” Phys. Lett. B 526 (2002), 132-136

    2002

  13. [19]

    Can Seiberg-Witten Map Bypass Noncommutative Gauge Theory No-Go Theorem?,

    M. Chaichian, P. Preˇ snajder, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and A. Tureanu, “Can Seiberg-Witten Map Bypass Noncommutative Gauge Theory No-Go Theorem?,” Phys. Lett. B683 (2010), 55-61

    2010

  14. [20]

    Electrodynamics on κ-Minkowski space-time,

    E. Harikumar, T. Juri´ c and S. Meljanac, “Electrodynamics on κ-Minkowski space-time,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011), 085020

    2011

  15. [21]

    Coherent state induced star prod- uct on R3 λ and the fuzzy sphere,

    A. B. Hammou, M. Lagraa and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Coherent state induced star prod- uct on R3 λ and the fuzzy sphere,” Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002), 025025

    2002

  16. [22]

    A twisted look on kappa-Minkowski:U (1) gauge theory,

    M. Dimitretrijevi´ c and L. Jonke, “A twisted look on kappa-Minkowski:U (1) gauge theory,” JHEP 2011 (2011), 080

    2011

  17. [23]

    Twisted BRST symmetry in gauge theories on the κ- Minkowski spacetime,

    P. Mathieu and J. C. Wallet, “Twisted BRST symmetry in gauge theories on the κ- Minkowski spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021), 086018

    2021

  18. [24]

    Quantum instability of gauge theories on κ- Minkowski space,

    K. Hersent, P. Mathieu and J. C. Wallet, “Quantum instability of gauge theories on κ- Minkowski space,” Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), 106013

    2022

  19. [25]

    Gauge theories on κ-Minkowski spaces: twist and modular operators,

    P. Mathieu and J. C. Wallet, “Gauge theories on κ-Minkowski spaces: twist and modular operators,” JHEP 05 (2020), 112

    2020

  20. [26]

    Braided quantum electrodynam- ics,

    M D ´Ciri´ c, N. Konjik, V. Radovanovi´ c and R. J. Szabo, “Braided quantum electrodynam- ics,” JHEP 08 (2023), 211

    2023

  21. [27]

    Quadratic Twist-Noncommutative Gauge Theory,

    T. Meier and S. J. van Tongeren, “Quadratic Twist-Noncommutative Gauge Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023), 121603

    2023

  22. [28]

    Quantum gauge theories on noncommutative three- dimensional space,

    A. G´ er´ e, P. Vitale and J. C. Wallet, “Quantum gauge theories on noncommutative three- dimensional space,” Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014), 045019

    2014

  23. [29]

    Gauge theory on ρ-Minkowski space-time,

    V. Maris and J. C. Wallet, “Gauge theory on ρ-Minkowski space-time,” JHEP 07 (2024), 119

    2024

  24. [30]

    Bootstrapping noncommutative gauge theories from L∞ algebra,

    R. Blumenhagen, I. Brunner, V. Kupriyanov and D. L¨ ust, “Bootstrapping noncommutative gauge theories from L∞ algebra,” JHEP 1805 (2018), 097

    2018

  25. [31]

    Non-commutative deformation of Chern–Simons theory,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, “Non-commutative deformation of Chern–Simons theory,” Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020), 42. 13

    2020

  26. [32]

    Four-dimensional noncommutative deformations of U (1) gauge theory and L∞ bootstrap,

    M. Kurkov and P. Vitale, “Four-dimensional noncommutative deformations of U (1) gauge theory and L∞ bootstrap,” JHEP 01 (2022), 032

    2022

  27. [33]

    Non-commutative gauge symmetry from strong homotopy algebras,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, F. Oliveira, A. Sharapov and D. Vassilevich, “Non-commutative gauge symmetry from strong homotopy algebras,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 57 (2024), 095203

    2024

  28. [34]

    Recurrence relations for symplectic realization of (quasi)-Poisson structures,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, “Recurrence relations for symplectic realization of (quasi)-Poisson structures,” J. Phys. A 52 (2019), 225204

    2019

  29. [35]

    A novel approach to non-commutative gauge theory,

    V. G. Kupriyanov and P. Vitale, “A novel approach to non-commutative gauge theory,” JHEP 08 (2020), 041

    2020

  30. [36]

    κ-Minkowski-deformation of U (1) gauge theory,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, M. Kurkov and P. Vitale, “ κ-Minkowski-deformation of U (1) gauge theory,” JHEP 01 (2021), 102

    2021

  31. [37]

    Poisson gauge theory,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, “Poisson gauge theory,” JHEP 09 (2021), 016

    2021

  32. [38]

    Symplectic embeddings, homotopy algebras and almost Poisson gauge symmetry,

    V. G. Kupriyanov and R. J. Szabo, “Symplectic embeddings, homotopy algebras and almost Poisson gauge symmetry,” J. Phys. A 55 (2022), 035201

    2022

  33. [39]

    Poisson gauge models and Seiberg-Witten map,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, M. A. Kurkov and P. Vitale, “Poisson gauge models and Seiberg-Witten map,” JHEP 2022 (2022), 062

    2022

  34. [40]

    Poisson gauge theory: a review,

    M. Kurkov, “Poisson gauge theory: a review,” PoS CORFU2022 (2023), 330

    2023

  35. [41]

    Effects of wave propagation in canonical Poisson gauge theory under an external magnetic field,

    O. Abla and M. J. Neves, “Effects of wave propagation in canonical Poisson gauge theory under an external magnetic field,” EPL 144 (2023), 24001

    2023

  36. [43]

    Hamiltonian analysis in Lie-Poisson gauge theory,

    F. Bascone and M. Kurkov, “Hamiltonian analysis in Lie-Poisson gauge theory,” Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 21 (2024), 2450108

    2024

  37. [44]

    Symplectic groupoids and Poisson elec- trodynamics,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, A. Sharapov and R. Szabo, “Symplectic groupoids and Poisson elec- trodynamics,” JHEP 2024 (2024), 39

    2024

  38. [45]

    Symplectic realizations and Lie groupoids in Poisson Electrodynamics,

    F. Di Cosmo, A. Ibort, G. Marmo and P. Vitale, “Symplectic realizations and Lie groupoids in Poisson Electrodynamics,” [arXiv:2312.16308[hep-th]]

    arXiv

  39. [46]

    On Poisson Electrodynamics With Charged Fields,

    A. Sharapov, “On Poisson Electrodynamics With Charged Fields,” J. Phys. A 57 (2024), 315401

    2024

  40. [47]

    Classical mechanics in noncommuta- tive spaces: confinement and more,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, M. A. Kurkov and A. Sharapov, “Classical mechanics in noncommuta- tive spaces: confinement and more,” Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024), 1068

    2024

  41. [49]

    Woodhouse, Geometric Quantization, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1997)

    N. Woodhouse, Geometric Quantization, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1997). 14

    1997

  42. [50]

    New quantum Poincar´ e algebra and κ-deformed field theory,

    J. Lukierski, A. Nowicki and H. Ruegg, “New quantum Poincar´ e algebra and κ-deformed field theory,” Phys. Lett. B 293 (1992), 344-352

    1992

  43. [51]

    Local D = 4 field theory on κ-deformed Minkowski space,

    P. Kosinski, J. Lukierski and P. Maslanka, “Local D = 4 field theory on κ-deformed Minkowski space,” Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000), 025004

    2000

  44. [52]

    De- formed Field Theory on kappa-spacetime,

    M. Dimitrijevic, L. Jonke, L. Moller, E. Tsouchnika, J. Wess and M. Wohlgenannt, “De- formed Field Theory on kappa-spacetime,” Eur. Phys. J. C 31 (2003), 129-138

    2003

  45. [53]

    U (1) gauge field theory on κ-Minkowski space,

    M. Dimitrijevic, L. Jonke and L. Moller, “ U (1) gauge field theory on κ-Minkowski space,” JHEP 09 (2005), 068

    2005

  46. [54]

    New realizations of Lie algebra kappa-deformed Euclidean space,

    S. Meljanac and M. Stojic, “New realizations of Lie algebra kappa-deformed Euclidean space,” Eur. Phys. J. C 47 (2006), 531-539

    2006

  47. [55]

    Kappa-Minkowski space-time and the star product realizations,

    S. Meljanac, A. Samsarov, M. Stojic and K. S. Gupta, “Kappa-Minkowski space-time and the star product realizations,” Eur. Phys. J. C 53 (2008), 295-309

    2008

  48. [56]

    Kappa Snyder deformations of Minkowski spacetime, realizations, and Hopf algebra,

    S. Meljanac, D. Meljanac, A. Samsarov and M. Stoji´ c, “Kappa Snyder deformations of Minkowski spacetime, realizations, and Hopf algebra,” Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011), 065009

    2011

  49. [57]

    Teleparallel gravity and dimensional reductions of non- commutative gauge theory,

    E. Langmann and R. J. Szabo, “Teleparallel gravity and dimensional reductions of non- commutative gauge theory,” Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001), 104019

    2001

  50. [58]

    Noncommutative field theories and gravity,

    V. O. Rivelles, “Noncommutative field theories and gravity,” Phys. Lett. B 558 (2003), 191-196

    2003

  51. [59]

    Symmetry, Gravity and Noncommutativity,

    R. J. Szabo, “Symmetry, Gravity and Noncommutativity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 23 (2006), R199

    2006

  52. [60]

    Geodesic equation in κ-Minkowski spacetime,

    E. Harikumar, T. Juri´ c and S. Meljanac, “Geodesic equation in κ-Minkowski spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012), 045002

    2012

  53. [61]

    Light Propagation in a Background Field for Time-Space Noncommutativity and Axionic Noncommutative QED,

    N. Chatillon and A. Pinzul, “Light Propagation in a Background Field for Time-Space Noncommutativity and Axionic Noncommutative QED,” Nucl. Phys. B 764 (2007), 95- 108

    2007

  54. [62]

    Classical noncommu- tative electrodynamics with external source,

    T. C. Adorno, D. M. Gitman, A. E. Shabad and D. V. Vassilevich, “Classical noncommu- tative electrodynamics with external source,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011), 065003

    2011

  55. [63]

    Noncommutative magnetic moment of charged particles,

    T. C. Adorno, D. M. Gitman, A. E. Shabad and D. V. Vassilevich, “Noncommutative magnetic moment of charged particles,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011), 085031

    2011

  56. [64]

    Photon propagation in noncommutative QED with constant external field,

    R. Fresneda, D. M. Gitman and A. E. Shabad, “Photon propagation in noncommutative QED with constant external field,” Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015), 085005

    2015

  57. [65]

    Deformed Hamilton Mechanics in Noncommutative Phase Space,

    S. D. Liang, “Deformed Hamilton Mechanics in Noncommutative Phase Space,” Int. J. Theo. Phys. 63 (2024), 262

    2024

  58. [66]

    V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Springer, New York (1978). 15

    1978

  59. [67]

    Modeling Transverse Relative Locality,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, L. Barcaroli and N. Loret, “Modeling Transverse Relative Locality,” Int. J. Theo. Phys. 51 (2012), 3359-3375

    2012

  60. [68]

    Noncommutative scalar quasinormal modes of the Reissner–Nordstr¨ om black hole,

    M. Dimitrijevic, N. Konjik and A. Samsarov, “Noncommutative scalar quasinormal modes of the Reissner–Nordstr¨ om black hole,” Class. Quant. Grav.35 (2018), 175005

    2018

  61. [69]

    Noncommutative field theory from angular twist,

    M. Dimitrijevic Ciric, N. Konjik, M. A. Kurkov, F. Lizzi and P. Vitale, “Noncommutative field theory from angular twist,” Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018), 085011

    2018

  62. [70]

    Localization and observers in ρ-Minkowski spacetime,

    F. Lizzi, L. Scala and P. Vitale, “Localization and observers in ρ-Minkowski spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), 025023

    2022

  63. [71]

    Bicrossproduct vs. twist quan- tum symmetries in noncommutative geometries: the case of ρ-Minkowski,

    G. Fabiano, G. Gubitosi, F. Lizzi, L. Scala and P. Vitale, “Bicrossproduct vs. twist quan- tum symmetries in noncommutative geometries: the case of ρ-Minkowski,” JHEP 08 (2023), 220

    2023

  64. [72]

    A hydrogen atom on curved noncommutative space,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, “A hydrogen atom on curved noncommutative space,” J. Phys. A 46 (2013), 245303

    2013

  65. [73]

    Dirac equation on coordinate dependent noncommutative space-time,

    V. G. Kupriyanov, “Dirac equation on coordinate dependent noncommutative space-time,” Phys. Lett. B 732 (2014), 385. 16

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.