Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

This paper proves that every sufficiently localized solution of the diffusion equation is the exact particle density of a solution of the relativistic Vlasov-Fokker-Planck equation, making diffusion an exact, causal, and stable hydrodynamic

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 07:38 UTC pith:GQDNYABJ

load-bearing objection The exact embedding of diffusive dynamics into VFP is a genuine and mostly sound result, but the paper overclaims coverage: the 'any localized diffusion solution' in the abstract is not supported by the theorem's assumptions, and positivity of the lifted state can fail at small times. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2601.19464 v2 pith:GQDNYABJ submitted 2026-01-27 gr-qc hep-thmath-phmath.MPnucl-th

The diffusion equation is compatible with special relativity

Lorenzo Gavassino This is my paper
classification gr-qc hep-thmath-phmath.MPnucl-th
keywords diffusion equationspecial relativityrelativistic kinetic theoryVlasov-Fokker-Planck equationcausalitystabilityhydrodynamicsLorentz invariance
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.

The paper seeks to overturn the long-held view that parabolic diffusion is incompatible with special relativity. It constructs an explicit embedding of any smooth, localized solution of the diffusion equation into an exact solution of the relativistic Vlasov–Fokker–Planck equation, a manifestly causal and thermodynamically consistent kinetic theory. In this embedding, the particle density satisfies Fick's law exactly at all wavelengths. The paper argues that the usual instability and acausality objections fail because they rely on non-normalizable solutions that lie outside the kinetic theory's state space. If correct, this redefines what relativity requires of dissipative hydrodynamic equations.

Core claim

Theorem 1 states that for any Schwartz function g with g*(k)=g(−k), the function f(t,x,p)=e^{α−βε}+∫(dk/2π) g(k)e^{−βε−iβDkp+ikx−Dk²t} is an exact, nonnegative (under a smallness condition) solution of the relativistic Vlasov–Fokker–Planck equation, and its particle density solves the diffusion equation ∂t n = D ∂x² n. The paper then asserts that every smooth, sufficiently localized diffusion solution arises this way, by choosing g(k) from the Fourier transform of the initial density via the kernel in (9). Within this kinetic sector, the standard boosted unstable modes (e.g., e^{Γ(t−Vx)} with Γ>0) are shown to have no kinetic counterpart: any exact VFP solution with that spacetime dependence

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the explicit integral ansatz f(t,x,p)=e^{α−βε}+∫(dk/2π) g(k)e^{−βε−iβDkp+ikx−Dk²t}, which couples momentum and position through the combination x−βDp. This ansatz is an exact solution of the relativistic Vlasov–Fokker–Planck equation, whose collision term is momentum-space Brownian motion with inverse temperature β. The choice of g(k) in equation (9) converts a density perturbation into the corresponding kinetic perturbation. The free-energy current with nonpositive divergence supplies the stability guarantee.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim depends on the assumption that the initial density perturbations of interest can be embedded as genuine, nonnegative phase-space distributions at t=0, which requires their Fourier transforms to decay sufficiently fast (or their profiles to extend analytically); the paper only proves this for a restricted class of initial data.

What would settle it

Take a smooth, compactly supported initial density bump δn(0,x), compute the constructed g(k) from (9), and evaluate the resulting phase-space distribution at t=0; if it is negative somewhere, or if its momentum integral does not reproduce δn(0,x), then the asserted embedding of all localized diffusion solutions into the kinetic theory fails.

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

If this is right

  • If the theorem holds, Fick's law can be regarded as an exact rather than approximate hydrodynamic limit of a relativistic kinetic theory.
  • The instability of boosted diffusion is not physical: the unstable modes lie outside the admissible state space, and every admissible kinetic state is stable in all frames.
  • Causality is preserved microscopically; the apparent instantaneous spreading of a diffusive density transmits no information beyond what was already encoded in the initial phase-space distribution.
  • Hyperbolic modifications such as Cattaneo or Israel–Stewart are not required for relativistic consistency, although they remain useful robust approximations for practical computations.
  • The construction extends to arbitrary spatial dimensions without changing the proof.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same embedding technique may apply to other parabolic transport equations, suggesting that a wider class of relativistic dissipative equations can be realized as exact sectors of kinetic theory.
  • The admissible initial data are restrictive: they must be Schwartz or analytic in a strip (or their Fourier transforms must decay fast enough). Realistic compactly supported disturbances only approximate this class; whether the approximation is physically sufficient is untested.
  • The paper's reinterpretation of causality—where effective equations need not be hyperbolic if embedded in a causal microscopic theory—could be applied to assess other apparent acausalities in effective field theories.
  • The massless limit provides an explicit formula with a testable prediction: a momentum-space precursor at a distant point encodes the full density profile before the density signal arrives; this could be searched for in controlled kinetic or ultracold-gas experiments.

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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims to resolve the alleged incompatibility of the diffusion equation with special relativity by constructing, for a class of initial density perturbations, exact solutions of the relativistic Vlasov–Fokker–Planck equation whose particle density satisfies the diffusion equation. The central ansatz is Eq. (6), with the embedding kernel given by Eq. (9). The paper further argues that the standard instability modes of the diffusion equation are non-normalizable and admit no kinetic-theory counterpart, and that apparent acausal tails are compensated by information already present in the initial phase-space distribution. It also provides an explicit massless limit and indicates a higher-dimensional generalization.

Significance. If fully established, the paper would provide a concrete counterexample to the common view that parabolic dissipative equations cannot be exact hydrodynamic sectors of causal relativistic kinetic theories. The construction is explicit and the verification of the VFP equation is direct; the positivity bound in Theorem 1(b) and the stability inequality in Eq. (11) are useful elements. However, the advertised coverage of 'any smooth and sufficiently localized solution' is not proven: the theorem requires Schwartz g(k), whereas the embedding kernel in Eq. (9) grows exponentially for massive particles. The paper itself partially concedes this in footnote 2 and in the paragraph after Eq. (9), but the abstract and introduction still assert a stronger statement. With a precise statement of the admissible class of initial data, the result would remain significant as an existence proof of an exact diffusive sector in a causal relativistic kinetic theory.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Theorem 1 and Eq. (9)] Theorem 1 assumes g(k) is Schwartz, but for m>0 the kernel in Eq. (9) grows like e^{mβD|k|}|k|^{3/2} at large |k|. For a Schwartz, let alone compactly supported, δn(0,x), the corresponding g is not L1 and is not Schwartz; Paley–Wiener prevents compactly supported δn from having the exponential Fourier decay needed to make g L1. Thus the t=0 integral in Eq. (6) is only distributional, and the proof of Theorem 1 does not apply. This contradicts the abstract's claim that 'any smooth and sufficiently localized solution' of the diffusion equation is embeddable. The text should be revised to restrict the claimed embedding to data satisfying a condition such as δn(k)e^{(mβD+a)|k|}∈L1 for some a>0, or to state explicitly that compactly supported preparations are outside the diffusive sector. This is a load-bearing gap for the coverage claim.
  2. [Section 2, paragraph after Eq. (9)] The paper asserts that for t>0 the Gaussian factor e^{-Dk^2 t} dominates the exponential growth of the embedding kernel, making the integral unambiguous. But it does not prove that the resulting f is nonnegative or has finite physical moments for such data. For compactly supported δn, the integrand is peaked near |k|∼(mβD)/(2Dt), and the perturbation amplitude can be as large as exp[(mβD)^2/(4Dt)] modulo oscillations, so for sufficiently small t positivity is not guaranteed. Theorem 1(b) does not apply because g∉L1. Without a positivity argument (or a restriction to data with ||g||L1 small enough), the claim that this defines a 'physically admissible kinetic solution' is unsupported.
  3. [Section 3, causality discussion and footnote 2] The observation that no distribution of the form (6) can have compact spatial support is correct, but it explicitly excludes the standard causality test case of compactly supported initial density. The paper should acknowledge in the abstract and introduction that the construction covers only a special class of localized initial data. Footnote 2 is an honest limitation, but the abstract and the sentence 'any smooth and sufficiently localized solution...' need to be adjusted to match the actual mathematical result. This is not merely a wording issue, because the apparent acausal tails of the diffusion Green function are precisely what one would want to embed for compactly supported data.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Notation] Typo: 'Througout' should be 'Throughout'.
  2. [Abstract and Introduction] The phrase 'governed exactly by diffusion at all wavelengths' is ambiguous; the diffusion equation has no intrinsic wavelength cutoff, but the admissible data class is restricted by the Fourier growth of the embedding kernel. Clarify what 'wavelength' means in this context.
  3. [Footnote 1] The companion paper cited in footnote 1 is not given a reference; either provide the citation or state that it is in preparation.
  4. [Eq. (12)] The notation (1−D^2∂_x^2)δn(t,x−βDp) should be clarified: the differential operator acts on the first argument of δn and the resulting function is evaluated at x−βDp. A brief explanation would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the diffusion embedding is a self-contained explicit construction.

full rationale

The central claim is an existence construction, not a circular derivation. Theorem 1 defines an explicit family f(t,x,p) by formula (6) and verifies by direct substitution that it solves the relativistic VFP equation (3); no parameter is fitted to the target result, and no prior result of the author is used as the load-bearing premise. The associated density satisfies the diffusion equation because each Fourier mode carries the factor e^{-Dk^2 t}, so the step from the VFP solution to diffusion is a consequence of the explicit ansatz, not an assumption equivalent to the desired conclusion. The embedding formula (9) chooses g(k) from the initial density perturbation; this is an inverse/existence construction, not a fitted prediction. Self-citations appear only as contextual support (e.g., refs. [38], [42], [43] for stability, which is also proved in the text via the free-energy current), and none is load-bearing. The paper's own caveats—that g may fail to be Schwartz for compactly supported data and that t=0 may require distributional interpretation, plus footnote 2 stating that standard localized preparations may lie outside the diffusive sector—are scope limitations or possible rigor gaps, not circularity. They do not make the derivation reduce to its inputs. Hence there is no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities. Its logical load is carried by (i) the VFP equation as the microscopic theory, (ii) standard Fourier/Bessel analysis, and (iii) interpretive assumptions about what constitutes a physical signal and a physical state. The only numerical inputs are D and β, which are model parameters rather than fitted constants.

free parameters (2)
  • D (diffusion coefficient)
    Input parameter shared by Fick's law (1) and the VFP equation (3). The construction holds for any D>0; it is not fitted to data.
  • β (inverse temperature)
    Inverse temperature of the thermal bath; input parameter. The equilibrium distribution is e^{−βε}.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The relativistic VFP equation (3) is a valid, causal, thermodynamically consistent kinetic theory.
    The entire paper relies on the VFP equation as the microscopic model. Causality is manifest in |v|≤1; stability and thermodynamic consistency are argued via the free-energy current, but the theory itself is an input.
  • standard math The equilibrium distribution e^{−βε} is the stationary solution of the VFP equation.
    Used throughout; it follows from ∂p(e^{−βε}) = −βv e^{−βε}. Stated in the proof of Theorem 1 and in the stability calculation.
  • standard math Fourier analysis and Schwartz-space manipulations are valid; the momentum integral of e^{−βε−iβDkp} equals the Bessel-function kernel in Eq. (7).
    Needed to compute the density projection and to define the embedding. Standard Bessel-function integral identities are invoked without derivation.
  • domain assumption Physical information is defined by the full phase-space distribution, so pre-existing momentum-space correlations at a point can encode the entire spatial profile; signals are not defined by the density alone.
    This is the load-bearing interpretive premise for the causality claim (section 'Why microscopic causality is preserved'). If one insists that the density alone is a valid signal, the theory is acausal; the paper argues that the full kinetic data redefine the signal.
  • domain assumption Non-normalizable, spatially non-localized solutions (plane waves, exponential growth in space) are unphysical and can be excluded from the admissible solution space.
    Used to dismiss the unstable modes of diffusion. The paper argues these have no counterpart in kinetic theory; the assumption is that only localized, normalizable states are physical.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 7769 in / 27640 out tokens · 324243 ms · 2026-08-03T07:38:02.309687+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Due to its parabolic character, the diffusion equation exhibits instantaneous spatial spreading, and becomes unstable when Lorentz-boosted. According to the conventional interpretation, these features reflect a fundamental incompatibility with special relativity. In this Letter, we show that this interpretation is incorrect by demonstrating that any smooth and sufficiently localized solution of the diffusion equation is the particle density of an exact solution of the relativistic Vlasov-Fokker-Planck equation. This establishes the existence of a causal, stable, and thermodynamically consistent relativistic kinetic theory whose hydrodynamic sector is governed exactly by diffusion at all wavelengths. We further demonstrate that the standard arguments for instability arise from considering solutions that admit no counterpart in kinetic theory, and that apparent violations of causality disappear once signals are defined in terms of the underlying microscopic data.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. The Lorentzian geometry of relaxation

    nucl-th 2026-07 accept novelty 8.0

    Causality forces purely relaxational dispersion relations to follow spacelike trajectories on the Lorentzian {iω,ik} plane, producing universal bounds on diffusivity, viscosity, time-dilation deviations, and hydrodyna...

  2. How acausal equations emerge from causal dynamics

    nucl-th 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    A causal microscopic kinetic model can reproduce arbitrary rest-frame stable dissipative dispersion relations at real k through suitable initialization, providing a counterexample to claims that micro-causality alone ...

  3. Causal UV completions of relativistic hydrodynamics

    hep-th 2026-05 accept novelty 7.0

    Any stand-alone dissipative hydrodynamic EFT is acausal; causal UV completions exist that preserve the exact IR hydrodynamic mode for subluminal sound speed and finite gradient-expansion radius.

  4. Lorentz-boosted diffusion: initial value formulation and exact solutions

    math-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0

    Lorentz-boosted diffusion becomes a well-posed initial-value problem on a band-limited (Paley-Wiener) function space, with an exact closed-form Shannon-Whittaker Green function.

  5. Causal UV completions of relativistic hydrodynamics

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Any standalone hydrodynamic EFT is acausal and requires UV completions with transient modes to restore causality.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 22 linked inside Pith · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Fick, Annalen der Physik und Chemie94, 59 (1855)

    A. Fick, Annalen der Physik und Chemie94, 59 (1855)

  2. [2]

    L. P. Kadanoff and P. C. Martin, Annals of Physics24, 419 (1963)

    1963

  3. [3]

    Peliti,Statistical Mechanics in a Nutshell, In a nutshell (Princeton University Press, 2011)

    L. Peliti,Statistical Mechanics in a Nutshell, In a nutshell (Princeton University Press, 2011)

    2011

  4. [4]

    Landau and E

    L. Landau and E. Lifshitz,Fluid Mechanics, v. 6 (Elsevier Science, 2013)

    2013

  5. [5]

    Landau and E

    L. Landau and E. Lifshitz,Theory of elasticity, v. 7 (Pergamon Press, 1970)

    1970

  6. [6]

    Einstein, Annalen der Physik322, 549 (1905)

    A. Einstein, Annalen der Physik322, 549 (1905)

    1905

  7. [7]

    P. M. Morse and H. Feshbach,Methods of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 1 (McGraw–Hill Book Company, New York, 1953) vol. I

    1953

  8. [8]

    C. Cattaneo,Sur une forme de l’´ equation de la chaleur ´ eliminant le paradoxe d’une propagation instantan´ ee, Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des s´ eances de l’Acad´ emie des sciences (Gauthier-Villars, 1958)

    1958

  9. [9]

    Israel and J

    W. Israel and J. Stewart, Annals of Physics118, 341 (1979)

    1979

  10. [10]

    Hiscock and L

    W. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, Physical review D: Particles and fields31, 725 (1985)

    1985

  11. [11]

    Baier, P

    R. Baier, P. Romatschke, D. Thanh Son, A. O. Starinets, and M. A. Stephanov, Journal of High Energy Physics2008, 100 (2008), arXiv:0712.2451 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  12. [12]

    Muller and T

    I. Muller and T. Ruggeri,Rational Extended Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag New York, 1998)

    1998

  13. [13]

    D. Jou, J. Casas-V´ azquez, and G. Lebon, Reports on Progress in Physics51, 1105 (1999)

    1999

  14. [14]

    Rezzolla and O

    L. Rezzolla and O. Zanotti,Relativistic Hydrodynamics, by L. Rezzolla and O. Zanotti. Oxford University Press,

  15. [15]

    Romatschke and U

    P. Romatschke and U. Romatschke,Relativistic Fluid Dynamics In and Out of Equilibrium, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2019) arXiv:1712.05815 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  16. [16]

    Gavassino and M

    L. Gavassino and M. Antonelli, Front. Astron. Space Sci.8, 686344 (2021), arXiv:2105.15184 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  17. [17]

    Gavassino, Phys

    L. Gavassino, Phys. Rev. X12, 041001 (2022), arXiv:2111.05254 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    G. S. Rocha, D. Wagner, G. S. Denicol, J. Noronha, and D. H. Rischke, Entropy26, 189 (2024), arXiv:2311.15063 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Kost ¨adt and M

    P. Kost ¨adt and M. Liu, Phys. Rev. D62, 023003 (2000), arXiv:cond-mat/0010276 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  20. [20]

    Geroch and L

    R. Geroch and L. Lindblom, Annals of Physics207, 394 (1991)

    1991

  21. [21]

    Gavassino, M

    L. Gavassino, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 222302 (2024), arXiv:2302.03478 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, Annals of Physics151, 466 (1983)

    1983

  23. [23]

    G. S. Denicol, H. Niemi, E. Moln´ ar, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D85, 114047 (2012)

    2012

  24. [24]

    I. S. Liu, I. M ¨uller, and T. Ruggeri, Annals of Physics169, 191 (1986)

    1986

  25. [25]

    Geroch and L

    R. Geroch and L. Lindblom, Phys. Rev. D41, 1855 (1990)

    1990

  26. [26]

    F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. D100, 104020 (2019)

    2019

  27. [27]

    Kovtun, Journal of High Energy Physics2019, 34 (2019), arXiv:1907.08191 [hep-th]

    P. Kovtun, Journal of High Energy Physics2019, 34 (2019), arXiv:1907.08191 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. X12, 021044 (2022)

    2022

  29. [29]

    Gavassino and M

    L. Gavassino and M. Antonelli, Phys. Rev. D112, 104052 (2025), arXiv:2509.00198 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Geroch, Journal of Mathematical Physics36, 4226 (1995)

    R. Geroch, Journal of Mathematical Physics36, 4226 (1995)

    1995

  31. [31]

    Lindblom, Annals of Physics247, 1 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9508058 [gr-qc]

    L. Lindblom, Annals of Physics247, 1 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9508058 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  32. [32]

    R. P. Geroch, (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0103112

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  33. [33]

    Armas and A

    J. Armas and A. Jain, SciPost Phys.11, 054 (2021), arXiv:2010.15782 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Ba¸ sar, J

    G. Ba¸ sar, J. Bhambure, R. Singh, and D. Teaney, Phys. Rev. C110, 044903 (2024), arXiv:2403.04185 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Gavassino, Phys

    L. Gavassino, Phys. Rev. D112, 034026 (2025), arXiv:2505.18815 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Debbasch, K

    F. Debbasch, K. Mallick, and J.-P. Rivet, Journal of Statistical Physics88, 945 (1997)

    1997

  37. [37]

    Dunkel and P

    J. Dunkel and P. H ¨anggi, Phys. Rept.471, 1 (2009), arXiv:0812.1996 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  38. [38]

    Gavassino, (2026), arXiv:2601.03081 [gr-qc]

    L. Gavassino, (2026), arXiv:2601.03081 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    S. R. de Groot, W. A. van Leeuwen, and C. G. van Weert,Relativistic kinetic theory: principles and applications(1980)

    1980

  40. [40]

    Huang,Statistical Mechanics, 2nd ed

    K. Huang,Statistical Mechanics, 2nd ed. (John Wiley & Sons, 1987)

    1987

  41. [41]

    Cercignani and G

    C. Cercignani and G. M. Kremer,The relativistic Boltzmann equation: theory and applications(2002)

    2002

  42. [42]

    Gavassino, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 21LT02 (2021), arXiv:2104.09142 [gr-qc]

    L. Gavassino, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 21LT02 (2021), arXiv:2104.09142 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    Gavassino, M

    L. Gavassino, M. Antonelli, and B. Haskell, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 010606 (2022), arXiv:2105.14621 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  44. [44]

    Gavassino, M

    L. Gavassino, M. Antonelli, and B. Haskell, Physical Review D102(2020), 10.1103/physrevd.102.043018

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.043018 2020

  45. [45]

    M. P. Heller, A. Serantes, M. Spali´ nski, and B. Withers, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 261601 (2023), arXiv:2212.07434 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    Gavassino, Phys

    L. Gavassino, Phys. Lett. B840, 137854 (2023), arXiv:2301.06651 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Rauch,Partial Differential Equations, Graduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer New York, 2012)

    J. Rauch,Partial Differential Equations, Graduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer New York, 2012)

    2012

  48. [48]

    Gavassino, M

    L. Gavassino, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 162301 (2024), arXiv:2307.05987 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    R. M. Wald,General relativity(Chicago Univ. Press, Chicago, IL, 1984). 6

    1984

  50. [50]

    G. S. Denicol, J. Noronha, H. Niemi, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D83, 074019 (2011)

    2011

  51. [51]

    Grozdanov, A

    S. Grozdanov, A. Lucas, and N. Poovuttikul, Phys. Rev. D99, 086012 (2019), arXiv:1810.10016 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [52]

    Baggioli, M

    M. Baggioli, M. Vasin, V. Brazhkin, and K. Trachenko, Physics Reports865, 1 (2020), gapped momentum states

    2020

  53. [53]

    Gavassino, M

    L. Gavassino, M. Antonelli, and B. Haskell, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 075001 (2021)

    2021

  54. [54]

    Gavassino and J

    L. Gavassino and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. D109, 096040 (2024), arXiv:2305.04119 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    Y. Ahn, M. Baggioli, Y. Bu, M. Matsumoto, and X. Sun, Phys. Rev. D112, 086013 (2025), arXiv:2506.00926 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Gavassino, (2025), arXiv:2511.14344 [physics.plasm-ph]

    L. Gavassino, (2025), arXiv:2511.14344 [physics.plasm-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  57. [2013]

    ISBN-10: 0198528906; ISBN-13: 978-0198528906(2013)

    2013