pith. sign in

arxiv: 2504.16673 · v2 · submitted 2025-04-22 · ✦ hep-th

Monopoles, Clarified

Aviral Aggarwal , Subhroneel Chakrabarti , Madhusudhan Raman This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 18:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th
keywords magnetic monopolesduality invarianceSen formalismquantum electrodynamicscharge renormalizationLorentz invariancefield strengthsDirac quantization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Using field strengths instead of potentials yields a local, duality-invariant action for QED with magnetic monopoles.

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

The paper develops a description of quantum electrodynamics that includes magnetic monopoles while keeping the action manifestly invariant under electric-magnetic duality and Lorentz transformations. It adapts Sen's formalism by promoting the field strengths themselves to the role of dynamical variables. This move eliminates the need for potentials and removes previous ambiguities that plagued attempts to write down such theories. The resulting framework produces consistent results when the theory is quantized, both at tree level and when loop corrections are included, using only standard quantum field theory rules. It also clarifies how electric charge is renormalized and shows that the Dirac quantization condition between electric and magnetic charges stays invariant under changes of renormalization scale.

Core claim

By taking the electromagnetic field strengths as the dynamical variables in Sen's formalism, one obtains a manifestly duality-invariant, Lorentz-invariant, and local action for quantum electrodynamics in the presence of magnetic monopoles. This action leads to consistent outcomes at both tree and loop levels within ordinary quantum field theory, without external assumptions or amendments, and it makes the mechanisms of charge renormalization and the renormalization-group invariance of the charge quantization condition explicit.

What carries the argument

Sen's formalism with electromagnetic field strengths promoted to dynamical variables, which enforces duality invariance and locality directly.

If this is right

  • The Dirac quantization condition remains unchanged under renormalization-group flow.
  • Standard perturbative techniques suffice for both tree-level and loop-level calculations involving monopoles.
  • Charge renormalization can be tracked without auxiliary conditions or cutoffs.
  • The same construction applies directly to other theories that possess strong-weak dualities.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The locality of the action may simplify numerical lattice studies of monopole dynamics.
  • The approach could be tested by checking whether it reproduces known semiclassical results for monopole scattering amplitudes.
  • Extensions to non-Abelian gauge groups would require only the replacement of the field-strength definition.

Load-bearing premise

Switching to field strengths as dynamical variables in Sen's formalism automatically produces a local, duality-invariant action without introducing new inconsistencies or requiring external amendments at the quantum level.

What would settle it

An explicit one-loop computation in this formalism that generates non-local terms, violates duality invariance, or breaks Lorentz invariance would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.16673 by Aviral Aggarwal, Madhusudhan Raman, Subhroneel Chakrabarti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Tree-level amplitude of Σe-Σe scattering. The case of scattering of magnetic sources does not require an independent computation in our approach. Instead, it corresponds to a choice of using Feµν for photon fields and Σm as its source. By starting from the propagator with Fe as photon field and Σm as its source, one can compute tree-level magnetic-magnetic scattering shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Tree-level amplitude of Σm-Σm scattering. Finally, we arrive at the apparently paradoxical case of electric-magnetic scattering at tree￾level. This amplitude is special in the following sense. As we discussed, in presence of charge quantisation, it is not consistent to carry out a Feynman diagram expansion in both couplings simultaneously. However, for charge quantisation to hold, one needs at least the se… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Tree-level amplitude of Σm-Σe scattering. iMΣeΣm = iMeg = egΣ µν e ⟨FµνFeρσ⟩Σ m ρσ = −ieg (Σµν m ϵµντκk τ )(kρΣ ρκ e ) k 2 . (41) Notice that the answer is perfectly Lorentz- and gauge-invariant, as it should be. However, if one insists on re-expressing this answer in terms of the familiar currents that naturally couple to gauge potentials (and which are therefore unnatural from the perspective of our fiel… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The 1-loop correction to Σe − Σe scattering amplitude. We do not need to know the exact details of the vacuum polarisation function, but the Ward identities for the sources allow us to conclude that the tensor structure is captured entirely by 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Insisting on using electric and magnetic coupling leads one to a double cover of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The theory only cares about the distinction between the weak coupling, which we [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We propose a manifestly duality-invariant, Lorentz-invariant, and local action to describe quantum electrodynamics theory in the presence of magnetic monopoles that derives from Sen's formalism. By employing field strengths as the dynamical variables, rather than potentials, this formalism resolves longstanding ambiguities in prior frameworks. Our analysis finds consistent outcomes at both tree and loop levels using the established principles of quantum field theory, obviating the need for external assumptions or amendments. We clarify the mechanisms of charge renormalisation and demonstrate the renormalisation group invariance of the charge quantisation condition. Our approach can be useful for phenomenological studies and in quantum field theories with strong-weak dualities.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a manifestly duality-invariant, Lorentz-invariant, and local action for quantum electrodynamics with magnetic monopoles, derived from Sen's formalism by taking field strengths as the dynamical variables rather than potentials. It derives the equations of motion, performs explicit perturbative checks at tree level and one-loop order, clarifies the mechanisms of charge renormalization, and shows that the Dirac quantization condition remains invariant under the renormalization group.

Significance. If the construction and checks hold, the work supplies a symmetric, local framework for monopoles that avoids the ambiguities of earlier potential-based approaches and is directly usable for phenomenological studies and strong-weak duality analyses. The explicit action construction, derivation of the equations of motion, and one-loop perturbative consistency checks are concrete strengths that support the central claims.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that the formalism is 'consistent at both tree and loop levels' would be strengthened by a single sentence indicating the specific one-loop observables that were computed (e.g., vacuum polarization or vertex corrections).
  2. [One-loop analysis] The one-loop section should specify the regularization and renormalization scheme employed, as this is needed to reproduce the reported charge renormalization and to confirm that no new divergences arise from the magnetic current.
  3. [Action and equations of motion] Notation: the distinction between the electric and magnetic field-strength tensors in the action should be made explicit in the first equation where both appear, to avoid any initial ambiguity for readers familiar with the standard Dirac-string formulation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the positive assessment. The referee's summary correctly identifies the central construction, the use of Sen's formalism with field strengths as dynamical variables, the tree- and one-loop checks, and the demonstration of RG invariance of the Dirac quantization condition. We appreciate the recommendation for minor revision and will incorporate any editorial or presentational suggestions in the revised version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation self-contained from Sen's formalism and standard QFT

full rationale

The paper constructs the action explicitly by adopting field strengths as dynamical variables within Sen's prior formalism, then derives equations of motion and performs tree- and one-loop perturbative checks using ordinary QFT rules. These steps do not reduce the claimed duality invariance, locality, or RG properties to a fit or to a self-referential definition; the output follows from the input assumptions without circular renaming or load-bearing self-citation. The Dirac quantization condition's RG invariance emerges directly from the symmetric electric-magnetic treatment rather than being imposed by construction. No quoted equation or step equates a prediction to its own fitted input.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on Sen's existing formalism plus the standard rules of quantum field theory; no new free parameters or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard principles of quantum field theory suffice for consistent tree- and loop-level calculations
    Invoked to claim consistency without external amendments

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5631 in / 1237 out tokens · 52812 ms · 2026-05-22T18:11:09.106954+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Compactifying the Sen Action: Six Dimensions

    hep-th 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Compactification of the two-metric Sen action requires zero modes from both KK towers but preserves correct on-shell degrees of freedom without doubling.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 12 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    P. A. M. Dirac, Quantised singularities in the electromagnetic field, , Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 133(821), 60 (1931), doi:10.1098/rspa.1931.0130

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1931.0130 1931

  2. [2]

    ’t Hooft, Magnetic Monopoles in Unified Gauge Theories , Nucl

    G. ’t Hooft, Magnetic Monopoles in Unified Gauge Theories , Nucl. Phys. B 79, 276 (1974), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(74)90486-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(74)90486-6 1974

  3. [3]

    A. M. Polyakov, Particle Spectrum in Quantum Field Theory , JETP Lett. 20, 194 (1974)

    work page 1974

  4. [4]

    Y. B. Zeldovich and M. Y. Khlopov, On the Concentration of Relic Magnetic Monopoles in the Universe, Phys. Lett. B 79, 239 (1978), doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90232-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90232-0 1978

  5. [5]

    Preskill, Cosmological Production of Superheavy Magnetic Monopoles , Phys

    J. Preskill, Cosmological Production of Superheavy Magnetic Monopoles , Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 1365 (1979), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.1365

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.43.1365 1979

  6. [6]

    K. A. Milton, Theoretical and experimental status of magnetic monopoles , Rept. Prog. Phys. 69, 1637 (2006), doi:10.1088/0034-4885/69/6/R02, hep-ex/0602040

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0034-4885/69/6/r02 2006

  7. [7]

    Blagojevic and P

    M. Blagojevic and P. Senjanovic, The Quantum Field Theory of Electric and Magnetic Charge, Phys. Rept. 157, 233 (1988), doi:10.1016/0370-1573(88)90098-1

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-1573(88)90098-1 1988

  8. [8]

    M. N. Saha, The origin of mass in neutrons and protons , Indian Journal of Physics 10, 145 (1936). 19 Draft Version REFERENCES

    work page 1936

  9. [9]

    J. J. Thomson, Xxxiv. on momentum in the electric field , The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 8(45), 331 (1904), doi:10.1080/14786440409463203

    work page doi:10.1080/14786440409463203 1904

  10. [10]

    P. C. Argyres and M. R. Douglas, New phenomena in SU(3) supersymmetric gauge theory , Nucl. Phys. B 448, 93 (1995), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(95)00281-V, hep-th/9505062

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0550-3213(95)00281-v 1995

  11. [11]

    P. A. M. Dirac, The Theory of magnetic poles , Phys. Rev. 74, 817 (1948), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.74.817

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.74.817 1948

  12. [12]

    Zwanziger, Quantum field theory of particles with both electric and magnetic charges , Phys

    D. Zwanziger, Quantum field theory of particles with both electric and magnetic charges , Phys. Rev. 176, 1489 (1968), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.176.1489

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.176.1489 1968

  13. [13]

    Zwanziger, Local Lagrangian quantum field theory of electric and magnetic charges , Phys

    D. Zwanziger, Local Lagrangian quantum field theory of electric and magnetic charges , Phys. Rev. D 3, 880 (1971), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.3.880

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.3.880 1971

  14. [14]

    Deser and C

    S. Deser and C. Teitelboim, Duality Transformations of Abelian and Nonabelian Gauge Fields, Phys. Rev. D 13, 1592 (1976), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.13.1592

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.13.1592 1976

  15. [15]

    J. H. Schwarz and A. Sen, Duality symmetric actions , Nucl. Phys. B 411, 35 (1994), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90053-1, hep-th/9304154

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90053-1 1994

  16. [16]

    NOTE ON MANIFEST LORENTZ AND GENERAL COORDINATE INVARIANCE IN DUALITY SYMMETRIC MODELS.

    P. Pasti, D. P. Sorokin and M. Tonin, Note on manifest Lorentz and general coordinate invariance in duality symmetric models , Phys. Lett. B 352, 59 (1995), doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(95)00463-U, hep-th/9503182

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0370- 1995

  17. [17]

    Mkrtchyan, On Covariant Actions for Chiral p−Forms, JHEP 12, 076 (2019), doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2019)076, 1908.01789

    K. Mkrtchyan, On Covariant Actions for Chiral p−Forms, JHEP 12, 076 (2019), doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2019)076, 1908.01789

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2019)076 2019

  18. [18]

    Manifest Electromagnetic Duality in Closed Superstring Field Theory

    N. Berkovits, Manifest electromagnetic duality in closed superstring field theory , Phys. Lett. B 388, 743 (1996), doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(96)01217-8, hep-th/9607070

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(96)01217-8 1996

  19. [19]

    Local Actions with Electric and Magnetic Sources

    N. Berkovits, Local actions with electric and magnetic sources , Phys. Lett. B 395, 28 (1997), doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00036-1, hep-th/9610134

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(97)00036-1 1997

  20. [20]

    Super-Maxwell Actions with Manifest Duality

    N. Berkovits, SuperMaxwell actions with manifest duality , Phys. Lett. B 398, 79 (1997), doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00212-8, hep-th/9610226

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(97)00212-8 1997

  21. [21]

    Lechner and P

    K. Lechner and P. A. Marchetti, Duality invariant quantum field theories of charges and monopoles, Nucl. Phys. B 569, 529 (2000), doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00711-7, hep-th/ 9906079

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(99)00711-7 2000

  22. [22]

    Avetisyan, O

    Z. Avetisyan, O. Evnin and K. Mkrtchyan, Democratic Lagrangians for Nonlinear Electrodynamics , Phys. Rev. Lett. 127(27), 271601 (2021), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.271601, 2108.01103

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.271601 2021

  23. [23]

    Avetisyan, O

    Z. Avetisyan, O. Evnin and K. Mkrtchyan, Nonlinear (chiral) p-form electrodynamics, JHEP 08, 112 (2022), doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2022)112, 2205.02522

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2022)112 2022

  24. [24]

    Covariant Action for Type IIB Supergravity

    A. Sen, Covariant Action for Type IIB Supergravity , JHEP 07, 017 (2016), doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2016)017, 1511.08220

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep07(2016)017 2016

  25. [25]

    Sen, Self-dual forms: Action, Hamiltonian and Compactification , J

    A. Sen, Self-dual forms: Action, Hamiltonian and Compactification , J. Phys. A 53(8), 084002 (2020), doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab5423, 1903.12196

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab5423 2020

  26. [26]

    Lambert, (2,0) Lagrangian Structures , Phys

    N. Lambert, (2,0) Lagrangian Structures , Phys. Lett. B 798, 134948 (2019), doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134948, 1908.10752. 20 Draft Version REFERENCES

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134948 2019

  27. [27]

    Andriolo, N

    E. Andriolo, N. Lambert and C. Papageorgakis, Geometrical Aspects of An Abelian (2,0) Action, JHEP 04, 200 (2020), doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2020)200, 2003.10567

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2020)200 2020

  28. [28]

    Gustavsson, A nonabelian M5 brane Lagrangian in a supergravity background , JHEP 10, 001 (2020), doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)001, 2006.07557

    A. Gustavsson, A nonabelian M5 brane Lagrangian in a supergravity background , JHEP 10, 001 (2020), doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)001, 2006.07557

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2020)001 2020

  29. [29]

    Vanichchapongjaroen, Covariant M5-brane action with self-dual 3-form , JHEP 05, 039 (2021), doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)039, 2011.14384

    P. Vanichchapongjaroen, Covariant M5-brane action with self-dual 3-form , JHEP 05, 039 (2021), doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)039, 2011.14384

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2021)039 2021

  30. [30]

    D. Rist, C. Saemann and M. van der Worp, Towards an M5-brane model. Part III. Self- duality from additional trivial fields , JHEP 06, 036 (2021), doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2021)036, 2012.09253

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2021)036 2021

  31. [31]

    Chakrabarti, D

    S. Chakrabarti, D. Gupta, A. Manna and M. Raman, Irrelevant deformations of chiral bosons, JHEP 02, 028 (2021), doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2021)028, 2011.06352

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep02(2021)028 2021

  32. [32]

    Andriolo, N

    E. Andriolo, N. Lambert, T. Orchard and C. Papageorgakis, A path integral for the chiral- form partition function , JHEP 04, 115 (2022), doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2022)115, 2112.00040

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2022)115 2022

  33. [33]

    Andrianopoli, C

    L. Andrianopoli, C. A. Cremonini, R. D’Auria, P. A. Grassi, R. Matrecano, R. Noris, L. Ravera and M. Trigiante, M5-brane in the superspace approach, Phys. Rev. D 106(2), 026010 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.026010, 2206.06388

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.026010 2022

  34. [34]

    Barbagallo and P

    G. Barbagallo and P. A. Grassi, Sen’s mechanism for self-dual super Maxwell theory , Nucl. Phys. B 1001, 116512 (2024), doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2024.116512, 2212.13856

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2024.116512 2024

  35. [35]

    Chakrabarti, A

    S. Chakrabarti, A. Manna and M. Raman, Renormalization in TT-deformed nonintegrable theories, Phys. Rev. D 105(10), 106025 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.106025, 2204. 03385

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.106025 2022

  36. [36]

    Chakrabarti, D

    S. Chakrabarti, D. Gupta and A. Manna, On-shell action for type IIB supergravity and superstrings on AdS5 × S5, Phys. Lett. B 835, 137578 (2022), doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137578, 2211.02345

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137578 2022

  37. [37]

    Chakrabarti and M

    S. Chakrabarti and M. Raman, Exploring T-Duality for Self-Dual Fields , Fortsch. Phys. 72(5), 2400023 (2024), doi:10.1002/prop.202400023, 2311.09153

    work page doi:10.1002/prop.202400023 2024

  38. [38]

    Lambert, Duality and fluxes in the sen formulation of self-dual fields , Phys

    N. Lambert, Duality and fluxes in the sen formulation of self-dual fields , Phys. Lett. B 840, 137888 (2023), doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137888, 2302.10955

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137888 2023

  39. [39]

    Phonchantuek and P

    A. Phonchantuek and P. Vanichchapongjaroen, Double dimensional reduction of M5-brane action in Sen formalism , Eur. Phys. J. C 83(8), 721 (2023), doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023- 11892-2, 2305.04861

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023- 2023

  40. [40]

    C. M. Hull, Covariant action for self-dual p-form gauge fields in general spacetimes , JHEP 04, 011 (2024), doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2024)011, 2307.04748

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2024)011 2024

  41. [41]

    Evnin and K

    O. Evnin and K. Mkrtchyan, Three approaches to chiral form interactions , Differ. Geom. Appl. 89, 102016 (2023), doi:10.1016/j.difgeo.2023.102016, 2207.01767

    work page doi:10.1016/j.difgeo.2023.102016 2023

  42. [42]

    M. B. Halpern, Field Strength and Dual Variable Formulations of Gauge Theory , Phys. Rev. D 19, 517 (1979), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.19.517

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.19.517 1979

  43. [43]

    Calucci, R

    G. Calucci, R. Jengo and M. T. Vallon, On the Quantum Field Theory of Charges and Monopoles, Nucl. Phys. B 197, 93 (1982), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90156-0. 21 Draft Version REFERENCES

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90156-0 1982

  44. [44]

    Calucci, R

    G. Calucci, R. Jengo and M. T. Vallon, A Quantum Field Theory of Dyons and Photons , Nucl. Phys. B 211, 77 (1983), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90186-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90186-4 1983

  45. [45]

    Calucci and R

    G. Calucci and R. Jengo, ON THE RENORMALIZATION OF THE QUANTUM FIELD THEORY OF POINT - LIKE MONOPOLES AND CHARGES , Nucl. Phys. B 223, 501 (1983), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90067-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90067-6 1983

  46. [46]

    Blagojevic and R

    M. Blagojevic and R. Jengo, THE ELECTRON - MONOPOLE INTERACTION AS A WESS-ZUMINO TERM, Phys. Lett. B 165, 343 (1985), doi:10.1016/0370-2693(85)91242-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(85)91242-0 1985

  47. [47]

    Newey, J

    J. Newey, J. Terning and C. B. Verhaaren, Schwinger vs Coleman: Magnetic charge renormalization, JHEP 11, 075 (2024), doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2024)075, 2407.13823

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2024)075 2024

  48. [48]

    Photons and gravitons in perturbation theory: Derivation of Maxwell’s and Einstein’s equations.Phys

    S. Weinberg, Photons and gravitons in perturbation theory: Derivation of Maxwell’s and Einstein’s equations, Phys. Rev. 138, B988 (1965), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.138.B988

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.138.b988 1965

  49. [49]

    Schwinger, Electric- and Magnetic-Charge Renormalization

    J. Schwinger, Electric- and Magnetic-Charge Renormalization. I , Phys. Rev. 151, 1048 (1966), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.151.1048

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.151.1048 1966

  50. [50]

    Schwinger, Electric- and Magnetic-Charge Renormalization

    J. Schwinger, Electric- and Magnetic-Charge Renormalization. II , Phys. Rev. 151, 1055 (1966), doi:10.1103/PhysRev.151.1055

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.151.1055 1966

  51. [51]

    R. A. Brandt and F. Neri, Remarks on Zwanziger’s Local Quantum Field Theory of Electric and Magnetic Charge , Phys. Rev. D 18, 2080 (1978), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.18.2080

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.18.2080 2080

  52. [52]

    Deans, Quantum Field Theory of Dirac Monopoles and the Charge Quantization Condition, Nucl

    W. Deans, Quantum Field Theory of Dirac Monopoles and the Charge Quantization Condition, Nucl. Phys. B 197, 307 (1982), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90294-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90294-2 1982

  53. [53]

    Panagiotakopoulos, Infinity Subtraction in a Quantum Field Theory of Charges and Monopoles, J

    C. Panagiotakopoulos, Infinity Subtraction in a Quantum Field Theory of Charges and Monopoles, J. Phys. A 16, 133 (1983), doi:10.1088/0305-4470/16/1/022

    work page doi:10.1088/0305-4470/16/1/022 1983

  54. [54]

    S. R. Coleman, THE MAGNETIC MONOPOLE FIFTY YEARS LATER , In Les Houches Summer School of Theoretical Physics: Laser-Plasma Interactions , pp. 461–552 (1982)

    work page 1982

  55. [55]

    Jengo and M

    R. Jengo and M. T. Vallon, VACUUM EFFECTS ON THE STATIC MONOPOLE - ANTI- MONOPOLE INTERACTION, Nuovo Cim. A 77, 249 (1983), doi:10.1007/BF02816654

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02816654 1983

  56. [56]

    C. J. Goebel and M. T. Thomaz, Antishielding of Magnetic Charge , Phys. Rev. D 30, 823 (1984), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.30.823

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.30.823 1984

  57. [57]

    Resolving the Weinberg Paradox with Topology

    J. Terning and C. B. Verhaaren, Resolving the Weinberg Paradox with Topology , JHEP 03, 177 (2019), doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2019)177, 1809.05102

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep03(2019)177 2019

  58. [58]

    Bott and L

    R. Bott and L. W. Tu, Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology, Springer, ISBN 978-0-387- 90613-3, 978-1-4419-2815-3, 978-1-4757-3951-0, doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3951-0 (1982)

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3951-0 1982

  59. [59]

    Hull, Coupling self-dual p-form Gauge fields to self-dual branes , J

    C. Hull, Coupling self-dual p-form Gauge fields to self-dual branes , J. Phys. A 58(12), 125202 (2025), doi:10.1088/1751-8121/adbf76, 2501.10566

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/adbf76 2025

  60. [60]

    C. M. Hull, Monopoles, Dirac Strings and Generalised Symmetries (2024), 2411.18741

    work page arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    C. G. Callan, Jr., Monopole Catalysis of Baryon Decay , Nucl. Phys. B 212, 391 (1983), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90677-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90677-6 1983

  62. [62]

    C. G. Callan, Jr., Disappearing Dyons , Phys. Rev. D 25, 2141 (1982), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.25.2141. 22 Draft Version REFERENCES

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.25.2141 1982

  63. [63]

    C. G. Callan, Jr., Dyon-Fermion Dynamics , Phys. Rev. D 26, 2058 (1982), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.26.2058

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.26.2058 2058

  64. [64]

    V. A. Rubakov, Adler-Bell-Jackiw Anomaly and Fermion Number Breaking in the Presence of a Magnetic Monopole , Nucl. Phys. B 203, 311 (1982), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90034-7

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90034-7 1982

  65. [65]

    V. A. Rubakov, Monopole Catalysis of Proton Decay , Rept. Prog. Phys. 51, 189 (1988), doi:10.1088/0034-4885/51/2/002

    work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/51/2/002 1988

  66. [66]

    S-duality Improved Superstring Perturbation Theory

    A. Sen, S-duality Improved Superstring Perturbation Theory , JHEP 11, 029 (2013), doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2013)029, 1304.0458

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep11(2013)029 2013

  67. [67]

    C. Beem, L. Rastelli, A. Sen and B. C. van Rees, Resummation and S-duality in N=4 SYM , JHEP 04, 122 (2014), doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2014)122, 1306.3228

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2014)122 2014

  68. [68]

    On Perturbation theory improved by Strong coupling expansion

    M. Honda, On Perturbation theory improved by Strong coupling expansion , JHEP 12, 019 (2014), doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2014)019, 1408.2960

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep12(2014)019 2014

  69. [69]

    Interpolating function and Stokes Phenomena

    M. Honda and D. P. Jatkar, Interpolating function and Stokes Phenomena , Nucl. Phys. B 900, 533 (2015), doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2015.09.024, 1504.02276. 23

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2015.09.024 2015