Cited by 21Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational TheoryBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics

Canonical quantum gravity in the Vassiliev invariants arena: II. Constraints, habitats and consistency of the constraint algebra

Open access
Bartolo, Cayetano Di, Gambini, Rodolfo, Griego, Jorge, Pullin, Jorge·2000·Classical and Quantum Gravity

Abstract

In a companion paper we introduced a kinematical arena for the discussion of the constraints of canonical quantum gravity in the spin network representation based on Vassiliev invariants. In this paper we introduce the Hamiltonian constraint, extend the space of states to non-diffeomorphism invariant ``habitats'' and check that the off-shell quantum constraint commutator algebra reproduces the classical Poisson algebra of constraints of general relativity without anomalies. One can therefore consider the resulting set of constraints and space of states as a consistent theory of canonical quantum gravity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0264-9381/17/16/310

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Regularization choices for the scalar constraint have to be made and the result is not unique.

    “Regularization choices have to be made and the result is not unique.”

    From The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity (2013) · cites this paper as [135]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [9]R. Gambini, J. Pullin 'Loops, knots, gauge theories and quantum gravity' Cambridge University Press (1996).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bartolo, C. D., Gambini, R., Griego, J., & Pullin, J.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Simón Bolívar (VE)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Venue
Classical and Quantum Gravity
Published
2000-08-02
Volume
17
Issue
16
Pages
3239-3264
ISSN
  • 0264-9381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6382
OpenAlex
W1997717507
Cited by
21
References
6
Citations by year
2013: 2
FWCI
2.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Classical and Quantum Gravity (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
Keywords
canonical quantum gravity, Vassiliev invariants, spin networks, Hamiltonian constraint, constraint algebra

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review