Cited by 46Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational TheoryAdvanced Operator Algebra Research

Quantum constraints, Dirac observables and evolution: group averaging versus the Schrödinger picture in LQC

Open access
Kamiński, Wojciech, Lewandowski, Jerzy, Pawłowski, Tomasz·2009·Classical and Quantum Gravity

Abstract

A general quantum constraint of the form (realized in particular in loop quantum cosmology models) is studied. Group averaging is applied to define the Hilbert space of solutions and the relational Dirac observables. Two cases are considered. In the first case, the spectrum of the operator is assumed to be discrete. The quantum theory defined by the constraint takes the form of a Schrödinger-like quantum mechanics with a generalized Hamiltonian . In the second case, the spectrum is absolutely continuous and some peculiar asymptotic properties of the eigenfunctions are assumed. The resulting Hilbert space and the dynamics are characterized by a continuous family of the Schrödinger-like quantum theories. However, the relational observables mix different members of the family. Our assumptions are motivated by new loop quantum cosmology models of quantum FRW spacetime. The two cases considered in this paper correspond to the negative and positive cosmological constant, respectively. Our results should also be applicable in many other general relativistic contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0264-9381/26/24/245016

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The EPRL amplitudes can be generalized to arbitrary complexes with boundaries given by graphs with nodes of arbitrary valence.

    “as in BF theory, the EPRL amplitudes can be generalized to arbitrary complexes with boundaries given by graphs with nodes of arbitrary valence. The extension of the model to arbitrary complexes was first studied in [237, 236] and has been revisited in [140].”

    From The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity (2013) · cites this paper as [237]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kamiński, W., Lewandowski, J., & Pawłowski, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Warsaw (PL)
  • Instituto de Estructura de la Materia (ES)
Venue
Classical and Quantum Gravity
Published
2009-12-08
Volume
26
Issue
24
Pages
245016
ISSN
  • 0264-9381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6382
OpenAlex
W2003533681
Cited by
46
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Classical and Quantum Gravity (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (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 › Mathematics › Mathematical Physics › Advanced Operator Algebra Research
Keywords
quantum constraints, loop quantum cosmology, group averaging, Dirac observables, relational observables, Schrödinger picture, generalized Hamiltonian, discrete spectrum, absolutely continuous spectrum, FLRW spacetime, cosmological constant, quantum gravity

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