Cited by 64

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Gravitating 't hooft monopoles

Cho, Y. M., Freund, P. G. O.·1975·Physical Review D

Abstract

The 't Hooft magnetic monopole solution of the SO(3) Higgs model generates, when coupled to gravity, a geometry which for large distances is of the Reissner-Nordstr\"om form corresponding to a (magnetic) charge $\frac{1}{e}$. The Higgs fields can contribute a cosmological term. In the absence of scalar fields the corresponding Wu-Yang solution of the SO(3) gauge theory still generates the Reissner-Nordstr\"om geometry.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.12.1588

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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 combination of Einstein gravity with Yang-Mills and Higgs fields admits charged black hole solutions.

    “The combination of Einstein gravity with Yang-Mills and Higgs fields admits the possibility of charged black hole solutions [51,52].”

    From Vacuum metastability with black holes (2015) · cites this paper as [52]

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. T. T. Wu, 1969, Properties of Matter Under Unusual Conditions
  2. G. 't Hooft, 1974, Nucl. Phys., B79, 276, 10.1016/0550-3213(74)90486-6 · DOI
  3. J. Arafune, 1975, J. Math. Phys., 16, 433, 10.1063/1.522518 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Cho, Y. M., & Freund, P. G. O.
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
1975-09-15
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
1588-1589
ISSN
0556-2821
Cited by
64
References
0
Language
en

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