Cited by 19Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational TheoryBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics

THE CONSTRAINT ALGEBRA OF QUANTUM GRAVITY IN THE LOOP REPRESENTATION

Open access
GAMBINI, RODOLFO, GARAT, ALCIDES, PULLIN, JORGE·1995·International Journal of Modern Physics D

Abstract

We study the algebra of constraints of quantum gravity in the loop representation based on Ashtekar’s new variables. We show by direct computation that the quantum commutator algebra reproduces the classical Poisson bracket one, in the limit in which regulators are removed. The calculation illustrates the use of several computational techniques for the loop representation.

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 · 10.1142/s0218271895000417

Cites

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?

  • If the commutator vanishes only in the limit ε→0, then the theory still has an anomaly, in the sense that its classical limit has non-vanishing Poisson brackets on the diffeomorphism constraint surface.

    “if the commutator only vanishes in the limit → 0 then one still has an anomaly in the sense that the classical limit of that theory has non-vanishing Poisson brackets on the constraint surface defined by the diffeomorphism constraint.”

    From Quantum spin dynamics (QSD) (1998) · cites this paper as [25]

  • The operator only annihilates Diff but not the extensions * discussed in [24].

    “in view of [25] it is clear that it only annihilates Diff but not any of the extensions * discussed in [24].”

    From Quantum spin dynamics (QSD) (1998) · cites this paper as [25]

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [10]A.Garat, M.Sc. Thesis, Universidad de la Rep´ ublica (unpublished) (1994).

Authors
GAMBINI, R., GARAT, A., & PULLIN, J.
Affiliations
  • Universidad de la República de Uruguay (UY)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Venue
International Journal of Modern Physics D
Published
1995-10
Volume
04
Issue
05
Pages
589-616
ISSN
  • 0218-2718 (ISSN-L)
  • 1793-6594
OpenAlex
W2084294237
Cited by
19
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
2.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Modern Physics D (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (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
quantum gravity, loop representation, Ashtekar variables, constraint algebra, Poisson brackets, canonical quantization, loop 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