Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

A Safe Beginning for the Universe?

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Requiring physical solutions of quadratic gravity to have finite action forces the big bang to be homogeneous, isotropic, and accelerating.

desk verdict A clean proposal for quantum-gravity initial conditions, but the selected s>1 branch contradicts the trace equation of the same action, so the central claim is likely vacuous. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.01169 v2 pith:42Y745TL submitted 2019-09-03 hep-th gr-qc

Jean-Luc Lehners , K.S. Stelle This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qc
keywords quadraticgravityfiniteactionbigbanginitialconditionsanisotropysuppressioninhomogeneityWeylcurvaturehypothesisasymptoticsafetyhigher-derivative
topics Quantum Gravity
open problems Quantum Gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

General relativity augmented by curvature-squared terms is renormalisable and may be asymptotically safe, so it can be trusted up to Planck-scale energies. The paper argues that the basic quantum-mechanical requirement that physical solutions have finite action then acts as a powerful selection principle near the big bang. In the limit of zero volume, anisotropies and inhomogeneities drive the action to infinity and are therefore excluded, while the scale factor must grow with an exponent $s>1$, i.e. accelerate. If this is right, the universe's special early state — smooth, nearly flat, and suitable for inflation — is not an accident but a consequence of the structure of the theory. It also implements Penrose's Weyl curvature hypothesis, explaining the low entropy at the start of the universe.

What carries the argument

The central object is the quadratic-gravity action, whose curvature-squared terms produce different power-law scalings of the integrand near the singularity than the Einstein-Hilbert term. The argument is carried by computing, term by term, the time exponents of the on-shell action for the Bianchi IX metric (a homogeneous, anisotropic cosmological geometry) and the Lemaître–Tolman–Bondi metric (a spherically symmetric, inhomogeneous geometry), under the ansatz $a\sim t^s$ with the anisotropy parameters growing logarithmically. Requiring every exponent to be positive (so that the action integral does not diverge as $t\to 0$) yields mutually incompatible inequalities unless anisotropies and inhomogeneities vanish, forcing $s>1$. The Weyl-squared and $R^2$ terms are the ones that impose the new, stronger conditions.

What would settle it

Find a solution of the full quadratic-gravity field equations in the Bianchi IX metric with $a(t)\sim t^s$, $s>1$, and $\beta_\pm(t)$ not tending to zero, and evaluate the Weyl-squared part of the action; if it converges, the mutually exclusive inequalities derived from the power-law scalings are evaded by cancellations, breaking the selection. A direct numerical evolution of the higher-derivative equations near the singularity would provide this check.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that requiring all physical solutions of quadratic gravity to have finite action imposes a strong selection on big-bang-type universes. Working with the action $S = \int d^4x \sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{1}{\kappa^2}R - \Lambda - \frac{1}{2\sigma}C^2 + \frac{\omega}{3\sigma}R^2 \right]$, the authors examine the approach to zero volume in Bianchi IX and Lemaître–Tolman–Bondi metrics. Power-law scaling of the action integrand near $t=0$ shows that the Einstein-Hilbert part converges for $a(t)\sim t^s$ with $s>1/3$, but the Weyl-squared and $R^2$ parts require $s>1$ and, in the presence of inhomogeneity, simultaneously $s<1$ unless the inhomogeneity function $F(r)\to 1$. For anisotropies the inequalities from the quadratic terms are mutually exclusive unless the anisotropy parameters $\beta_\pm$ tend to zero. The conclusion is that finite action selects homogeneous, isotropic, accelerating histories, and only these contribute to quantum-gravity transition amplitudes.

Load-bearing premise

The selection depends on the extra rule, stated in Section II, that all physical solutions of the theory must have finite action; if a more complete ultraviolet theory or a path integral weighted only by $\exp(iS)$ does not require finiteness, then anisotropic and inhomogeneous histories might survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Only homogeneous, isotropic, accelerating histories contribute to quantum-gravity transition amplitudes, so the universe's smoothness near the big bang is a consequence of the theory's structure.
  • The selected initial states have vanishingly small Weyl curvature, implementing the Weyl curvature hypothesis and explaining the low initial entropy of the universe.
  • The requirement of acceleration ($a\sim t^s$ with $s>1$) creates conditions favorable to the onset of inflation, potentially easing the initial-conditions problem of inflationary cosmology.
  • Unlike pure general relativity, where anisotropic singularities can have finite action, quadratic gravity generically diverges for such histories, so the selection is a distinct prediction of the higher-derivative theory.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If finite action is the correct quantum criterion, the same divergence argument should apply to other curvature-dominated singularities, such as the interiors of black holes, possibly restricting the allowed quantum states there; the paper does not explore this.
  • The selection may become scale-dependent once the running of couplings is included; the paper fixes the renormalisation scale and ignores running, so a testable extension would be to track $\sigma(\mu)$ and see whether the allowed exponent $s$ is determined dynamically.
  • The argument assumes no cancellations among the many terms in the action integrand; an explicit solution with nonzero anisotropy and finite Weyl action would falsify the scaling conclusion, and searching for such solutions is a direct test.
  • The finite-action principle is imposed on the full Euclidean action; if the Lorentzian path integral only requires a convergent phase $\exp(iS)$, infinite-action configurations might still contribute via rapid oscillations, which would weaken the selection.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a selection principle for big-bang initial conditions in quadratic gravity. After reviewing the renormalisability and possible asymptotic safety of the action S = ∫ d⁴x √−g [R/κ² − Λ − (1/2σ)C² + (ω/3σ)R²], the authors impose the condition that all physical solutions have finite action. They evaluate this condition on power-law approaches to zero volume for Bianchi IX anisotropies and for Lemaître-Tolman-Bondi inhomogeneities. The scaling analysis gives conflicting exponent inequalities, Eq. (22) and Eq. (28), which the authors interpret as requiring β± → 0, F(r) → 1, and a(t) ∼ t^s with s > 1. They conclude that the big bang must be homogeneous, isotropic, and accelerating, providing favourable initial conditions for inflation and a low-entropy beginning in line with Penrose's Weyl curvature hypothesis.

Significance. If correct, the result would be a striking, parameter-free dynamical selection mechanism: no fitted parameters enter the scaling analysis, the exponent lists are explicit, and the contradiction between the conditions for anisotropic and isotropic convergence is clearly displayed. The authors are also honest about the fixed-scale assumption and the 'barring cancellations' caveat. However, the central claim is conditional on an unproven finite-action postulate and, more seriously, the selected asymptotics are never checked against the full fourth-order field equations; the trace equation of the very same action appears to exclude them. These issues bear directly on whether the selection principle has any physical content.

major comments (2)
  1. [§III–IV, Eqs. (18)–(28), and §II, Eq. (1)] The finite-action-selected class is not a class of solutions of the theory. The trace of the field equations derived from Eq. (1) is 6(ω/(3σ))□R − R/κ² + 2Λ = 0, because the Weyl-squared variation is traceless. For an isotropic FLRW metric with a(t) = t^s, one has R = 6s(2s−1)t^{−2} and □R = 36s(s−1)(2s−1)t^{−4}. For every s > 1, which is precisely the convergence requirement of the R² and Weyl actions in Eqs. (22) and (28), the □R term diverges as t^{−4} and cannot be balanced by the −R/κ² ∼ t^{−2} term or the constant Λ at fixed renormalisation scale μ. Hence no vacuum power-law solution of the action (1) can realize the advertised a ∼ t^s, s > 1 approach to t = 0. The paper evaluates the action on the ansatz (18) but never checks the field equations; the only full-solution numerical example shown (Fig. 1) exhibits BKL-type behavior, not accelerated expansion. The authors need to exhibit at least one finite-action solution of the full fourth-order equations with the claimed asymptotics; otherwise the selection principle selects an empty set. Invoking the running of couplings would depart from the stated fixed-scale framework of Section II.
  2. [§II (finite-action postulate)] The selection principle rests on the postulate, introduced in Section II, that all physical solutions must have finite action. This postulate is not derived from renormalisability or asymptotic safety, and it is not evidently equivalent to the convergence of the Lorentzian path integral, whose weight exp(iS) has unit modulus. If the path integral is defined with a regulator, or if a more fundamental theory renormalizes the action, infinite-action geometries need not be excluded. Since this postulate is the only mechanism producing the claimed suppression of anisotropies and inhomogeneities, the paper should either justify it from a concrete path-integral construction or explicitly frame the result as conditional on this additional assumption.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§III, Eq. (14)] The constant b_+ in Eq. (14) is introduced without definition; please define it explicitly as a positive constant determined by the initial data.
  2. [§IV] The statement that relaxing spherical symmetry 'would only strengthen the arguments below' is plausible but not demonstrated; a one-sentence scaling justification for non-spherical inhomogeneities would make the claim precise.
  3. [Abstract and §II] The term 'non-Gaussian fixed point' is used for a fixed point at which σ⋆ = 0 and ω⋆ < 0; since the quadratic couplings vanish there, the terminology may be misleading and deserves clarification.
  4. [References and text] There are small typographical issues: Ref. [56] has 'imhomogeneity' instead of 'inhomogeneity', and the accented form 'Lemaître' is rendered incorrectly in several places.
  5. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption states a(t = 0) = 100 while the singularity is approached as time is followed backwards; please clarify the direction of time integration in the figure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the finite-action condition is an input assumption, and the derived constraints are obtained by explicit evaluation of the action on the stated ansatz, not by fitting the conclusion in.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. It starts from the quadratic-gravity action (1), imposes the explicitly stated postulate that physical solutions have finite action, and then evaluates the action on the Bianchi IX and Lemaître-Tolman-Bondi ansätze (18) and (23). The selection of isotropic, homogeneous, accelerating histories follows from the convergence conditions on the computed exponents in (19)–(22) and (27)–(28). No parameter is fitted to the target conclusion, and the desired outcome is not inserted by construction. The finite-action requirement is a physical input rather than an output, so its status is a soundness question, not a circularity. The only self-citations, [36] and [52] by co-author Stelle, support well-known, independently checkable results on renormalizability and classical higher-derivative gravity; they are not used to close the argument by fiat. The skeptical concern that the selected s>1 power-law solutions may fail the trace equation of the same action is a dynamical-consistency objection about whether such solutions exist, not a circularity objection, and therefore does not affect this score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim has no fitted parameters. The load-bearing assumptions are the finite-action postulate, the trustworthiness of quadratic gravity at all energies, the fixed-scale approximation, the no-cancellation generic assumption, the power-law singularity ansatz, and finite spatial volume. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (7)
  • ad hoc to paper All physical solutions of the theory must have finite action.
    Stated in Section II as 'we impose the following condition, motivated by basic quantum mechanics'. This is the load-bearing premise; it is not derived from the action or from asymptotic safety.
  • domain assumption Quadratic gravity is renormalisable and trustworthy up to arbitrarily high energies.
    Section II invokes refs [36-42] for renormalisability and asymptotic safety. If the theory is only an intermediate effective theory, applying it at zero volume is not justified.
  • domain assumption Action convergence is evaluated at fixed renormalisation scale mu, ignoring the running of couplings.
    Section II states 'at fixed (and arbitrarily large) scale mu we will impose the requirement that the action is convergent'. The paper notes the scale-curvature relation is unclear.
  • domain assumption Near t=0 the action integrand terms do not cancel; each must converge separately.
    Sections III and IV say 'barring cancellations between terms'. Exact cancellations could leave finite action for anisotropic or inhomogeneous histories.
  • domain assumption The approach to zero volume has power-law form a~t^s and the Bianchi IX and LTB ansaetze are representative.
    Sections III and IV. Exponential or oscillatory singular behaviors are not covered, so the conclusion is not proven for all possible singularities.
  • domain assumption The spatial volume of the universe is finite.
    Section II states 'we will assume that the spatial volume of the universe is finite'. An infinite spatial volume would introduce an overall divergence.
  • domain assumption BKL/mixmaster oscillations describe the generic approach to a spacelike singularity in quadratic gravity.
    Section III uses BKL and one numerical example. The genericity of the conclusion relies on this extrapolation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Safe Beginning for the Universe?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/42Y745TL

@misc{pith2026190901169,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Safe Beginning for the Universe?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/42Y745TL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.01169}
}
read the original abstract

When general relativity is augmented by quadratic gravity terms, it becomes a renormalisable theory of gravity. This theory may admit a non-Gaussian fixed point as envisaged in the asymptotic safety program, rendering the theory trustworthy to energies up to the Planck scale and even beyond. We show that requiring physical solutions to have a finite action imposes a strong selection on big-bang-type universes. More precisely we find that, in the approach to zero volume, both anisotropies and inhomogeneities are suppressed while the scale factor is required to undergo accelerated expansion. This provides initial conditions which are favourable to the onset of an inflationary phase while also providing a suitable starting point for the second law of thermodynamics in the spirit of the Weyl curvature hypothesis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.01169 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Plots of the scale factor (left) and the anisotropy (right) as a function of time, for a typical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Conformal Cores of Quantum Black Holes in Quadratic Gravity

    hep-th 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Exact complex power-law solutions of pure quadratic gravity, named powerballs, can match a Schwarzschild black hole just outside its horizon and give a finite-action model of the quantum interior.

  2. The Speed of Gravity

    hep-th 2019-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In the standard effective field theory of gravity, gravitational waves on cosmological backgrounds propagate at a speed differing from unity, and analyticity arguments favor superluminal speed relative to matter.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim et al. , “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,” arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO] . 16

    arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,

    A. H. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,” Phys. Rev. D23 (1981) 347–356

    work page 1981

  3. [3]

    A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems,

    A. D. Linde, “A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems,” Phys. Lett. 108B (1982) 389–393

    work page 1982

  4. [4]

    Cosmology for Grand Unified Theories with Radiatively Induced Symmetry Breaking,

    A. Albrecht and P. J. Steinhardt, “Cosmology for Grand Unified Theories with Radiatively Induced Symmetry Breaking,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 48 (1982) 1220–1223

    work page 1982

  5. [5]

    Spectrum of relict gravitational radiation and the early state of the universe,

    A. A. Starobinsky, “Spectrum of relict gravitational radiation and the early state of the universe,” JETP Lett. 30 (1979) 682–685. [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.30,719(1979)]

    work page 1979

  6. [6]

    Chaotic Inflation,

    A. D. Linde, “Chaotic Inflation,” Phys. Lett. 129B (1983) 177–181

    work page 1983

  7. [7]

    Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck2013,

    A. Ijjas, P. J. Steinhardt, and A. Loeb, “Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck2013,” Phys. Lett. B723 (2013) 261–266, arXiv:1304.2785 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    A Quantum Complete Prelude to Inflation

    S. Hofmann, M. Schneider, and M. Urban, “Quantum complete prelude to inflation,” Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) no. 6, 065012, arXiv:1901.04492 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    Quantum Incompleteness of Inflation,

    A. Di Tucci, J. Feldbrugge, J.-L. Lehners, and N. Turok, “Quantum Incompleteness of Inflation,” arXiv:1906.09007 [hep-th]

    1906 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Cosmic evolution in a cyclic universe,

    P. J. Steinhardt and N. Turok, “Cosmic evolution in a cyclic universe,” Phys. Rev. D65 (2002) 126003, arXiv:hep-th/0111098 [hep-th]

    2002 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Ekpyrotic and Cyclic Cosmology,

    J.-L. Lehners, “Ekpyrotic and Cyclic Cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 465 (2008) 223–263, arXiv:0806.1245 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  4. [12]

    The Ekpyrotic universe: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang,

    J. Khoury, B. A. Ovrut, P. J. Steinhardt, and N. Turok, “The Ekpyrotic universe: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang,” Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 123522, arXiv:hep-th/0103239 [hep-th]

    2001 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Dark Energy and the Return of the Phoenix Universe,

    J.-L. Lehners and P. J. Steinhardt, “Dark Energy and the Return of the Phoenix Universe,” Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 063503, arXiv:0812.3388 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  6. [14]

    The Return of the Phoenix Universe,

    J.-L. Lehners, P. J. Steinhardt, and N. Turok, “The Return of the Phoenix Universe,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D18 (2009) 2231–2235, arXiv:0910.0834 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Bouncing Galileon Cosmologies,

    T. Qiu, J. Evslin, Y.-F. Cai, M. Li, and X. Zhang, “Bouncing Galileon Cosmologies,” JCAP 1110 (2011) 036, arXiv:1108.0593 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  8. [16]

    G-Bounce,

    D. A. Easson, I. Sawicki, and A. Vikman, “G-Bounce,” JCAP 1111 (2011) 021, arXiv:1109.1047 [hep-th] . 17

    2011 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Cosmological super-bounce,

    M. Koehn, J.-L. Lehners, and B. A. Ovrut, “Cosmological super-bounce,” Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) no. 2, 025005, arXiv:1310.7577 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Classically stable nonsingular cosmological bounces,

    A. Ijjas and P. J. Steinhardt, “Classically stable nonsingular cosmological bounces,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) no. 12, 121304, arXiv:1606.08880 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Unbraiding the Bounce: Superluminality around the Corner,

    D. A. Dobre, A. V. Frolov, J. T. G. Ghersi, S. Ramazanov, and A. Vikman, “Unbraiding the Bounce: Superluminality around the Corner,” JCAP 1803 (2018) 020, arXiv:1712.10272 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Wave Function of the Universe,

    J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, “Wave Function of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D28 (1983) 2960–2975

    1983

  13. [21]

    The Birth of Inflationary Universes,

    A. Vilenkin, “The Birth of Inflationary Universes,” Phys. Rev. D27 (1983) 2848

    1983

  14. [22]

    Perfect Quantum Cosmological Bounce,

    S. Gielen and N. Turok, “Perfect Quantum Cosmological Bounce,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) no. 2, 021301, arXiv:1510.00699 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    CPT-Symmetric Universe,

    L. Boyle, K. Finn, and N. Turok, “CPT-Symmetric Universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) no. 25, 251301, arXiv:1803.08928 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [24]

    On the Creation of the Universe via Ekpyrotic Instantons,

    L. Battarra and J.-L. Lehners, “On the Creation of the Universe via Ekpyrotic Instantons,” Phys. Lett. B742 (2015) 167–171, arXiv:1406.5896 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  17. [25]

    On the No-Boundary Proposal for Ekpyrotic and Cyclic Cosmologies,

    L. Battarra and J.-L. Lehners, “On the No-Boundary Proposal for Ekpyrotic and Cyclic Cosmologies,” JCAP 1412 (2014) no. 12, 023, arXiv:1407.4814 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  18. [26]

    No smooth beginning for spacetime,

    J. Feldbrugge, J.-L. Lehners, and N. Turok, “No smooth beginning for spacetime,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) no. 17, 171301, arXiv:1705.00192 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Real no-boundary wave function in Lorentzian quantum cosmology,

    J. Diaz Dorronsoro, J. J. Halliwell, J. B. Hartle, T. Hertog, and O. Janssen, “Real no-boundary wave function in Lorentzian quantum cosmology,” Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) no. 4, 043505, arXiv:1705.05340 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  20. [28]

    No rescue for the no boundary proposal: Pointers to the future of quantum cosmology,

    J. Feldbrugge, J.-L. Lehners, and N. Turok, “No rescue for the no boundary proposal: Pointers to the future of quantum cosmology,” Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) no. 2, 023509, arXiv:1708.05104 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Damped perturbations in the no-boundary state,

    J. Diaz Dorronsoro, J. J. Halliwell, J. B. Hartle, T. Hertog, O. Janssen, and Y. Vreys, “Damped perturbations in the no-boundary state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) no. 8, 081302, arXiv:1804.01102 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Inconsistencies of the New No-Boundary Proposal,

    J. Feldbrugge, J.-L. Lehners, and N. Turok, “Inconsistencies of the New No-Boundary Proposal,” Universe 4 (2018) no. 10, 100, arXiv:1805.01609 [hep-th] . 18

    2018 arXiv

  23. [31]

    What is the No-Boundary Wave Function of the Universe?,

    J. J. Halliwell, J. B. Hartle, and T. Hertog, “What is the No-Boundary Wave Function of the Universe?,” Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) no. 4, 043526, arXiv:1812.01760 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    The No-Boundary Proposal as a Path Integral with Robin Boundary Conditions,

    A. Di Tucci and J.-L. Lehners, “The No-Boundary Proposal as a Path Integral with Robin Boundary Conditions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) no. 20, 201302, arXiv:1903.06757 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Singularities and time-asymmetry,

    R. Penrose, “Singularities and time-asymmetry,” in General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey , pp. 581–638. Cambridge University Press, 1979

    1979

  26. [34]

    Difficulties with inflationary cosmology,

    R. Penrose, “Difficulties with inflationary cosmology,” Annals N. Y. Acad. Sci. 571 (1989) 249–264

    1989

  27. [35]

    Trace anomaly driven inflation,

    S. W. Hawking, T. Hertog, and H. S. Reall, “Trace anomaly driven inflation,” Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 083504, arXiv:hep-th/0010232 [hep-th]

    2001 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Renormalization of Higher Derivative Quantum Gravity,

    K. S. Stelle, “Renormalization of Higher Derivative Quantum Gravity,” Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 953–969

    1977

  29. [37]

    Renormalizable asymptotically free quantum theory of gravity,

    E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, “Renormalizable asymptotically free quantum theory of gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B201 (1982) 469–491

    1982

  30. [38]

    Asymptotic freedom in higher derivative quantum gravity,

    I. G. Avramidi and A. O. Barvinsky, “Asymptotic freedom in higher derivative quantum gravity,” Phys. Lett. 159B (1985) 269–274

    1985

  31. [39]

    Fixed points of higher derivative gravity,

    A. Codello and R. Percacci, “Fixed points of higher derivative gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 221301, arXiv:hep-th/0607128 [hep-th]

    2006 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Gravitational Fixed Points from Perturbation Theory,

    M. R. Niedermaier, “Gravitational Fixed Points from Perturbation Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 (2009) 101303

    2009

  33. [41]

    Gravitational fixed points and asymptotic safety from perturbation theory,

    M. Niedermaier, “Gravitational fixed points and asymptotic safety from perturbation theory,” Nucl. Phys. B833 (2010) 226–270

    2010

  34. [42]

    Higher Derivative Gravity and Asymptotic Safety in Diverse Dimensions,

    N. Ohta and R. Percacci, “Higher Derivative Gravity and Asymptotic Safety in Diverse Dimensions,” Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 015024, arXiv:1308.3398 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    The Singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology,

    S. W. Hawking and R. Penrose, “The Singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A314 (1970) 529–548

    1970

  36. [44]

    One loop divergencies in the theory of gravitation,

    G. ’t Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman, “One loop divergencies in the theory of gravitation,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Phys. Theor. A20 (1974) 69–94

    1974

  37. [45]

    Quantizing Gravity with a Cosmological Constant,

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, “Quantizing Gravity with a Cosmological Constant,” Nucl. Phys. B170 (1980) 480–506. 19

    1980

  38. [46]

    The Ultraviolet Behavior of Einstein Gravity,

    M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, “The Ultraviolet Behavior of Einstein Gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B266 (1986) 709–736

    1986

  39. [47]

    Asymptotic safety in higher-derivative gravity,

    D. Benedetti, P. F. Machado, and F. Saueressig, “Asymptotic safety in higher-derivative gravity,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A24 (2009) 2233–2241, arXiv:0901.2984 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theories of gravitation,

    S. Weinberg, “Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theories of gravitation,” in General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey , pp. 790–831. Cambridge University Press, 1979

    1979

  41. [49]

    Nonperturbative evolution equation for quantum gravity,

    M. Reuter, “Nonperturbative evolution equation for quantum gravity,” Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 971–985, arXiv:hep-th/9605030 [hep-th]

    1998 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Percacci, An Introduction to Covariant Quantum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety , vol

    R. Percacci, An Introduction to Covariant Quantum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety , vol. 3 of 100 Years of General Relativity . World Scientific, 2017

    2017

  43. [51]

    An asymptotically safe guide to quantum gravity and matter,

    A. Eichhorn, “An asymptotically safe guide to quantum gravity and matter,” Front. Astron. Space Sci. 5 (2019) 47, arXiv:1810.07615 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Classical Gravity with Higher Derivatives,

    K. S. Stelle, “Classical Gravity with Higher Derivatives,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 9 (1978) 353–371

    1978

  45. [53]

    Oscillatory approach to a singular point in the relativistic cosmology,

    V. A. Belinsky, I. M. Khalatnikov, and E. M. Lifshitz, “Oscillatory approach to a singular point in the relativistic cosmology,” Adv. Phys. 19 (1970) 525–573

    1970

  46. [54]

    Mixmaster universe,

    C. W. Misner, “Mixmaster universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 22 (1969) 1071–1074

    1969

  47. [55]

    Stable isotropic cosmological singularities in quadratic gravity,

    J. D. Barrow and J. D. Middleton, “Stable isotropic cosmological singularities in quadratic gravity,” Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 123515, arXiv:gr-qc/0702098 [GR-QC]

    2007 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Effect of imhomogeneity on cosmological models,

    R. C. Tolman, “Effect of imhomogeneity on cosmological models,” Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 20 (1934) 169–176. [Gen. Rel. Grav.29,935(1997)]

    1934

  49. [57]

    Spherically symmetrical models in general relativity,

    H. Bondi, “Spherically symmetrical models in general relativity,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 107 (1947) 410–425

    1947

  50. [58]

    Asymptotically Safe Inflation,

    S. Weinberg, “Asymptotically Safe Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 083535, arXiv:0911.3165 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.