Reheating chiral dynamos with spin-0 and massive spin-1 torsions via chiral asymmetry

Biao-Peng Li; L.C. Garcia de Andrade; Zhi-Fu Gao

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 56 references

Reheating chiral dynamos with spin-0 and massive spin-1 torsions via chiral asymmetry

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that a constant right-handed torsion trace in Einstein–Cartan gravity exponentially amplifies seed magnetic fields, lifting 10^-42 Gauss seeds to 10^-9 Gauss today.

desk verdict A plausible but undefended torsion shift of the chiral dynamo, with enough algebraic errors in the correlation section that the quantitative claims do not stand. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00419 v2 pith:UZA2PRDO submitted 2025-02-01 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-ph

Zhi-Fu Gao , Biao-Peng Li , L.C. Garcia de Andrade This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph

keywords torsiontraceEinstein-Cartangravitychiralmagneticeffectasymmetrymagnetogenesisdynamoamplificationcosmologicalfieldsreheating

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

This paper tries to show that a constant spacetime torsion can act as a dynamo driver in the early universe, turning the chiral magnetic effect into an exponential amplifier. Working in Einstein–Cartan gravity with minimal coupling, the authors replace the conformal-time derivative by $\partial_\eta - T_0$ and solve the resulting chiral magnetohydrodynamic equations. They find that a positive (right-handed) torsion trace makes seed magnetic fields grow as $B(\eta)=B_0 \exp[(T_0 - k/\sigma_c - \alpha \Delta\mu \lambda/(\pi \sigma_c))\eta]$, and that the magnetic-helicity correlation product $AS$ grows as $\exp(2 T_0 \eta)$. On this basis they report that $10^{-42}$ Gauss seeds can reach $10^{-9}$ Gauss today, and that a $10^{-6}$ Gauss galactic field with torsion $10^{-15}$ Gauss implies a $10^{-9}$ Gauss seed. If correct, torsion would offer a viable magnetogenesis route already present in the geometry of Einstein–Cartan spacetime.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the torsion-trace replacement $D_0 = \partial_\eta - T_0$ (Eq. 2.7), applied to the chiral MHD equation. This single shift converts the diffusive chiral equation into a first-order linear ODE whose solution is $B(\eta)=B_0 \exp[(T_0 - k/\sigma_c - \alpha \Delta\mu \lambda/(\pi \sigma_c))\eta]$. The same shift, inserted into the standard correlation equations for the magnetic spectra $S(k,\eta)$ and $A(k,\eta)$, produces the exponential law $AS=(AS)_0 \exp(2 T_0 \eta)$. Torsion thereby plays the role of an effective chiral chemical potential: its sign decides whether the dynamo grows or decays, and its magnitude sets the growth rate.

What would settle it

One could settle the claim by deriving the photon equation from the Einstein–Cartan action with minimal coupling: if the Maxwell equation contains no term equivalent to $D_0 = \partial_\eta - T_0$, the exponential solutions (2.14) and (3.9) do not follow.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that torsion chirality selects the sign of chiral dynamo amplification. Starting from the torsionless chiral MHD equation and making the minimal-coupling ansatz $D_0 = \partial_\eta - T_0$, the paper derives $B(\eta)=B_0 \exp[(T_0 - k/\sigma_c - \alpha \Delta\mu \lambda/(\pi \sigma_c))\eta]$. A positive (right-handed) constant torsion trace therefore gives exponential growth of helical magnetic fields, while a negative trace gives damping; the physical reading is that right-handed torsion favors left-handed particle dominance and makes the chiral chemical potential decay in a torsion-dependent way. Applied to the correlation equations for the spectra $S(k,\eta)$ and $A(k,\eta)$, the same replacement gives $AS=(AS)_0 \exp(2 T_0 \eta)$, and, when the two spectra are taken equal, $S^2 = S_0^2 \exp(2 T_0 \eta)$. The paper uses these solutions to connect very weak primordial seeds ($10^{-42}$ Gauss) to present-day fields ($10^{-9}$ Gauss) and to estimate a galactic dynamo seed of $10^{-9}$ Gauss from a $10^{-6}$ Gauss present field with torsion $10^{-15}$ Gauss.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that torsion enters the chiral MHD equation only through the replacement $D_0 = \partial_\eta - T_0$; if torsion does not enter spacetime dynamics exactly this way, every exponential growth solution in the paper fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the central claim is right, right-handed torsion alone can amplify a $10^{-42}$ Gauss seed to $10^{-9}$ Gauss today, providing a magnetogenesis mechanism without invoking new fermion physics.
A $10^{-6}$ Gauss galactic field with torsion $10^{-15}$ Gauss implies a $10^{-9}$ Gauss dynamo seed, so present-day galactic fields can be used to infer the torsion amplitude.
The sign of the torsion trace decides whether the chiral dynamo grows or decays, so left-handed torsion would suppress magnetic amplification.
The chiral chemical potential decays as $\Delta\mu \approx -(c_\Delta/\pi^2) A_0 (\exp(T_0 t)-1)/T_0$, meaning torsion chirality controls how fast fermion asymmetry is converted into helical fields.
The dynamo amplification can be expressed in terms of reheating e-folds via the relation between the cosmic magnetic field and temperature squared, linking inflationary parameters to the final field strength.

Reading between the lines

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

Inference: torsion behaves effectively as a constant chiral chemical potential in this model, so existing observational bounds on chiral magnetogenesis could be translated into constraints on the torsion trace of Einstein–Cartan cosmology.
Inference: a testable signature is the sign of intergalactic magnetic helicity: the model predicts helicity set by torsion chirality, so measuring the helicity spectrum of large-scale fields would directly probe the mechanism.
Inference: the strong $10^{-42}$ to $10^{-9}$ Gauss statement depends on the unproven derivative replacement and on dropping $A^2 + S^2$ terms; a full action-level derivation or numerical treatment with backreaction could either confirm the amplification or reduce it.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This is a quick embedding of the Sydorenko chiral dynamo with D0 = ∂η − T0 slipped in as the torsion coupling, and the main growth effect is exactly what you get from that substitution. The paper's quantitative message — 10^-42 G seeds becoming 10^-9 G today — rests on the correlation-function section, and that section has too many internal errors to support it. If you want the idea, it is already present in earlier work they cite where torsion mimics a chiral chemical potential.

What works: the single-field integration (2.14) is algebraically fine given the ansatz ∇² = −k and D0 = ∂η − T0; the long-wavelength, high-conductivity reduction is transparent; and they are explicit that they are embedding a known system rather than claiming a new equation. That is honest.

The problems are load-bearing, not cosmetic. (1) D0 is never derived. Minimal coupling in Einstein-Cartan does not automatically turn the torsion trace into a global shift of the conformal-time derivative for a U(1) field; if anything, for F = dA torsion drops out of the field strength, so this is exactly the point that needed proof. (2) The correlation section is internally inconsistent: Eq (3.6) has a sign error relative to Eq (3.4) — S ∂A/∂η should carry the same sign as A ∂S/∂η; Eq (3.16) does not solve Eq (3.15), since plugging in exp[2(T0 − 2k²/σc)η] gives a factor-of-2 mismatch; Eq (3.12) has exp[T0 k], which is dimensionally odd and has no η dependence. Then Eq (3.20) converts to cosmic time and produces the T0 t ~ 10^12 claim that drives the plot. (3) The seed-field numbers are not consistent: 10^-42 G in the abstract, 10^-45 G in the introduction, and 10^-24 G in Section 4 are used interchangeably. That suggests the quoted amplification factors are reverse-engineered. The title also promises spin-0 and massive spin-1 torsion modes, but the body only uses the constant trace T0.

Who this is for: if you work on torsion magnetogenesis, the intended direction is worth knowing about, but the paper as it stands is a pointer, not a citable result. I would not send it to a referee; a desk reject with a note to derive the coupling, fix the algebra, and reconcile the seeds would be appropriate. If those issues are fixed, it could become a short, minor-result paper.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a torsionful chiral dynamo mechanism in Einstein-Cartan cosmology. It replaces the conformal-time derivative in the chiral MHD equations by D0 = ∂η − T0 (Eq. 2.7), solves the single-mode dynamo equation to obtain B(η) = B0 exp[(T0 − kσ_c^{-1} − αΔμλ/(πσ_c))η] (Eq. 2.14), and solves the S and A correlation equations to obtain AS = (AS)_0 exp(2T0η) (Eq. 3.9). From these results it claims that seed fields of order 10^-42 G are amplified to about 10^-9 G today, and that a galactic field of 10^-6 G with torsion 10^-15 G leads to a dynamo seed of 10^-9 G. It also estimates the decay of the chiral chemical potential and discusses reheating-era amplification.

Significance. If the minimal-coupling premise and the correlation equations were established, the exponential-growth mechanism would be a simple and potentially falsifiable magnetogenesis scenario, and the paper would open a useful direction for torsion cosmology. The single-field integration in Eqs. (2.12)–(2.14) is algebraically correct conditional on the ansatz, and Section 4 candidly lists the unknown parameters. However, the central coupling is not derived, and the correlation section contains sign, dimensional, and algebraic errors that are load-bearing for the quantitative conclusions. As it stands, the paper does not support the headline amplification claims.

major comments (5)

[Section 2, Eq. (2.7)] The entire exponential amplification mechanism rests on the replacement D0 = ∂η − T0, introduced without derivation. For a U(1) gauge field with field strength F = dA, minimal coupling to a torsionful connection does not automatically reduce to a global shift of the time derivative by the torsion trace; this must be shown from an Einstein-Cartan action or from the torsionful Maxwell/MHD equations. Equations (2.11)–(2.14) and (3.8)–(3.9) are all consequences of this unproved premise, so the abstract's quantitative claims are unsupported unless this coupling is derived.
[Section 3, Eqs. (3.1)–(3.8)] The correlation-function derivation is internally inconsistent. Eq. (3.2) (or its long-wavelength reduction) has a positive Δμ term in the A equation, but Eq. (3.6), obtained by multiplying by S, contains a minus sign, while Eq. (3.7) is then written with a plus sign. In addition, the step that A and S are small does not justify dropping A² + S² while keeping AS: all three products are of the same second order in the small quantities unless a separate hierarchy is imposed. Therefore the solution (3.9) is not a controlled consequence of Eqs. (3.1)–(3.8).
[Section 3, Eqs. (3.15)–(3.16)] The claimed solution (3.16) does not satisfy the stated ODE (3.15). The general solution of ∂²A/∂η² − (T0 − 2k²/σ_c) ∂A/∂η = 0 is C1 + C2 exp[(T0 − 2k²/σ_c)η], whereas (3.16) has a prefactor 2A0/(T0 + 2k²/σ_c) and an exponent 2(T0 − 2k²/σ_c)η; substitution gives ∂²A − (T0 − 2k²/σ_c)∂A = 2(T0 − 2k²/σ_c)²A ≠ 0. The correlation function used in the subsequent chiral-asymmetry decay is therefore not a solution of the dynamics.
[Section 3, Eqs. (3.18)–(3.20)] Eq. (3.18) contains the product T0 k², which is not dimensionless in the units used elsewhere in the paper (T0 has dimension 1/time and k has dimension 1/length), and no derivation is given for how the integral in Eq. (3.17) reduces to (1 − T0 k²) exp(T0η). In addition, the text after Eq. (3.20) states that T0 t ∼ 10^12 for T0 = 10^-24 s^-1 and t = 10^18 s; the actual product is 10^-6. This arithmetic error reverses the claimed significance of the Earth-surface torsion effect.
[Abstract and Section 4] The quantitative claims in the abstract are not derived in the body. The abstract says 10^-42 G seeds are boosted to 10^-9 G, but Section 4 estimates ξ = 10^15 using Bseed ∼ 10^-24 G; the 10^-42 G statement and the statement that a 10^-6 G galactic field with torsion 10^-15 G leads to a 10^-9 G seed do not appear in the derivations. These numbers should either be derived from Eq. (2.14) with specified parameters or removed.

minor comments (6)

[Section 2, Eq. (2.10)] The Fourier replacement is written as ∇² = −k; the standard replacement is ∇² = −k², and the wavenumber scaling in the diffusion term of Eq. (2.14) should be adjusted accordingly.
[Section 2, Eq. (2.2)] The notation 'k̂_s = k̂_s / k̂' is self-referential; it should read k̂_s = k_s / k.
[Section 3, Eq. (3.13)] As typeset, Eq. (3.13) is dimensionally inconsistent because the bracket mixes T0, derivatives of A, and ∂Δμ/∂η; presumably a parenthesis is missing around (T0 − 2k²/σ_c) ∂A/∂η. This should be corrected for the reduction to Eq. (3.15) to be transparent.
[Section 3, Eq. (3.12)] The correlation function is written with exp[T0 k], but T0 has dimensions of inverse time and k of inverse length, so the argument is not dimensionless; moreover the preceding solution (3.9) has time dependence exp(2T0η), so the replacement of η by k is unexplained.
[References and title] The title mentions spin-0 and massive spin-1 torsions, but the analysis only uses a constant torsion trace T0; the connection between the title and the model is not explained. The abstract also spells 'Syderenko' while the body uses 'Sydorenko', and the cross-reference '(see Ref. [27]])' after Eqs. (3.1)–(3.2) is confusing because the preceding sentence attributes the equations to Ref. [19].
[Section 2 vs Section 4] The handedness conclusion in Section 4 ('chiral left-handed torsion seems to favor dynamo amplification') is opposite to the condition in Section 2, where right-handed (positive) T0 is required for growth; this discrepancy is not discussed.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 7.0 of 10

Torsion-driven growth is inserted by the undefended replacement D0 = ∂η − T0; Eqs (2.14) and (3.9) restate the ansatz, so the abstract's amplification claims are not derived from Einstein-Cartan electrodynamics.

self definitional [Section 2, Eq (2.7), leading to Eq (2.14)]
"Now, let us investigate the effects of introducing torsion in an otherwise flat spacetime by employing the minimal coupling D0 = ∂η − T0. (2.7) ... By strategically coupling this equation to torsion through the derivative operator D0, we get ∂B ∂η = − ( −T0 + kσ−1 c + α∆µ πσc λ ) B. (2.11)"

With D0 = ∂η − T0, the equation D0B = ... is equivalent to ∂ηB = (T0 − ...)B. Therefore the exponential growth rate T0 in Eq (2.14), B(η) = B0 exp[(T0 − kσc^{-1} − αΔμλ/(πσc))η], is the eigenvalue of the operator that the paper simply postulates. Because no Einstein-Cartan action or field-strength computation is given to justify the global shift of the conformal time derivative, the claimed torsion dynamo is the ansatz restated rather than a derived prediction; the sign of T0 controls amplification by construction.
self definitional [Section 3, Eqs (3.7)-(3.9)]
"Assuming that A and S are small quantities, one obtains the new result that does not appear in the absence of torsion ∂(AS) ∂η ≈ 2T0(AS). (3.8) ... This is an extremely simple differential equation that can easily be solved to yield AS = (AS)0 exp(2T0η). (3.9)"

This is the same reduction as Step 1: the T0S and T0A terms in Eqs (3.1)-(3.2) came from replacing ∂η by D0 in Eq (2.6). Dropping A^2+S^2 leaves ∂(AS)/∂η = 2T0(AS), whose solution exp(2T0η) is literally the inserted operator. Setting T0=0 makes it ∂(AS)/∂η = 0, so the 'new result that does not appear in the absence of torsion' is merely the consequence of the assumed derivative shift, not a separate physical prediction.

full rationale

The paper is not self-contained against external input: the torsionless chiral dynamo equation (2.6) and the correlation system (3.1)-(3.2) are imported from Sydorenko et al., which is legitimate external support. Circularity enters at the torsion coupling step. The paper introduces (2.7), D0 = ∂η − T0, with no derivation from an Einstein-Cartan Maxwell action, and then presents the exponential solution (2.14) as a prediction. But with that replacement, the growth rate T0 is the eigenvalue of the assumed derivative operator: the torsionful dynamo amplification is the ansatz restated. The same holds for the correlation product (3.9), which is just the homogeneous solution of the inserted shift after neglecting A^2+S^2. The abstract's numerical claims (10^-42 G seeds amplified to 10^-9 G, and a 10^-6 G galactic field with 10^-15 G torsion implying a 10^-9 G seed) are inversions of the same assumed exponential with freely chosen T0 and η; Section 4 itself concedes that the seed and T0 are not observable and that many parameters are unknown, so these are consistency examples rather than independent predictions. No load-bearing self-citation chain or imported uniqueness theorem is used; self-citations such as [22] and [50] are peripheral. The obvious mathematical error that Eq (3.16) does not satisfy Eq (3.15) is a correctness issue, not circularity, and does not change the circularity assessment. Because the central growth mechanism is equivalent by construction to the assumed minimal-coupling replacement, the score is 7 rather than 0-2.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the torsion-free chiral dynamo of Sydorenko et al., the ad hoc minimal-coupling replacement D0 = d_eta - T0, the truncation to torsion trace, high conductivity, long-wavelength limit, and a smallness assumption that discards quadratic spectral terms while keeping their product. The headline numbers additionally use T0 and B_seed values taken from literature or chosen to match observations.

free parameters (4)

Torsion trace T0 = 10^-24 s^-1 at Earth (Bergmann-de Sabbata), 1 MeV in early universe (Mavromatos)
Central growth exponent in Eq (2.14) is T0 eta; the sign and magnitude of T0 are taken from external references, not derived, and the headline amplifications require T0 > 0 over cosmic time.
Initial seed field B0 (B_seed) = 10^-42 G, 10^-45 G, and 10^-24 G appear in different places
B0 is not measured; different seed values are invoked in the abstract and Section 4 to yield the desired present-day 10^-9 G field through Eq (2.14).
Helicity lambda = not given
The helical ansatz curl(B) = lambda B is assumed; the sign of lambda is essential for the amplification condition Eq (2.16).
Initial spectral amplitude A0 = normalized to Delta_mu / A0 in Figure 1
A0 is 'hard to be evaluated' per the text and is normalized away, so the decay of chiral asymmetry is only shown as a ratio.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Minimal coupling of torsion to the electromagnetic sector is implemented as D0 = d_eta - T0 (Eq 2.7).
The central growth law follows directly from this replacement; no derivation from an Einstein-Cartan Maxwell action is provided.
domain assumption The torsionless chiral dynamo equation (2.6) from Sydorenko et al. is adopted without modification.
The paper builds on this prior result as its starting point for adding torsion.
ad hoc to paper Only the torsion trace (time component) contributes; axial and other torsion components are neglected.
The paper states in Section 4 that 'we assume the torsion trace only contribution'; this keeps the equations one-dimensional but is not justified by the Einstein-Cartan dynamics.
domain assumption High conductivity sigma_c approximately constant and long-wavelength limit k^2 approximately 0, while the chiral term 2 alpha k Delta_mu / (pi sigma_c) is retained.
Used to reduce the correlation system; the mixed treatment of k is not justified.
ad hoc to paper A(k) and S(k) are 'small quantities' so that A^2 + S^2 can be dropped while AS is kept in Eq (3.7).
If A and S are small, AS is second order just like A^2 and S^2; the truncation is inconsistent unless a specific hierarchy is assumed, which is not stated.
domain assumption Constant torsion throughout cosmic evolution.
T0 is treated as time-independent, though torsion in the early universe is expected to decay.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reheating chiral dynamos with spin-0 and massive spin-1 torsions via chiral asymmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UZA2PRDO

@misc{pith2026250200419,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reheating chiral dynamos with spin-0 and massive spin-1 torsions via chiral asymmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UZA2PRDO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00419}
}

abstract

Recently, Syderenko et al. (JCAP, 10: 018, 2016) investigated magnetogenesis and chiral asymmetry in the early hot universe. This study explores the impact of minimally coupling a constant torsion in their cosmological model, suggesting new chiral physics. Physically, this means that if torsion is right chiral, the difference between the number of right and left chiralities does not change. Moreover, the decay of chiral asymmetry depends on torsion chirality. We solve the chiral torsionful dynamo equation for magnetic field seeds. Magnetic helical fields are considered important for chiral fermion asymmetry. Even in $(3+1)$ dimensional spacetime, torsion is highly suppressed beyond inflation (Eur Phys J C 82: 291, 2022). However, torsion of $1\,\mathrm{MeV}$ appears in the early universe. Equations for correlated magnetic field coefficients are solved in terms of torsion. Weak magnetic fields of the order of $10^{-42}$ Gauss are boosted by powerful torsionful dynamo amplification, generating a much stronger magnetic field of the order of $10^{-9}$ Gauss in the present universe. A galactic magnetic field of $10^{-6}$ Gauss in the present universe, with torsion of $10^{-15}$ Gauss, leads us to a galactic dynamo seed of $10^{-9}$ Gauss. We also discuss reheating dynamo regeneration of decaying cosmic magnetic fields during the hadronization era. The relation between the reheating contribution to e-folds and the connection between CMF and temperature squared allows us to obtain dynamo amplification in terms of N-folds of inflation. The main innovation of this work is the exploration of constant torsion in a cosmological model, revealing new chiral physics. This study offers a new perspective on the origin and evolution of magnetic fields in the early universe.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages

[1]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Cosmic Magnetism in Modiﬁed Theories of Gravity , Ed Europeans universitaires (2017)

work page 2017
[2]

Einstein, The meaning of Relativity , Princeton University Press (1955)

A. Einstein, The meaning of Relativity , Princeton University Press (1955)

work page 1955
[3]

Einstein and E

A. Einstein and E. Cartan, Letters on Absolute Parallelism , Ed R. Debever, Princeton University Press (1979)

work page 1979
[4]

R. J. Petti, Some aspects of the geometry of ﬁrst-quantized theories , General Relativity and Gravitation, 7 (11) 869–883 (1976)

work page 1976
[5]

D. E. Neville, Gravity theories with propagating torsion , Phys. Rev. D, 21, 867–873 (1980)

work page 1980
[6]

Kleinert, Nonholonomic Mapping Principle for Classical and Quantum M echanics in Spaces with Curvature and Torsion , General Relativity and Gravitation, 32, 769–839 (2000)

H. Kleinert, Nonholonomic Mapping Principle for Classical and Quantum M echanics in Spaces with Curvature and Torsion , General Relativity and Gravitation, 32, 769–839 (2000)

work page 2000
[7]

R. J. Petti, Derivation of Einstein–Cartan theory from general relativ ity, International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 18, 2150083, arXiv:1301.1588 (2001)

work page Pith review arXiv 2001
[8]

I. L. Shapiro, Physical aspects of the space–time torsion , Physics Reports, 357, 113–213 (2002)

work page 2002

Show all 56 references

[9]

F. W. Hehl, Note on the torsion tensor , Physics Today, 60, 16 (2007)

2007
[10]

Pop/suppress lawski,Universe in a black hole in Einstein-Cartan gravity , Astrophys

N. Pop/suppress lawski,Universe in a black hole in Einstein-Cartan gravity , Astrophys. J., 832, 96 (2016)

2016
[11]

Unger and N

G. Unger and N. Pop/suppress lawski,Big Bounce and closed universe from spin and torsion , Astrophys. J., 870, 78 (2019)

2019
[12]

Pop/suppress lawski,Chapter 13: Gravitational Collapse with Torsion and Univer se in a Black Hole , In C

N. Pop/suppress lawski,Chapter 13: Gravitational Collapse with Torsion and Univer se in a Black Hole , In C. Bambi (ed.), Regular Black Holes: Towards a New Paradigm of Gr avitational Collapse, Springer, pp. 485–499, arXiv:2307.12190 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[13]

Piani and J

M. Piani and J. Rubio, Higgs-Dilaton Inﬂation in Einstein-Cartan gravity , JCAP, 05, 009 (2022)

2022
[14]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Addendum to: Dynamical Torsion Suppression in Brans-Dicke Inﬂation and Lorentz Violation: Einstein-Cartan-Brans-D icke-Maxwell Universe with a Chiral Dynamo?, Eur. Phys. J. C, 82, 69 (2022)

2022
[15]

Bluhm and Y

R. Bluhm and Y. Zhi, Spontaneous and Explicit Spacetime Symmetry Breaking in Einstein–Cartan Theory with Background Fields , Symmetry, 16, 25 (2023). – 9 –

2023
[16]

Barker and S

W. Barker and S. Zell, Einstein-Proca origin of gravity in Einstein-Cartan formu lation, Phys. Rev. D, 109, 024007 (2024)

2024
[17]

Palle, Chiral Vorticity in Einstein-Cartan Cosmology , Entropy, 8, 985 (2016)

D. Palle, Chiral Vorticity in Einstein-Cartan Cosmology , Entropy, 8, 985 (2016)

2016
[18]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, A left-chiral Goedel-like teleparallel universe with grav itational anomalies and dynamo action with torsional sources , The European Physical Journal Plus, 136, 956 (2021)

2021
[19]

Sydorenko, O

M. Sydorenko, O. Tomalak and Y. Shtanov, Magnetic ﬁelds and chiral asymmetry in the early hot universe , JCAP, 10, 018 (2016)

2016
[20]

Garcia de Andrade, Einstein–Cartan non-supersymmetric spin-polarised nucl eons wall dynamos, Can

L. Garcia de Andrade, Einstein–Cartan non-supersymmetric spin-polarised nucl eons wall dynamos, Can. J. Phys., 431, 168558 (2021)

2021
[21]

Lammerzahl, Constraints on space–time torsion from Hughes–Drever expe riments, Phys

C. Lammerzahl, Constraints on space–time torsion from Hughes–Drever expe riments, Phys. Lett. A, 228, 223 (1997)

1997
[22]

Garcia de Andrade, Riemann–Cartan gravitational and axial anomalies in elect rodynamics and black holes , Class

L. Garcia de Andrade, Riemann–Cartan gravitational and axial anomalies in elect rodynamics and black holes , Class. Quantum Grav., 38, 065005 (2021)

2021
[23]

Leite, P

N. Leite, P. Pavlovic, Magnetogenesis in Cyclic universe , arXiv:1805.06036v1 [gr-qc] (2018)

2018 arXiv
[24]

Novello, S

M. Novello, S. E. Perez Bergliaﬀa, Bouncing Cosmologies, Phys. Reports, 463, 127-213 (2018)

2018
[25]

Pavlovich and G

P. Pavlovich and G. Sigl, Limits on point-like sources of ultra-high-energy neutrin os with the Pierre Auger Observatory , JCAP, 4, 055 (2019)

2019
[26]

Pavlovich, N

P. Pavlovich, N. Leite and G. Sigl, Constraints on the neutrino mass from cosmological observations, Phys. Rev. D, 96, 023504 (2017)

2017
[27]

Boyarsky, A

A. Boyarsky, A. Brandenburg, J. Shoeber and J. Froelich, Self-consistent evolution of magnetic ﬁelds and chiral asymmetry in the early universe , Phys. Rev. Lett., 108, 031301 (2012)

2012
[28]

Shober, T

J. Shober, T. Fujita and R. Durrer, Primordial magnetic ﬁelds and right electrons, and the Abelian anomaly, Phys. Rev. D, 101, 103028 (2020)

2020
[29]

Neronov and D

A. Neronov and D. Semikoz, Viscous damping of chiral dynamos in the early universe , arXiv:2010.13571v1 [hep-th] (2020)

2020 arXiv
[30]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Topological Defects in Einstein-Cartan magnetogenesis an d dynamo eﬀects, Lambert Acad Publishers Moldavia (2021)

2021
[31]

Mavromatos and N

N. Mavromatos and N. E. Mavromatos, Torsion in string-inspired cosmologies and the universe dark sector, arXiv:2111.05675 [hep-th] (2021)

2021 arXiv
[32]

Garcia de Andrade, Lorentz violation bounds from torsion trace fermion sector and galaxy M 51 data and chiral dynamos , Eur

L. Garcia de Andrade, Lorentz violation bounds from torsion trace fermion sector and galaxy M 51 data and chiral dynamos , Eur. Phys. J. C, 77, 401 (2017)

2017
[33]

Shaposhnikov, A

M. Shaposhnikov, A. Shkerin, I. Timiryamon and S. Zell, Einstein-Cartan Portal to Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett., 126, 16130 (2021)

2021
[34]

M. S. Turner and L. M. Widrow, Inﬂation-produced, large-scale magnetic ﬁelds , Phys. Rev. D, 37, 2743 (1998)

1998
[35]

Baym and H

G. Baym and H. Heiselberg, Electrical conductivity in the early universe , Phys. Rev. D, 56, 5254 (1997)

1997
[36]

Joyce and M

M. Joyce and M. E. Shaposhnikov, Primordial magnetic ﬁelds, right electrons, and the Abelia n anomaly, Phys. Rev. Lett., 79, 1193 (1997)

1997
[37]

Frohlich and B

J. Frohlich and B. Pedrini, New applications of the chiral anomaly , in Mathematical physics, A. Fokas et al. (eds.), Imperial College Press, London U.K. (2000), pp. 9–47, arXiv:0002195 [hep-th]. – 10 –

2000
[38]

Vilenkin, Equilibrium parity-violating current in a magnetic ﬁeld , Phys

A. Vilenkin, Equilibrium parity-violating current in a magnetic ﬁeld , Phys. Rev. D, 22, 3080 (1980)

1980
[39]

A. N. Redlich and L. C. R. Wijewardhana, Induced Chern–Simons terms at high temperatures and ﬁnite densities , Phys. Rev. Lett., 54, 970 (1985)

1985
[40]

Fukushima, D

K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev and H. J. Warringa, Chiral magnetic eﬀect , Phys. Rev. D, 78, 074033 (2008)

2008
[41]

Tashiro, T

H. Tashiro, T. Vachaspati and A. Vilenkin, Chiral eﬀects and cosmic magnetic ﬁelds , Phys. Rev. D, 86, 105033 (2012)

2012
[42]

B. P. Dolan, Chiral fermions in the early universe with torsion , Class. Quantum Grav., 27, 095010 (2010)

2010
[43]

Shober, I

J. Shober, I. Rogachevskii and A. Brandenburg, Dynamo instabilities in plasmas with inhomogeneous chiral chemical potential , Phys. Rev. D, 105, 043507 (2022)

2022
[44]

L. M. Widrow, Origin of Galactic and Extragalactic Magnetic Fields , Reviews of Modern Physics, 74, 775 (2002)

2002
[45]

R. M. Kulsrud and E. G. Zweibel, On the origin of cosmic magnetic ﬁelds , Reports on Progress in Physics, 71, 046901 (2008)

2008
[46]

Giovannini, Letter to the Editor: Non-topological gravitating defects in ﬁve-dimensional anti-de Sitter space , Classical and Quantum Gravity, 23, L73-L80 (2006)

M. Giovannini, Letter to the Editor: Non-topological gravitating defects in ﬁve-dimensional anti-de Sitter space , Classical and Quantum Gravity, 23, L73-L80 (2006)

2006
[47]

C. G. Tsagas, Large-scale magnetic ﬁelds in cosmology , Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 51, 124013 (2009)

2009
[48]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Generation of Primordial Magnetic Fields from QED and Higgs -like Domain Walls in Einstein–Cartan Gravity , Universe, 8 (12), 658 (2022)

2022
[49]

P. G. Bergmann and V. De Sabbata, Cosmology and Gravitation: Spin, Torsion, Rotation, and Supergravity, Part of the book series: NATO Science Series B, Volume 58, Plenum P ress, New York (1980)

1980
[50]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Dynamical torsion suppression in Brans-Dicke inﬂation and Lorentz Violation, Eur. Phys. J. C, 82, 291 (2022)

2022
[51]

L. C. Garcia De Andrade, Can magnetogenesis driven by dynamo instabilities in chira l plasmas favor Einstein-Cartan Cosmology? , Annals of Physics, 434, 168660 (2021)

2021
[52]

P. G. Bergmann and V. De Sabbata, Cosmology and Gravitation: Spin, Torsion, Rotation, and Supergravity, ISBN-10: 1461331250, Plenum Press, New York (1980)

1980
[53]

Z. F. Gao and L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Axion-photon-mixing dark matter conversion mediated by torsion mass constrained by the Barbero-Immirzi paramet er, arXiv:2412.05982 [hep-ph] (2024)

2024 arXiv
[54]

Z. F. Gao, B. P. Li and L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Dark photons and tachyonic instability induced by Barbero-Immirzi parameter and axion-torsion tr ansmutation, arXiv:2412.16617 [hep-ph] (2024)

2024 arXiv
[55]

Z. F. Gao and L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Chern-Simons electrodynamics and torsion dark matter axions , arXiv:2404.13517 [hep-ph] (2024)

2024 arXiv
[56]

Z. G. Wen, J. P. Yuan, N. Wang et al., A Single-pulse Study of the Subpulse Drifter PSR J1631+1252 Discovered at F AST, ApJ, 929, 71 (2022). – 11 –

2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

L. C. Garcia de Andrade, Cosmic Magnetism in Modiﬁed Theories of Gravity , Ed Europeans universitaires (2017)

work page 2017

[2] [2]

Einstein, The meaning of Relativity , Princeton University Press (1955)

A. Einstein, The meaning of Relativity , Princeton University Press (1955)

work page 1955

[3] [3]

Einstein and E

A. Einstein and E. Cartan, Letters on Absolute Parallelism , Ed R. Debever, Princeton University Press (1979)

work page 1979

[4] [4]

R. J. Petti, Some aspects of the geometry of ﬁrst-quantized theories , General Relativity and Gravitation, 7 (11) 869–883 (1976)

work page 1976

[5] [5]

D. E. Neville, Gravity theories with propagating torsion , Phys. Rev. D, 21, 867–873 (1980)

work page 1980

[6] [6]

Kleinert, Nonholonomic Mapping Principle for Classical and Quantum M echanics in Spaces with Curvature and Torsion , General Relativity and Gravitation, 32, 769–839 (2000)

H. Kleinert, Nonholonomic Mapping Principle for Classical and Quantum M echanics in Spaces with Curvature and Torsion , General Relativity and Gravitation, 32, 769–839 (2000)

work page 2000

[7] [7]

R. J. Petti, Derivation of Einstein–Cartan theory from general relativ ity, International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 18, 2150083, arXiv:1301.1588 (2001)

work page Pith review arXiv 2001

[8] [8]

I. L. Shapiro, Physical aspects of the space–time torsion , Physics Reports, 357, 113–213 (2002)

work page 2002