Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Physical limits on information metrics and quantum gravity as gravitized quantum theory

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This essay argues that quantum gravity plus general covariance removes the fixed information geometry that forces the Born rule, making probability itself dynamical and testable through triple interference.

desk verdict A readable synthesis of the authors' earlier claim that quantum gravity undermines Cencov's theorem, but the abstract overstates the body's weaker, more careful conclusion; the Talbot test is concrete but parameterized by the same deformation it seeks to measure. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12925 v1 pith:L6JR4LVU submitted 2025-04-17 gr-qc

Per Berglund , Andrew Geraci , Tristan Hubsch , David Mattingly , Djordje Minic This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc
keywords quantumgravityBornruleinformationgeometryFishermetricCencov'stheoremtripleinterferenceTalboteffectgeneralcovariance
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

The essay argues that quantum gravity denies the two assumptions that force a unique information geometry—independent, identically distributed measurements and the existence of sufficient statistics shared between observers—and that this denial removes the mathematical foundation for the Born rule of quantum mechanics. If correct, the probability rule is not a fixed axiom but a dynamical, state-dependent quantity, and both quantum mechanics and classical information theory need a generally covariant 'gravitized' extension. The argument lands on a concrete testable signature: intrinsic triple and higher-order quantum interference, including a modified Talbot effect in matter-wave interferometry, that would reveal a dynamical information metric.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is a chain of universality theorems and gravity constraints. Cencov's theorem fixes the Fisher metric as the unique classical information metric under sufficiency and i.i.d. sampling; in geometric quantum mechanics that metric becomes the Fubini-Study metric, which fixes the Born rule. The essay attacks the two preconditions: storage back-reaction via the equivalence principle, absence of global charges in quantum gravity, the weak gravity conjecture, and gravitational dressing make data non-Markovian and boundary-dependent, so neither i.i.d. sampling nor transferable sufficient statistics exist. The proposed replacement is a generalized, state-dependent probability metric $P = g_{ab}(\psi)\psi^a\psi^b$, with the cubic term $\gamma_{abc}\psi^a\psi^b\psi^c$ in the expansion producing intrinsic triple interference (measured by $\hat\kappa(1,2,3)$) and a modified Talbot carpet as its clean experimental handle.

What would settle it

Measure the intrinsic triple-interference parameter $\hat\kappa(1,2,3)$ in a matter-wave triple-slit experiment with particles of mass up to $10^7$ atomic mass units; a null result at precision below one part in $10^3$, with successive runs demonstrably independent, would falsify the dynamical Born-rule claim, while a nonzero value would support it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that in any theory combining quantum mechanics with gravity—where permanent data must be stored in a physical device, where the equivalence principle makes that device back-react on the measured system, where no global charges exist, and where gauge-invariant operators are gravitationally dressed and boundary-dependent—the premises of Cencov's theorem fail. Without i.i.d. repeated sampling and without transferable sufficient statistics between observers, the Fisher metric is no longer the unique information metric, and the Fubini-Study metric that encodes the Born rule is not forced. The generalized probability rule takes the form $P = g_{ab}(\psi)\psi^a\psi^b$ with a state-dependent $g_{ab}$, a Finsler-like deformation of projective complex geometry whose leading signature is intrinsic triple interference. The authors therefore conclude that quantum gravity is not merely a quantization of general relativity but a gravitization of quantum theory and information theory themselves.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on assuming that permanent data storage in gravity back-reacts on the system strongly enough to make successive measurements non-i.i.d., and that observers in different causal diamonds cannot share sufficient statistics; if either assumption fails in practice, the Born rule remains fixed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the argument holds, the Born rule is not an axiom but an emergent, state-dependent law, so probability assignments in local quantum-gravitational experiments should deviate from $|\psi|^2$ at some scale.
  • The uniqueness of the Fisher metric via Cencov's theorem fails in local gravitational experiments, so other information geometries, such as Finsler metrics, become admissible.
  • Evolution equations must be deformed together with the probability rule; the paper cites non-linear quantum mechanics and non-linear optics as consistent examples of such coupled modifications.
  • Intrinsic triple and higher-order interference should appear, and current experimental limits on Born-rule violations are only at the $10^{-3}$ level, leaving room for detection.
  • Matter-wave Talbot interferometry with nanoparticles of mass up to $10^7$ atomic mass units could search for the predicted suppression of the Talbot carpet.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test is to measure the memory effect itself: if successive outcomes are non-Markovian, correlations between consecutive measurements should persist in a way that depends on the gravitational dressing of the storage device, independent of the triple-interference signature.
  • The argument suggests quantum information theory, including quantum Fisher information and Bures metrics, would also need gravitized versions, which could alter resource-theoretic results such as optimal cloning or estimation bounds.
  • Because the failure rests on boundary conditions in different causal diamonds, one prediction is that experiments with asymptotically fixed boundaries would recover the standard Born rule while local experiments would not.
  • If the deformation parameter is tied to gravitational strength, then interference experiments with heavier or more massive superpositions should show a monotonic increase in triple interference; current optomechanical platforms could place bounds on this scaling.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The essay argues that the assumptions underlying Čencov's theorem—independent identically distributed measurements and exchangeable sufficient statistics—fail in quantum gravity because recorded data gravitates and back-reacts on subsequent measurements, and because gravitational dressing makes local data depend on unmeasured boundary conditions. From this the authors conclude that the fixed Fisher/Fubini–Study information geometry is precluded, that the Born rule is generally not fixed but dynamical, and that a generally covariant 'gravitized' quantum theory is necessary. They propose a specific cubic deformation of the Born rule, Eq. (1), and an experimental search for intrinsic triple interference using nanoparticle Talbot interferometry, with the measure κ̂ defined after Eq. (4) as the predicted signature.

Significance. If the central claim were established, the paper would connect information geometry, quantum measurement, and quantum gravity in a genuinely novel way, and the proposed nanoparticle Talbot experiment would provide a concrete probe of departures from the Born rule. The essay is clearly written, correctly identifies Čencov's theorem as the relevant uniqueness result, and gives an explicit experimental pathway. However, the manuscript does not supply a derivation of its central claim: the two premises—non-Markovian back-reaction of stored data and non-exchangeability of sufficient statistics—are asserted and delegated to the authors' prior work, and the proposed observable is a parameterized fit to the same cubic ansatz that the theory postulates. The significance is therefore prospective rather than established, and the paper functions as a research proposal or perspective rather than a self-contained argument.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and 'In summary' paragraph (p. 8)] The abstract states that quantum gravity and general covariance 'preclude the fixed information geometry' and that 'there must be a gravitized, generally covariant extension of both theories,' but the body's own summary says only that 'Čencov's theorem does not apply, the information metric does not have to be the Fisher metric, and the Born rule is not necessarily appropriate.' The latter is a possibility claim, not a necessity claim. From the failure of the hypotheses of Čencov's theorem one cannot infer the falsity of its conclusion; this is the fallacy of denying the antecedent. Establishing the abstract's 'preclude' and 'there must be' would require a model or general argument showing an obstruction to any fixed quadratic probability rule in a generally covariant quantum theory. No such model is given, and the paper's weaker body text contradicts its stronger abstract claim.
  2. [Eq. (4) and definition of κ̂] The proposed experimental signature is defined in terms of the same deformation parameter that the experiment would fit: κ̂(1,2,3) := γ ψ^(1)ψ^(2)ψ^(3)/(P2(1,2)+P2(1,3)+P2(2,3))^{3/2}, where γ is also the cubic deformation parameter in Eqs. (1) and (4). Consequently a nonzero measurement of κ̂ would only confirm the assumed cubic ansatz; it would not independently test the central claim that quantum gravity forces the information metric to be dynamical. A null result would only bound γ within that ansatz and would not rule out other forms of dynamical information geometry. The experiment is therefore not a test of the necessity claim, only a parameter search within the authors' specific deformation family.
  3. [Section on i.i.d. failure (p. 5)] The load-bearing premise that recording permanent data back-reacts on the measured system and renders successive measurements non-Markovian is asserted rather than derived. No estimate is given for the magnitude of the gravitational back-reaction of a stored data record on a subsequent measurement, and the weak-gravity-conjecture argument against reducing the charge of the storage device is not quantified. For the proposed experiment (nanoparticles of masses up to 10^7 atomic mass units, optical gratings, and free-fall expansion), no analysis shows that the back-reaction cannot be made negligible. Without a quantitative model or an explicit bound, the failure of the i.i.d. assumption is not established.
  4. [Alice–Bob sufficiency discussion (pp. 6–7)] The second pillar of the argument—that gravitational dressing prevents observers from exchanging sufficient statistics because of boundary-condition dependence—is asserted and cited to the authors' prior work, refs. [6,7], rather than derived here. The text does not explain why Bob's boundary conditions cannot be inferred from Alice's data in any local experiment, nor why covariant entropy bounds (ref. [12]) forbid determining the required boundary data in practice. Since the failure of both i.i.d. and sufficiency is needed to evade Čencov's theorem, the central argument of the essay is not self-contained: both premises and the proposed signal are delegated to earlier papers by the same group.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (2b)] The index structure in Eq. (2b) appears inconsistent: the left-hand side is dψ^(1)_a/dτ, but the first term on the right-hand side is δ_ab ψ^(2)*_c, with a free index c that does not appear on the left; presumably the second state index should be b, matching the left-hand side, or a sum over c is intended.
  2. [Eq. (2c)] The same index issue occurs in Eq. (2c), where δ_ab ψ^(1)*_c is written with a free index c instead of b.
  3. [p. 3] There is a duplicated article in 'analogous to the the famous fifth postulate of Euclidean geometry.'
  4. [p. 5] The phrase 'one cannot either simply turn down the magnitude of the charge in D arbitrarily' is grammatically awkward and should be rephrased for clarity.
  5. [Ref. [5]] The spelling of the theorem differs between the text ('Čencov') and reference [5] ('Chentsov'); this should be harmonized for consistency.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The essay's necessity claim rests on self-cited premises, and its proposed triple-interference signature is defined in terms of the same deformation parameter it would measure.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section on Cencov theorem assumptions, page 5 (paragraph after 'One could try to evade this...')]
    "Therefore in quantum gravity the data in X is not i.i.d. but instead non-Markovian [7], as each successive recording of a data point affects the next measurement."

    The central premise that Cencov's theorem fails is not derived in this essay. It is imported from reference [7], an arXiv preprint by the same five authors, which is cited as the sole support for the non-Markovian, non-i.i.d. character of data and for the failure of sufficient statistics. The essay then uses this imported premise to conclude that the fixed Fisher/Fubini-Study metric is precluded and that the Born rule must become dynamical. Since the load-bearing fact is asserted by self-citation rather than demonstrated or externally verified here, the derivation chain is not self-contained at its most critical step.

  2. self definitional [Phenomenological section, Eqs. (1), (4), and the definition of κ̂]
    "Phenomenologically, this would imply that state dependent deviations from maximal symmetry may be allowed. The generalized Born rule therefore would contain an expansion of the form ... P = g_ab(ψ)ψ^a ψ^b ≡ δ_ab ψ^a ψ^b + β_abc ψ^a ψ^b ψ^c + ... (1) ... Thus we have the key measure (properly normalized) of the intrinsic triple interference, κ̂(1,2,3) := γψ(1)ψ(2)ψ(3)/(P2(1,2)+P2(1,3)+P2(2,3))^{3/2} [6]."

    The 'predicted' triple-interference signature is not an independent consequence of quantum gravity; it is defined in terms of γ, the same deformation coefficient introduced by hand in the assumed cubic extension of the Born rule (Eq. (1)). The observable κ̂ is proportional to γ by construction, so an experiment searching for a nonzero κ̂ is equivalently a measurement of the input parameter γ. The paper's claim that 'any discovered modification would provide a smoking gun experimental signature for gravitized quantum theory' therefore reduces to detecting the very ansatz the authors inserted, rather than testing whether quantum gravity necessitates that ansatz.

full rationale

The paper has a real logical skeleton: Cencov's theorem is an external, valid result, and the essay correctly notes that the theorem assumes i.i.d. measurements and sufficient statistics. But the essential moves that make the conclusion follow — that gravitational back-reaction makes data non-Markovian and that boundary-condition dependence prevents sharing sufficient statistics — are not derived in this manuscript; they are cited to reference [7], a same-author preprint. This is load-bearing self-citation, not a machine-checked or externally reproduced result, so it raises the circularity score. The experimental proposal is more clearly circular: the generalized Born rule (Eq. (1)) posits a cubic coefficient γ, the triple-interference expression (Eq. (4)) is expanded to leading order in that same γ, and the key measure κ̂ is defined to be proportional to γ. A nonzero measurement of κ̂ would be a measurement of the assumed deformation parameter, not independent evidence for the necessity claim. The body's own weaker language — 'the information metric does not have to be the Fisher metric, and the Born rule is not necessarily appropriate' — also contrasts with the abstract's 'preclude' and 'there must be,' but that gap is a non-sequitur rather than a circularity. Overall, the central necessity claim is not fully forced by the equations; it rests on self-cited physical assertions, while the proposed signature is effectively the input ansatz renamed as a prediction. Score 6 reflects this partial circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on physical premises about gravitational back-reaction of stored data, absence of global charges, the weak gravity conjecture, gravitational dressing of observables, and covariant entropy bounds, plus the mathematical background of Cencov's theorem. No quantitative model or derivation is given, and the proposed experimental signature is parameterized by the free deformation gamma.

free parameters (1)
  • gamma_abc (cubic Born-rule deformation)
    Introduced in Eq (1) as the cubic correction to the probability rule. It appears in the triple-interference measure kappa_hat and in the proposed Talbot test. No predicted value is given; the experiment is a parametric search for it.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Recording permanent data back-reacts on the measured system through gravity, making measurements non-i.i.d. and non-Markovian.
    Central premise used in Section 3 to argue Cencov's i.i.d. assumption fails; no quantitative model or estimate is provided.
  • domain assumption There are no global charges in quantum gravity; all charges are dynamical and coupled to gauge fields with back-reacting energy-momentum.
    Used in Section 3 to block evasion of back-reaction via gauge charges; cited to refs [9,10].
  • domain assumption The weak gravity conjecture prevents arbitrarily reducing the charge in the storage device.
    Invoked in Section 3, citing ref [11], to argue back-reaction cannot be turned down arbitrarily.
  • domain assumption Gauge-invariant operators are gravitationally dressed and depend on unmeasured boundary conditions, so sufficient statistics cannot be exchanged between observers.
    Used in Section 4 to argue the second Cencov assumption, existence of sufficient statistics, fails; inherited from ref [7].
  • domain assumption Covariant entropy bounds limit the boundary data an observer can measure.
    Invoked in Section 4, citing ref [12], to argue one cannot simply measure all boundary data.
  • standard math Cencov's theorem is the correct uniqueness result for information metrics under i.i.d. and sufficient statistics.
    Background theorem used to identify the Fisher metric as the fixed structure that would become dynamical; cited to refs [4,5].
invented entities (1)
  • Dynamical (gravitized) information metric on quantum state space
    purpose: To make the probability rule and information geometry depend on the quantum state, replacing the fixed Fisher and Fubini-Study metrics.
    Introduced as the central postulate in Eqs (1)-(4). The only proposed evidence is a parametric search for triple interference that would measure the same deformation parameter introduced in the postulate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Physical limits on information metrics and quantum gravity as gravitized quantum theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L6JR4LVU

@misc{pith2026250412925,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Physical limits on information metrics and quantum gravity as gravitized quantum theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L6JR4LVU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12925}
}
read the original abstract

There is a long history in both general relativity and quantum mechanics of removing fixed background structures, thereby making observed objects and measurement processes dynamical. We continue this evolution by combining central insights from both theories to argue that physical limits on information collection resulting from quantum gravity coupled with general covariance preclude the fixed information geometry still assumed in both information theory and quantum mechanics. As a consequence there must be a gravitized, generally covariant extension of both theories. We also propose a novel experimental test involving intrinsic triple and higher order quantum interferences that would provide evidence for dynamical information metrics and a dynamical Born rule.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [12]

    The Holographic principle,

    R. Bousso, “The Holographic principle,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 74 (2002) 825–874 , arXiv:hep-th/0203101

    arXiv 2002

  2. [1]

    Frontiers of Quantum Gravity: shared challenges, converging directions,

    J. de Boer et al. , “Frontiers of Quantum Gravity: shared challenges, converging directions,” arXiv:2207.10618 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  3. [2]

    Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review,

    A. Addazi et al. , “Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 125 (2022) 103948 , arXiv:2111.05659 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

  4. [3]

    Geometrical formulation of quan tum mechanics,

    A. Ashtekar and T. A. Schilling, “Geometrical formulation of quan tum mechanics,” arXiv:gr-qc/9706069

    arXiv

  5. [4]

    N. N. ˇCencov, Statistical Decision Rules and Optimal Inference , vol. 53 of Translations of Mathematical Monographs . Amer. Math. Soc., 1981

    work page 1981

  6. [5]

    Hommage to Chentsov’s theorem,

    A. Fujiwara, “Hommage to Chentsov’s theorem,” Inf. Geom. 7 no. (Suppl. 1), (2024) S79–S98

    work page 2024

  7. [6]

    T riple interference, non-linear Talbot effect and gravitization of the quantum,

    P. Berglund, A. Geraci, T. H¨ ubsch, D. Mattingly, and D. Minic, “T riple interference, non-linear Talbot effect and gravitization of the quantum,” Class. Q. Grav. 40 (2023) 155008 , arXiv:2303.15645 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2023

  8. [7]

    In formation Metrics and Possible Limitations of Local Information Objectivity in Quantum Gravity,

    P. Berglund, A. Geraci, T. Hubsch, D. Mattingly, and D. Minic, “In formation Metrics and Possible Limitations of Local Information Objectivity in Quantum Gravity,” arXiv:2501.19269 [gr-qc] . 12

    arXiv

Show all 30 references
  1. [8]

    Qua ntum nonlocality, Bell inequalities, and the memory loophole,

    J. Barrett, D. Collins, L. Hardy, A. Kent, and S. Popescu, “Qua ntum nonlocality, Bell inequalities, and the memory loophole,” Physical Review A 66 no. 4, (Oct., 2002) , arXiv:quant-ph/0205016 [quant-ph]

    2002 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Symmetries in quantum field theory and q uantum gravity,

    D. Harlow and H. Ooguri, “Symmetries in quantum field theory and q uantum gravity,” Commun. Math. Phys. 383 no. 3, (2021) 1669–1804 , arXiv:1810.05338 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  3. [10]

    On the holographic dual of a topological symmetry operator,

    J. J. Heckman, M. H¨ ubner, and C. Murdia, “On the holographic dual of a topological symmetry operator,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 4, (2024) 046007 , arXiv:2401.09538 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Weak gra vity conjecture,

    D. Harlow, B. Heidenreich, M. Reece, and T. Rudelius, “Weak gra vity conjecture,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 95 no. 3, (2023) 035003 , arXiv:2201.08380 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Background independent quantum mech anics and gravity,

    D. Minic and H. C. Tze, “Background independent quantum mech anics and gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 061501 , arXiv:hep-th/0305193

    2003 arXiv

  6. [14]

    A general theory of quantum relativity,

    D. Minic and H. C. Tze, “A general theory of quantum relativity,” Phys. Lett. B 581 (2004) 111–118 , arXiv:hep-th/0309239

    2004 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Time and M-theory,

    V. Jejjala, M. Kavic, and D. Minic, “Time and M-theory,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 22 (2007) 3317–3405 , arXiv:0706.2252 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Born reciprocity in string th eory and the nature of spacetime,

    L. Freidel, R. G. Leigh, and D. Minic, “Born reciprocity in string th eory and the nature of spacetime,” Phys. Lett. B730 (2014) 302–306 , arXiv:1307.7080 [hep-th] . 13

    2014 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Quantum gravity, dynamica l phase space and string theory,

    L. Freidel, R. G. Leigh, and D. Minic, “Quantum gravity, dynamica l phase space and string theory,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D23 no. 12, (2014) 1442006 , arXiv:1405.3949 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Metastring Theory and Mod ular Space-time,

    L. Freidel, R. G. Leigh, and D. Minic, “Metastring Theory and Mod ular Space-time,” JHEP 06 (2015) 006 , arXiv:1502.08005 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Gravitizing the quantum,

    P. Berglund, T. H¨ ubsch, D. Mattingly, and D. Minic, “Gravitizing the quantum,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 31 no. 14, (Mar., 2022) 2242024 (9 pages) , arXiv:2203.17137 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Quantum gravity as gravitized quantu m theory,

    T. H¨ ubsch and D. Minic, “Quantum gravity as gravitized quantu m theory,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Nolinearity (Sep. 4–8. 2023), B. Dragovich and ˇZ. ˇCupi´ c, eds., pp. 1–72. Serbian Academy of Nonlinear Sciences, Be lgrade, Serbia,

    2023

  13. [21]

    Experimental higher-order interference in a n onlinear triple slit,

    P. Namdar, P. K. Jenke, I. A. Calafell, A. Trenti, M. Radonji´ c , B. Daki´ c, P. Walther, and L. A. Rozema, “Experimental higher-order interference in a n onlinear triple slit,” Phys. Rev. A 107 no. 3, (2023) 032211 , arXiv:2112.06965 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    K¨ ahler finsler manifolds with curvatu res bounded from below

    B. Chen, N. Li, and S. Liu, “K¨ ahler finsler manifolds with curvatu res bounded from below.” 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.00703

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Extensions of Born’s rule to non-linear qu antum mechanics, some of which do not imply superluminal communication,

    B. Helou and Y. Chen, “Extensions of Born’s rule to non-linear qu antum mechanics, some of which do not imply superluminal communication,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 880 no. 1, (2017) 012021 . 14

    2017

  16. [24]

    Nambu quantum mechanics: A Nonlinear ge neralization of geometric quantum mechanics,

    D. Minic and H. C. Tze, “Nambu quantum mechanics: A Nonlinear ge neralization of geometric quantum mechanics,” Phys. Lett. B 536 (2002) 305–314 , arXiv:hep-th/0202173

    2002 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Interference and oscillat ion in Nambu quantum mechanics,

    D. Minic, T. Takeuchi, and C. H. Tze, “Interference and oscillat ion in Nambu quantum mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 5, (2021) L051301 , arXiv:2012.06583 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Constraints on a genera lization of geometric quantum mechanics from neutrino and B 0-B0 oscillations,

    N. Bhatta, D. Minic, and T. Takeuchi, “Constraints on a genera lization of geometric quantum mechanics from neutrino and B 0-B0 oscillations,” JHEP 02 (2024) 031 , arXiv:2310.07457 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Nonlinear stokes-muelle r polarimetry,

    M. Samim, S. Krouglov, and V. Barzda, “Nonlinear stokes-muelle r polarimetry,” Physical Review A 93 no. 1, (Jan., 2016) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.93.013847

    2016 doi

  20. [28]

    Quantum mechanics as quantum measure theory ,

    R. D. Sorkin, “Quantum mechanics as quantum measure theory ,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9 (1994) 3119–3128 , arXiv:gr-qc/9401003

    1994 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Quantum carpets, carp ets of light,

    M. Berry, I. Marzoli, and W. Schleich, “Quantum carpets, carp ets of light,” Physics World 14 no. 6, (Jun, 2001) 39 . https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2058-7058/14/6/30. 15

    2001 doi

  22. [2024]

    arXiv:2407.06207 [hep-th]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.