Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 36 references

Dark matter is proposed to be an emergent, in-medium massive mode of a 3-form gauge field—the same field that acts as dark energy—not a fundamental particle.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 22:43 UTC pith:X3XQJQ6Y

load-bearing objection A clean, honest speculative proposal for emergent dark matter from 3-form gauge fields, but the dark-matter identification rests on a background fit and a mass scale that likely prevents clustering—needs perturbation analysis before it lands. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.09034 v1 pith:X3XQJQ6Y submitted 2025-11-12 hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th

Emergent Dark Matter

Christian Canete , Archil Kobakhidze This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th PACS 95.35.+d
keywords emergent dark matter3-form gauge fielddark energytopological mass generationAnderson-Higgs mechanismcosmological fluidultralight scalarnon-particle dark matter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper argues that dark matter is not a fundamental particle but an emergent property: a massless, non-propagating 3-form gauge field—normally just a cosmological constant—acquires a massive mode when it couples to a medium of ordinary matter, in an analogue of the Anderson–Higgs mechanism (the way photons become massive inside a plasma). The energy stored in the field is redistributed: a constant piece remains dark energy, while a piece scaling as the inverse cube of the scale factor behaves exactly like cold dark matter on cosmological scales. If this picture is right, the dark sector is unified in a single field, the dark-matter-to-baryon ratio follows from one coupling, and conventional particle-based dark matter searches would be futile.

Core claim

In the authors' formulation, the dark matter phenomenon is an emergent, in-medium massive mode of a three-form gauge field. A free Abelian 3-form gauge theory in four dimensions has no local propagating degrees of freedom; the gauge redundancy removes all four components of the potential, leaving only a global degree of freedom whose on-shell energy-momentum tensor is exactly that of a cosmological constant. Coupling the field to an irrotational perfect fluid (modelled by a shift-invariant scalar) through a gauge-invariant topological interaction generates, via a BF-style topological mass mechanism, a massive scalar mode χ with mass squared m_χ² = (2c^{1−w_f}/(1+w_f)) m². In the background c

What carries the argument

The central object is the gauge-invariant topological coupling L_int = (m/3!) ε^{μνρσ} V_μ A_{νρσ} − (1/3!) ε^{μνρσ} (∇_μ V_ν) Θ_{ρσ} between the 3-form gauge potential A_{νρσ} and the one-form field V_μ of the cosmic fluid. This BF-type term, without introducing new propagating fundamental degrees of freedom, gives the 3-form field an effective mass through the Anderson–Higgs mechanism: the longitudinal part of the 3-form is absorbed into the Lagrange multiplier, leaving a dual scalar field χ as the physical excitation. The coupling is topological (metric-independent), so it does not directly alter the off-shell energy-momentum tensor, yet it redistributes the on-shell energy between a cosm

Load-bearing premise

The proposal stands or falls on the assumption that the emergent massive scalar mode, once produced, actually clusters gravitationally on galactic and cluster scales like collisionless dark matter; the paper demonstrates only that its background energy density scales as a⁻³, not that perturbations grow into the observed halo structure.

What would settle it

A concrete calculation of linear cosmological perturbations in the coupled 3-form-fluid model: if the χ-mode fluctuations do not develop growing, pressureless density contrasts on sub-horizon scales (or if their growth is severely suppressed relative to cold dark matter), then the a⁻³ background component cannot reproduce the observed halo mass function, and the identification of this mode with dark matter fails. One could also compare the predicted m_χ ∼ H₀ wave-like effects against small-scale structure observations such as the Lyman-α forest or satellite counts.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the scenario is correct, dark matter has no particle counterpart; direct and indirect detection experiments that assume particle dark matter would find nothing, no matter how sensitive.
  • Dark energy and dark matter are unified: the same 3-form gauge field, through its interaction with ordinary matter, produces both the accelerating expansion and the gravitational pull attributed to dark matter.
  • The emergent dark matter density is tied to the baryon density: the ratio ρ_dm/ρ_b ≈ 5 fixes the coupling m ≈ (15/2) μ² H₀/Λ ≲ H₀, so the massive mode is extremely light and cannot be resolved as a particle.
  • Because the massive mode exists only inside a medium of ordinary matter or radiation, dark matter would be an environmental phenomenon rather than a universal background constituent.
  • The dynamics of the emergent mode arise from the same kind of topological mass generation that produces plasmons, providing a concrete field-theoretic template for non-particle dark matter.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the predicted mass m_χ of order the present Hubble scale places the emergent mode in the same regime as ultralight bosonic dark matter; if it does cluster, it should leave wave-like signatures (suppressed small-scale structure, solitonic cores) that upcoming galaxy-power-spectrum and Lyman-α observations could bound or detect.
  • Editorial inference: the in-medium production mechanism implies the emergent dark matter distribution is tied to the baryon distribution in a way that conventional cold dark matter is not; this unusual correlation is testable in principle via cross-correlations of galaxy counts or lensing maps with dark matter maps in voids versus clusters.
  • Editorial inference: the speculative gravitational origin via lepton-number asymmetry suggests a concrete bridge—if the topological coupling is induced by a chemical potential for an anomalous charge, then independent constraints on the primordial lepton asymmetry could determine or rule out the coupling scale m.
  • Editorial inference: the natural next calculation is a perturbation-theory analysis of the χ mode; if its fluctuations do not grow with time like pressureless dust on sub-horizon scales, the a⁻³ background matching alone would not be enough to identify the mode with the dark matter that forms halos.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that dark matter is not a fundamental particle but an emergent, in-medium massive mode of a 3-form gauge field coupled to an irrotational perfect fluid representing ordinary matter/radiation. The free 3-form theory has only a global degree of freedom and acts as a cosmological constant; the topological coupling (12) generates a propagating scalar mode χ via the BF mechanism (Appendix C). In the background FLRW solution, the energy density (19) contains a term scaling as a^-3, which the authors identify with dark matter. Using ρ_dm/ρ_b ≈ 5 fixes the coupling m ≈ (15/2) μ² H0 / Λ, yielding m ≲ H0. Section 4 speculates on a gravitational/lepton-asymmetry origin and concludes that conventional dark matter searches would be futile.

Significance. The construction is a technically explicit realization of an idea that has been discussed only qualitatively: a single 3-form gauge field could unify dark energy and dark matter without introducing new fundamental particle degrees of freedom. The first-order formalism cleanly avoids known boundary-condition issues, and the BF mass-generation calculation in Appendix C is standard. If the identification with dark matter could be established, the paper would offer a unified dark-sector model with a sharp, falsifiable prediction (null direct and indirect searches). However, the central identification currently rests only on background scaling; the mass scale fixed by the fit is of order H0, which is problematic for structure formation, and the paper itself leaves small-scale structure open. The significance is therefore prospective rather than established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3, after Eq. (19)] The headline inequality m ≲ H0 is not a prediction but a fitting condition. The same paragraph fixes m by imposing ρ_dm,0/ρ_b,0 ≈ 5, giving m ≈ (15/2) μ² H0 / Λ. Since μ, c, and Λ are free parameters, this relation merely trades m for the observed density ratio; it does not derive the smallness of m from the model. The hierarchy is also introduced by the phrase 'assuming m ≲ H0' before the fit, so the subsequent identification of an unobservably light mode is circular in part.
  2. [Appendix C; Section 4] The emergent scalar has m_χ² = [2 c^{1-wf}/(1+wf)] m². Combining this with the fitted m in §3 and ρ_b,0 = c μ⁴ gives m_χ² = (225/2) ρ_b,0 H0² / Λ² = O(Ω_b H0²), i.e. m_χ ∼ H0, not m_χ² ≪ H0² as stated in the last paragraph of Appendix C. A scalar with m_χ ∼ H0 has a de Broglie/Jeans scale of order the Hubble radius and cannot form galactic-scale halos. No linearized perturbation calculation is provided; Eq. (13) shows anisotropic stress and energy-transfer terms, so the a^-3 scaling of the background cross-term in Eq. (19) does not by itself establish a pressureless, clustered dark-matter component. Section 4 explicitly leaves small-scale structure as an open question, and the final line of Appendix C that the excitation is 'massless at present epoch' makes the clustering failure the expected outcome.
  3. [Eqs. (13), (14), (19)] Even at the level of the background decomposition, the identification of the a^-3 cross-term with a separate non-relativistic fluid is not derived. The on-shell stress tensor (13) contains a non-perfect-fluid contribution involving B_μ, and the effective equation of state (14) describes the combined system, not the individual a^-3 component. The authors have not shown that this component is covariantly conserved or that it has vanishing pressure; a background contribution that scales as a^-3 can carry non-negligible pressure or shear perturbations. The label 'dark matter' is therefore an assumption about the perturbations, not a consequence of the background dynamics alone.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.1] Typo: 'folllowing' should be 'following'.
  2. [Appendix A title] The title reads 'NOTATIONS AND CONVENSIONS'; 'CONVENSIONS' should be 'CONVENTIONS'.
  3. [Section 3, Eq. (19)] Typo: 'the the density' should read 'the density'. The piecewise braces around the two regimes are hard to parse and would benefit from clearer formatting.
  4. [Section 4] The first paragraph states that 'at the hydrodynamic level, small-scale behaviour, such as gravitational clumping, is straightforward to demonstrate', but the next sentence says it 'remains an open question to better understand the small-scale structure'. These statements need to be reconciled or the first should be removed, since no hydrodynamic demonstration is actually included.
  5. [References] Reference [29] is listed as 'to appear' without an arXiv number. If it is not yet publicly available, please provide an arXiv identifier or update the status.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the DM abundance is a transparent parameter normalization, not a hidden prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain from the coupled Lagrangian to the background energy density (19) is self-contained: the a^-3 cross term 2c μ^2 m Λ/(3H_0) appears algebraically after solving the background equations and does not use any dark-matter datum. The step "this is what we identify as a potential dark matter candidate" is an interpretation, not a derivation, and the paper signals its parametric character with "If we assume that the total dark matter observed today originates directly from this 3-form interaction" before fixing m using ρ_dm/ρ_b≈5. That is an explicit parameter fit; the later conclusion that the emergent mode is ultralight and undetectable is a consequence of that calibration, not an independent prediction. Because the input is stated transparently, this is not a fitted input disguised as a prediction. Appendix C derives the mass of the emergent mode algebraically from the same interaction, and the BF/Anderson-Higgs mechanism is supported by independent references. Self-citations (e.g., refs. [23], [33], [36]) are side comments on alternatives or speculative origins and are not load-bearing for the central claim. Section 4's concession that small-scale structure remains an open question is a genuine validation gap — a^-3 background scaling alone does not establish clustering — but insufficiency of evidence is not circularity: the identification is not equivalent, by construction, to the observational input used. Therefore no circular step meets the evidentiary standard required by the analysis rules.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on five fitted/assumed parameters (Lambda, mu, c, m, w_f) and on unverified physical assumptions about the emergent mode's clustering and stability. The model illustrates a mechanism but does not provide an independent prediction of the DM abundance.

free parameters (5)
  • Lambda (3-form integration constant / dark energy density) = ≈ observed cosmological constant
    Free integration constant in Eq. (4); chosen so the constant term in Eq. (19) matches the present dark energy density.
  • mu (cosmic fluid energy scale) = set by rho_b,0 = c mu^4
    Mass scale in the fluid Lagrangian (7); normalized so the first term in Eq. (19) equals the present baryon density.
  • c (fluid velocity integration constant) = ≈ rho_b,0/mu^4 (order one)
    Integration constant in the V_0 background solution (10); absorbs the normalization of the baryon density.
  • m (3-form-fluid coupling) = ≈ (15/2) sqrt(3) mu^2 / M_P
    Determined by imposing the observed DM/baryon ratio rho_dm,0/rho_b,0 ~ 5 after Eq. (19). Controls the mass of the emergent mode.
  • w_f (fluid equation of state) = ≈ 0 (baryonic matter)
    Assumed present cosmic fluid is baryonic with w_f = 0; the model generalizes to arbitrary w_f, but the DM-matching argument uses the baryonic choice.
axioms (5)
  • standard math A free Abelian 3-form gauge theory in 4D has no local propagating degrees of freedom and its on-shell energy-momentum is equivalent to a cosmological constant.
    Section 2.1; relies on the gauge-redundancy count and on the boundary-term treatment discussed with Ref. [13].
  • domain assumption The interaction term (12) is gauge invariant, topological (metric-independent), and generates a massive mode via the BF mechanism.
    Section 3 and Appendix C; uses known BF topological mass generation for p-form fields [27,28]. This is central to the claim.
  • standard math The cosmic fluid can be described by a shift-invariant scalar field in first-order formalism with P(X)=X^{(1+w_f)/2}.
    Section 2.2, citing Refs. [25,26]. This is an established fluid description, though it restricts to irrotational perfect fluids.
  • domain assumption The universe is homogeneous and isotropic (FLRW) and the fluid is irrotational, so V vector = 0 in the background.
    Section 2.2, Eq. (10). Standard cosmological approximation; not expected to be a serious issue.
  • ad hoc to paper The emergent massive scalar mode chi, once massive, behaves as non-relativistic dark matter on cosmological scales and clusters gravitationally on small scales.
    This is the core physical identification in Section 3/4. It is asserted but not derived; the paper concedes small-scale structure is an open question.
invented entities (1)
  • Emergent dark matter mode (massive in-medium 3-form state / scalar chi) no independent evidence
    purpose: Accounts for observed dark matter without introducing a new fundamental particle degree of freedom.
    No falsifiable handle outside the model: its mass and abundance are tied to parameters matched to observations, and the paper explicitly says it would evade DM detectors, which makes it difficult to test independently.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 3911 in / 3807 out tokens · 212726 ms · 2026-08-03T22:43:03.492548+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We entertain the possibility that the phenomena typically attributed to dark matter may have a fundamentally emergent nature, rather than arising from new particle degrees of freedom. To illustrate this idea, we consider a field-theoretic model of a three-form gauge field coupled to a cosmological fluid composed of ordinary matter and radiation. In the absence of interactions, the 3-form gauge theory describes only a global, non-propagating state, which can be associated with dark energy. However, when coupled to the cosmic fluid, the theory gives rise to an emergent, dynamical in-medium state. We identify this emergent state of the 3-form gauge field with dark matter. Thus, our proposal provides a unified framework for the dark sector of the universe within the context of an interacting three-form gauge theory. Furthermore, we speculate that the three-form field may have a gravitational origin, potentially supported by the lepton-number asymmetry in the primordial plasma. If this scenario is correct, conventional direct and indirect searches for dark matter would likely be futile.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 24 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Plasmons, Gauge Invariance, and Mass,

    P. W. Anderson, “Plasmons, Gauge Invariance, and Mass,” Phys. Rev.130, 439-442 (1963)

    1963

  2. [2]

    Contributions of the Plasmons to the Energy Density and Pressure in the Early Universe,

    N. Itoh, A. Nishikawa, Y. Kohyama, and S. Nozawa, “Contributions of the Plasmons to the Energy Density and Pressure in the Early Universe,” Astrophysical Journal482, 33 (1997)

    1997

  3. [3]

    The Secret Long Range Force in Quantum Field Theories With Instantons,

    M. Luscher, “The Secret Long Range Force in Quantum Field Theories With Instantons,” Phys. Lett. B78, 465-467 (1978)

    1978

  4. [4]

    The U(1) Problem and the Higgs Mechanism in Two-dimensions and Four-dimensions,

    A. Aurilia, Y. Takahashi and P. K. Townsend, “The U(1) Problem and the Higgs Mechanism in Two-dimensions and Four-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B95, 265-268 (1980)

    1980

  5. [5]

    Modeling the glueball spectrum by a closed bosonic membrane,

    G. Gabadadze, “Modeling the glueball spectrum by a closed bosonic membrane,” Phys. Rev. D58, 094015 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9710402 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  6. [6]

    Three-form gauging of axion symmetries and gravity,

    G. Dvali, “Three-form gauging of axion symmetries and gravity,” [arXiv:hep-th/0507215 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [7]

    Strong-CPwith and without gravity,

    G. Dvali, “Strong-CPwith and without gravity,” [arXiv:2209.14219 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [8]

    Consistency of the dual formulation of axion solutions to the strong CP problem,

    O. Sakhelashvili, “Consistency of the dual formulation of axion solutions to the strong CP problem,” Phys. Rev. D105, no.8, 085020 (2022) [arXiv:2110.03386 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  9. [9]

    Cosmic attractors and gauge hierarchy,

    G. Dvali and A. Vilenkin, “Cosmic attractors and gauge hierarchy,” Phys. Rev. D70, 063501 (2004) [arXiv:hep-th/0304043 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  10. [10]

    Large hierarchies from attractor vacua,

    G. Dvali, “Large hierarchies from attractor vacua,” Phys. Rev. D74, 025018 (2006) [arXiv:hep- th/0410286 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2006

  11. [11]

    The Cosmological Constant Is Probably Zero,

    S. W. Hawking, “The Cosmological Constant Is Probably Zero,” Phys. Lett. B134, 403 (1984)

    1984

  12. [12]

    Dynamical Neutralization of the Cosmological Constant,

    J. D. Brown and C. Teitelboim, “Dynamical Neutralization of the Cosmological Constant,” Phys. Lett. B195, 177-182 (1987)

    1987

  13. [13]

    The Cosmological Constant Is Possibly Zero, but the Proof Is Probably Wrong,

    M. J. Duff, “The Cosmological Constant Is Possibly Zero, but the Proof Is Probably Wrong,” Phys. Lett. B226, 36 (1989)

    1989

  14. [14]

    Quantization of four form fluxes and dynamical neutralization of the cosmological constant,

    R. Bousso and J. Polchinski, “Quantization of four form fluxes and dynamical neutralization of the cosmological constant,” JHEP06, 006 (2000) [arXiv:hep-th/0004134 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  15. [15]

    Field theory models for variable cosmological constant,

    G. R. Dvali and A. Vilenkin, “Field theory models for variable cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. D 64, 063509 (2001) [arXiv:hep-th/0102142 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  16. [16]

    Where in the String Landscape is Quintessence,

    N. Kaloper and L. Sorbo, “Where in the String Landscape is Quintessence,” Phys. Rev. D79, 043528 (2009) [arXiv:0810.5346 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  17. [17]

    A Natural Framework for Chaotic Inflation,

    N. Kaloper and L. Sorbo, “A Natural Framework for Chaotic Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 121301 (2009) [arXiv:0811.1989 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  18. [18]

    Vacuum bubbles nucleation and dark matter production through gauge symmetry rearrangement,

    S. Ansoldi, A. Aurilia and E. Spallucci, “Vacuum bubbles nucleation and dark matter production through gauge symmetry rearrangement,” Phys. Rev. D64, 025008 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0104212 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  19. [19]

    Dark matter from dark energy in q-theory,

    F. R. Klinkhamer and G. E. Volovik, “Dark matter from dark energy in q-theory,” JETP Lett.105, no.2, 74-77 (2017) [arXiv:1612.02326 [physics.gen-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Dark matter as integration constant in Horava-Lifshitz gravity,

    S. Mukohyama, “Dark matter as integration constant in Horava-Lifshitz gravity,” Phys. Rev. D80, 064005 (2009) [arXiv:0905.3563 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  21. [21]

    Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,

    P. Horava, “Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,” Phys. Rev. D79, 084008 (2009) [arXiv:0901.3775 [hep-th]]. 9

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  22. [22]

    The Classical Equations of Motion of Quantized Gauge Theories, Part I: General Relativity,

    D. E. Kaplan, T. Melia and S. Rajendran, “The Classical Equations of Motion of Quantized Gauge Theories, Part I: General Relativity,” [arXiv:2305.01798 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  23. [23]

    On the infrared limit of Horava’s gravity with the global Hamiltonian constraint,

    A. Kobakhidze, “On the infrared limit of Horava’s gravity with the global Hamiltonian constraint,” Phys. Rev. D82, 064011 (2010) [arXiv:0906.5401 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  24. [24]

    The price of abandoning dark matter is nonlocality,

    C. Deffayet and R. P. Woodard, “The price of abandoning dark matter is nonlocality,” JCAP05, 042 (2024) [arXiv:2402.11716 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Scalar Fields in Curved Space-times,

    M. S. Madsen, “Scalar Fields in Curved Space-times,” Class. Quant. Grav.5, 627-639 (1988)

    1988

  26. [26]

    Thermodynamics of perfect fluids from scalar field theory,

    G. Ballesteros, D. Comelli and L. Pilo, “Thermodynamics of perfect fluids from scalar field theory,” Phys. Rev. D94, no.2, 025034 (2016) [arXiv:1605.05304 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  27. [27]

    Spontaneous dynamical breaking of gauge symmetry in dual models,

    E. Cremmer and J. Scherk, “Spontaneous dynamical breaking of gauge symmetry in dual models,” Nucl. Phys. B72, 117-124 (1974)

    1974

  28. [28]

    Topological mass generation in four dimensions,

    G. Dvali, R. Jackiw and S. Y. Pi, “Topological mass generation in four dimensions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 081602 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0511175 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  29. [29]

    Quantum (non)equivalence of dualp-form gauge theories,

    C. Canete and E. Loomes, “Quantum (non)equivalence of dualp-form gauge theories,”to appear

  30. [30]

    Quantum Compositeness of Gravity: Black Holes, AdS and Inflation,

    G. Dvali and C. Gomez, “Quantum Compositeness of Gravity: Black Holes, AdS and Inflation,” JCAP01, 023 (2014) [arXiv:1312.4795 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    Quantum Exclusion of Positive Cosmological Constant?,

    G. Dvali and C. Gomez, “Quantum Exclusion of Positive Cosmological Constant?,” Annalen Phys. 528, 68-73 (2016) [arXiv:1412.8077 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  32. [32]

    Quantum Break-Time of de Sitter,

    G. Dvali, C. Gomez and S. Zell, “Quantum Break-Time of de Sitter,” JCAP06, 028 (2017) [arXiv:1701.08776 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    Hint to supersymmetry from the GR vacuum,

    G. Dvali, A. Kobakhidze and O. Sakhelashvili, “Hint to supersymmetry from the GR vacuum,” Phys. Rev. D110, no.8, 8 (2024) [arXiv:2406.18402 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Electroweak ηw meson,

    G. Dvali, A. Kobakhidze and O. Sakhelashvili, “Electroweak ηw meson,” Phys. Rev. D111, no.11, 11 (2025) [arXiv:2408.07535 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    ηw-meson from topological properties of the electroweak vacuum,

    G. Dvali, A. Kobakhidze and O. Sakhelashvili, “ ηw-meson from topological properties of the electroweak vacuum,” [arXiv:2509.16043 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  36. [36]

    Gravitational Instabilities of the Cosmic Neutrino Background with Non-zero Lepton Number,

    N. D. Barrie and A. Kobakhidze, “Gravitational Instabilities of the Cosmic Neutrino Background with Non-zero Lepton Number,” Phys. Lett. B772, 459-463 (2017) [arXiv:1701.00603 [hep-ph]]. 10

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017