Transverse stable causality in Lorentzian foliations

Henrique Amador Puel Martins; Ivan Pontual Costa e Silva; Victor Luis Espinoza

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Transverse stable causality in Lorentzian foliations

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For simple Lorentzian foliations, transverse stable causality matches the base spacetime's stable causality.

desk verdict Transverse stable causality framework is a real contribution, but the proof of the simple-foliation equivalence rests on a false pullback assertion and needs repair before the main results can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06678 v1 pith:GMUD7NTR submitted 2026-08-07 math.DG

Henrique Amador Puel Martins , Ivan Pontual Costa e Silva , Victor Luis Espinoza This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.DG MSC 53C1253C50

keywords LorentzianfoliationtransversecausalitystableleafspaceK-causalitytimefunctionsimplecausalladder

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 paper introduces a transverse analogue of stable causality for Lorentzian foliations, a setting in which the leaf space of the foliation plays the role of a low-regularity spacetime. The authors' main claim is that for 'simple' foliations—those whose leaves are the connected components of the fibers of a submersion satisfying a local connectivity condition—this transverse stable causality is equivalent to ordinary stable causality of the base spacetime, and also to a suitably defined transverse K-causality. For general foliations, the paper establishes a web of partial implications, including the existence of transverse time functions (continuous almost everywhere) and the antisymmetry of the transverse Seifert relation under transverse stable causality. The result matters because it extends the causal ladder—a central classification in spacetime geometry—to leaf spaces, with applications to Lorentzian orbifolds and spatially homogeneous spacetimes.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the space of transverse Lorentzian metrics $T L(M,F)$ with the strict order $g^\top < g'^\top$ (every $g^\top$-causal nonvertical vector is $g'^\top$-timelike) and the Whitney $C^0$ topology; the paper shows this space is homeomorphic to holonomy-invariant Lorentzian fiber metrics on the normal bundle $\nu F$ (Prop. 5.2). The leaf space $M/F$ carries the transverse causal relations, and the key imported tool is the Causal Waterfall Lemma from [10], which lets leaf-to-leaf connecting curves be pushed or pulled so that transverse causal statements can be transferred to ordinary causal statements on associated bundle-like metrics. For simple foliations the decisive device is the projection $\pi:M\to B$: transverse stable causality of $(M,F,g^\top)$ is shown in Cor. 8.4 to be equivalent to stable causality of $(B,h)$.

What would settle it

Exhibit a simple Lorentzian foliation (a submersion satisfying the connectivity condition in Definition 8.2) whose base spacetime is stably causal but whose transverse Seifert relation is not closed, or for which some arbitrarily small widening of the transverse cones creates a transverse causal loop; either would contradict Corollaries 8.4 and 8.5.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a natural transverse analogue of stable causality can be defined for Lorentzian foliations by requiring that the transverse light cones can be widened, $g^\top < g'^\top$, without creating transverse causal loops. In the simple-foliation class, the authors prove (Cor. 8.4) that this transverse stable causality holds exactly when the base spacetime $(B,h)$ is stably causal, with $g^\top = \pi^*h$; they then show (Cor. 8.5 and Prop. 8.9) that transverse stable causality and transverse K-causality coincide. For general foliations they establish partial converse results: transverse stable causality yields a transverse time function that is continuous almost everywhere (Thm. 6.1), a transverse temporal function implies transverse stable causality (Thm. 6.2), and transverse stable causality makes the transverse Seifert relation antisymmetric (Prop. 7.1). The paper does not claim full equivalence outside the simple case, and it gives an explicit example where dropping the connectivity condition of Definition 8.2 breaks the converse of Cor. 8.4.

Load-bearing premise

The entire argument leans on the Causal Waterfall Lemma imported from the earlier paper [10], which guarantees that certain leaf-to-leaf connecting curves can be deformed; that lemma is not reproved here, and if it fails the main theorems fall with it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For simple foliations, transverse stable causality is exactly stable causality of the base spacetime, so all classical consequences of stable causality pass through the submersion.
Transverse stable causality and transverse K-causality coincide on simple foliations, giving a relation-theoretic characterization of the new notion.
Transversely stably causal simple foliations admit transverse time functions and, after smoothing, transverse temporal functions.
For general foliations, transverse stable causality yields a transverse time function that is continuous almost everywhere and makes the transverse Seifert relation antisymmetric, even when full equivalence remains open.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper's partial results suggest that the topology of the leaf space—especially its failure to be Hausdorff—is the main obstruction to a full transverse causal ladder; if the leaf space were Hausdorff, the remaining equivalences might follow from the established machinery.
The almost-everywhere continuity in Theorem 6.1 points toward a testable regularity question: whether the Causal Waterfall Lemma can be strengthened to yield a fully continuous transverse time function under mild extra hypotheses.
Because Lorentzian orbifolds are leaf spaces of foliations with Hausdorff quotient, the framework could settle whether stable causal orbifolds are K-causal, an open point the paper leaves to future work.
For general foliations, a promising direct test is whether transverse stable causality plus a Hausdorff leaf space (without causal leaf-regularity) already forces the Seifert relation to be closed.

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

Thanks for the report and the stress-test note. I read the paper with both in hand, and the stress-test lands: the proof of Corollary 8.4 is built on a false statement. The paper's core idea—define transverse counterparts to stable causality, time/temporal functions, Seifert and K+ relations—is sound, and the partial implications for general foliations are a genuine contribution. The definitions are natural, the exposition is clear, and the authors are honest about what remains open. The section on simple foliations is the advertised payoff, and there the problem shows up.

In the proof of Cor 8.4 they say that every transverse Lorentzian metric on a simple foliation is the pullback of a Lorentz metric on the base. That is only true when the fibers are connected. For simple foliations in Definition 8.2, fibers are only locally connected away from a point; Example 8.1 explicitly has disconnected fibers. A transverse metric is F-basic, meaning holonomy-invariant, and that only forces constancy along each leaf, not along the whole fiber. On M=R^3\Z^3 with π(t,x,y)=(t,x), you can take σ=1 or 2 according to which interval (k,k+1) contains y; σ(-dt^2+dx^2) is a smooth basic transverse Lorentzian metric, and it is not a pullback. So the equivalence g_⊺

The other concerns are smaller. The Causal Waterfall Lemma from [10] is doing a lot of work, and this paper does not reprove it; a referee should check that [10] is solid. Theorem 6.1 only gets an almost everywhere continuous function, and the monotone convergence argument is sketched; the push-up step also leans on [10]. A minor point: the proof of Theorem 4.1 has a strictness slip in the null-vector case. None of these, by themselves, would be blocking.

Overall: the framework is worth publishing, but Section 8 needs a corrected proof. I would send it to a serious referee, with the request to focus on Cor 8.4 and its dependents. The authors have done the right thing by stating the limits of the general case; they just overreached in the simple case. If the gap is fixed, this will be a useful paper for people working on causal hierarchies beyond manifolds.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a notion of transverse stable causality for Lorentzian foliations and studies its relationship to transverse time/temporal functions, transverse Seifert and K^+ relations, and C^0-perturbation stability. For general foliations it establishes a diagram of partial implications (Theorem 6.1, Theorem 6.2, Proposition 7.1, Theorem 7.1, Theorem 7.3), while the main section, Section 8, aims to recover for simple foliations the classical equivalences of stable causality: Corollary 8.4 identifies transverse stable causality with stable causality of the base spacetime, and Corollary 8.5 and Proposition 8.9 give the equivalence with transverse K-causality. The paper is clearly motivated, carefully discusses the non-Hausdorff nature of leaf spaces, and offers explicit examples, including simple foliations with disconnected fibers.

Significance. If the main claims are established, the paper provides a nearly complete transverse analogue of the stable-causality rung of the causal ladder for submersion foliations, which would be a genuine contribution to the geometry of Lorentzian foliations and to the authors' program of treating leaf-space geometry via transverse structures. The simple-foliation results are concrete and falsifiable, and the paper correctly identifies the key topological difficulty, namely the non-Hausdorff leaf space. The treatment of Whitney topologies for transverse Lorentz metrics and the explicit examples are also valuable. However, several load-bearing arguments are either imported from the authors' previous preprint [10] without statement or are not fully justified, so the current version does not yet substantiate all advertised equivalences.

major comments (4)

[§8, Corollary 8.4] The proof rests on the assertion that every transverse Lorentzian metric on a simple foliation is the pullback of a unique Lorentz metric on B. This is not immediate when fibers are disconnected, precisely the situation allowed by Definition 8.2 and illustrated in Example 8.1. The third bullet of Definition 8.2 may imply a descent statement, but the present manuscript gives no argument; in particular, smoothness of an F-basic tensor and vertical invariance alone do not obviously force equality of the induced metrics on different connected components of a fiber. A rigorous proof using local sections through points of the bad fiber and the connectedness of π^{-1}(U\{b}) is needed. As written, the unproved pullback assertion is load-bearing for Corollary 8.5, Proposition 8.8, Proposition 8.9, Proposition 8.10, and Theorem 9.2.
[§6, Theorem 6.1] The convergence argument for the almost everywhere continuous transverse time function is not justified. The proof states that the monotone sequence f_k converges 'almost everywhere uniformly' by the Monotone Convergence Theorem because μ(M)<∞; this is incorrect. Monotone convergence gives pointwise a.e. convergence and L^1 convergence, not uniform or almost-everywhere-uniform convergence. A pointwise a.e. limit of continuous functions need not be continuous on a set of full measure. Moreover, the finiteness assumption on μ is not stated among the hypotheses of Theorem 6.1. This is a load-bearing gap in the general-foliation claim that transverse stable causality yields an almost everywhere continuous transverse time function.
[§6, §7, §9] Several central results depend on the Causal Waterfall Lemma and the push-up lemma imported from the authors' own prior paper [10], without stating them or proving them here. These lemmas are used in Proposition 6.2, Lemma 6.1, Theorem 6.1, Theorem 7.1, and Theorem 9.2, and the present paper's general-foliation conclusions are not self-contained without them. The authors should state the precise hypotheses and either prove these lemmas in an appendix or give a definitive published reference; relying on an unreviewed companion preprint for load-bearing ingredients is not adequate as the manuscript stands.
[§7, Theorem 7.1] In the proof of Theorem 7.1, the transition from nets of causal curves to the conclusion (L, L')∈J^+_{S⊺} uses causal leaf-regularity in a way that should be checked carefully: causal regularity only provides a causal segment when the given leaves coincide or when the limit curve exists, but the proof also uses openness of transverse chronology from [10]. Since the closure conclusion of Theorem 7.1 is the basis of Corollary 7.2 and Corollary 7.4, the authors should spell out the net-limit argument in full rather than invoking [10] at the decisive step.

minor comments (4)

[§3, Definition 3.1] There is a typo in the definition of transverse global hyperbolicity: 'it contains any lef it intersects' should read 'any leaf it intersects'.
[§4, Theorem 4.1] The proof of (1)=>(2) contains apparent misprints: ε_i is first defined as min{g_⊺(v,v): v∈K_i} but should be min{−g'_⊺(v,v): v∈K_i}, and the displayed inequality for f(p) has a wrong sign and the wrong metric; the intended argument appears to be f(p) ≤ −g'_⊺(v,v), which is what is needed for the subsequent estimate.
[§8, Example 8.2] The sentence 'we have still have g_⊺ = π^*h' contains a duplicated verb and should be corrected.
[§5, Proposition 5.4] The notation Q^# is used before the conformal bundle construction is fully explained; referring the reader to (2) or defining the map explicitly would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation found: the transverse stable-causality analogues are defined independently and the main implications are proved from classical causality results, with prior-work lemmas used as technical inputs rather than assumed conclusions.

full rationale

I examined the derivation chain for the claimed transverse analogues of stable causality. The fiducial notion (Definition 4.1) is introduced directly as cone-widening plus transverse causality, without presupposing any of the equivalent formulations it is later compared with. Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.2 are proved from the definition using a partition-of-unity argument. The time-function results in Section 6 use the Causal Waterfall Lemma and push-up lemma from the authors' prior paper [10]; these are cited as technical tools with stated assumptions that do not include the target equivalences. They are not treated as equivalent to transverse stable causality, and the paper's own claims do not reduce to them. The simple-foliation results in Section 8 reduce transverse questions to the base spacetime via the submersion, but this is a structural reduction rather than a circular assumption: the definitions of transverse causality and transverse stable causality are fixed in advance, and the classical stable-causality equivalences of Beem–Ehrlich–Easley, Bernal–Sánchez, and Minguzzi are then invoked. The paper also explicitly flags limitations, such as the almost-everywhere continuity in Theorem 6.1, the unresolved smoothing of transverse time to transverse temporal functions, and the reliance on causal leaf-regularity for closure of the transverse Seifert relation; these are acknowledged open gaps, not circular dependencies. The possible difficulty raised about Corollary 8.4 (whether every F-basic transverse Lorentzian metric on a simple foliation is a pullback) is a mathematical correctness concern about the proof, not a self-referential reduction, and therefore does not constitute circularity under the stated criteria.

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

No free parameters are fitted; this is a theorem-proving paper. Its load-bearing inputs are imported lemmas from the authors' prior foliation paper, classical causality theory, and two structural conditions, causal leaf-regularity and the simple-foliation connectivity condition, introduced to make equivalences go through.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Causal Waterfall Lemma and the push-up lemma from [10] hold for transverse causal relations.
Imported without proof from the authors' prior work; used in Prop. 6.2, Lemma 6.1, Theorem 6.1, and Theorem 7.1. The new results collapse if these lemmas fail.
standard math Classical stable causality equivalences cited from the literature, such as temporal functions and Seifert/K+ relations, are valid as stated.
The paper transplants spacetime causal ladder results from [2, 3, 24, 42, 47] and assumes them when proving the transverse analogues.
ad hoc to paper Causal leaf-regularity (Definition 7.3) is imposed, and Hausdorffness of the leaf space is assumed in Theorems 7.1 and 7.3.
The authors introduce this regularity condition to make the relation-theoretic analogue work; they prove it for simple foliations but leave it open for general foliations and orbifolds.
domain assumption The simple foliation connectivity condition (Definition 8.2, third bullet) holds.
The equivalence of transverse stable causality with stable causality of the base (Cor. 8.4) and the converses in Prop. 8.1 depend on every fiber except one being connected in a neighborhood of each point; Example 8.2 shows the failure mode.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Transverse stable causality in Lorentzian foliations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GMUD7NTR

@misc{pith2026260806678,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Transverse stable causality in Lorentzian foliations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GMUD7NTR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06678}
}

abstract

We introduce and investigate a notion analogous to stable causality for Lorentzian foliations, considerably extending the framework of transverse causality initiated in a recent work. It is well-known that in spacetime geometry stable causality is characterized by several equivalent conditions, such as the stability of non-existence of causal loops under metric perturbations, the existence of smooth temporal functions, and relation-theoretic formulations via the so-called Seifert and $K^+$ relations. We define natural transversal analogues of these distinct formulations and establish partial logical implications between them in the foliation setting. Whether and to what extent the full equivalences can be established remains an open question for general foliations, partly due to the eventual non-Hausdorff nature and other topological complexities of arbitrary leaf spaces. Furthermore, we demonstrate that for the important class of \textit{simple} foliations, which are defined by certain submersions, the equivalences of almost all the transverse analogues of stable causality are indeed recovered.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06678 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Diagram of logical implication between the several equivalent definitions of stable causality. The reader can find proofs in the references on the corresponding arrows. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Diagram of the logical implications established so far for a general foliation. surjection πˆ : M/F ! B such that πˆ ◦ πF = π. In either case a transverse Lorentzian metric g⊺ on (M, F) can be easily projected to yield a Lorentzian metric h on B. We also implicitly assume that compatible time-orientations were chosen for (M, F, g⊺) and (B, h). Proposition 8.1. Let π : M ! B be an onto submersion, and consider the fo… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Diagram of the logical implications established for simple foliations. 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

[1]

Transversal Hard Lefschetz Theorem on Transversely Symplectic Foliations

Jesús A Álvarez López and Seoung Dal Jung. “Transversal Hard Lefschetz Theorem on Transversely Symplectic Foliations”. In:The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics72.4 (Dec. 2021), pp. 1235–1251.issn: 0033-5606.doi:10.1093/qmath/haaa071. eprint:https: //academic.oup.com/qjmath/article-pdf/72/4/1235/43803079/haaa071.pdf.url: https://doi.org/10.1093/qmath/haaa071

work page doi:10.1093/qmath/haaa071 2021
[2]

J. K. Beem, P. E. Ehrlich, and K. Easley.Global Lorentzian geometry. 2nd. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 1996

work page 1996
[3]

Smoothness of Time Functions and the Met- ric Splitting of Globally Hyperbolic Spacetimes

Antonio N. Bernal and Miguel Sánchez. “Smoothness of Time Functions and the Met- ric Splitting of Globally Hyperbolic Spacetimes”. In:Communications in Mathematical Physics257.1 (Apr. 2005), pp. 43–50.issn: 1432-0916.doi:10.1007/s00220-005-1346- 1.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-005-1346-1

work page doi:10.1007/s00220-005-1346- 2005
[4]

Lyapounov functions of closed cone fields from Conley theory to time functions

P. Bernard and S. Suhr. “Lyapounov functions of closed cone fields from Conley theory to time functions”. In:Comm. Math. Phys.359.2 (2018), pp. 467–498

work page 2018
[5]

Convex optimization

S. Boyd and L. Vandenberge. “Convex optimization”. In:Cambridge university press (2009)

work page 2009
[6]

Time functions on Lorentzian length spaces

A. Burtscher and L. Garcia-Heveling. “Time functions on Lorentzian length spaces”. In: Annales Henri Poincaré(2024)

work page 2024
[7]

H.Busemann.Timelike spaces.Warszawa:InstytutMatematycznyPolskiejAkademiNauk, 1967.url:http://eudml.org/doc/268386

work page 1967
[8]

Candel and Conlon L.Foliations I

A. Candel and Conlon L.Foliations I. American Mathematical Society, 2000

work page 2000

Show all 55 references

[9]

F. C. Caramello Jr.Introduction to orbifolds. 2022. arXiv:1909.08699 [math.DG].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.08699

2022 arXiv
[11]

A review of Lorentzian synthetic theory of timelike Ricci curvature bounds

F. Cavalletti and A. Mondino. “A review of Lorentzian synthetic theory of timelike Ricci curvature bounds”. In:Gen. Rel. and Gravitation54.11 (2022)

2022
[12]

P. T. Chruściel.Elements of causality theory. 2011. arXiv:1110 . 6706 [gr-qc].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.6706

2011 arXiv
[13]

On Lorentzian causality with continuous metrics

P. T. Chruściel and J. D. E. Grant. “On Lorentzian causality with continuous metrics”. In:Class. Quantum Gravity29.14 (2012)

2012
[14]

Regularity of horizons and the area theorem

P. T. Chruściel et al. “Regularity of horizons and the area theorem”. In:Annales Henri Poincaré2 (2001), pp. 109–178

2001
[15]

Pseudo-Riemannian foliations and their graphs

A Yu Dolgonosova and NI Zhukova. “Pseudo-Riemannian foliations and their graphs”. In: Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics39.1 (2018), pp. 54–64

2018
[16]

Pseudo-Riemannian foliations and their graphs

A. Yu. Dolgonosova and N. I. Zhukova. “Pseudo-Riemannian foliations and their graphs”. In:Lobachevskii J. of Mathematics39.1 (2018), pp. 54–64

2018
[17]

On the structure of causal spaces

E.H E. H. Kronheimer and R. R. Penrose. “On the structure of causal spaces”. In:Math- ematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society63 (1967), pp. 481–505

1967
[18]

Orbifolds as configuration spaces of systems with gauge symmetries

C. Emmrich and H. Römer. “Orbifolds as configuration spaces of systems with gauge symmetries”. In:Commun. Math. Phys.129 (1990), pp. 69–94

1990
[19]

On smooth time functions

A. Fathi and A. Siconolfi. “On smooth time functions”. In:Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society152.2 (2012), pp. 303–339

2012
[20]

In:Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal)2018.745 (2018), pp

Oliver Goertsches and Dirk Töben. In:Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal)2018.745 (2018), pp. 1–40.doi:doi : 10 . 1515 / crelle - 2015 - 0102. url:https://doi.org/10.1515/crelle-2015-0102

2018 doi
[21]

WhitneyC ∞-topologies and the Baire property

J. Gravesen. “WhitneyC ∞-topologies and the Baire property”. In:Mathematica Scandi- navica52.1 (1983), pp. 58–60. 35

1983
[22]

New cohomological invariants of foliations

Georges Habib and Ken Richardson. “New cohomological invariants of foliations”. In: Asian Journal of Mathematics28.6 (2024), pp. 757–790.issn: 1945-0036.doi:10.4310/ ajm.250314015548.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.4310/AJM.250314015548

2024 doi
[23]

On the causal hierarchy of Lorentzian length spaces

L. A. Hau, A. J. Cabrera Pacheco, and D. A. Solis. “On the causal hierarchy of Lorentzian length spaces”. In:Classical and Quantum Gravity(2020)

2020
[24]

Hawking and G

S. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis.The large scale structure of space-time. Cambridge Mono- graphs on Math. Physics, 1973

1973
[25]

Hirsch.Differential Topology

Morris W. Hirsch.Differential Topology. Vol. 33. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. New York, NY: Springer New York, 1976

1976
[26]

A note on the existence of standard split- tings for conformally stationary spacetimes

Miguel Angel Javaloyes and Miguel Sánchez. “A note on the existence of standard split- tings for conformally stationary spacetimes”. In:Classical and Quantum Gravity25.16 (Aug. 2008), p. 168001.doi:10.1088/0264-9381/25/16/168001.url:https://doi. org/10.1088/0264-9381/25/16/168001

2008 doi
[27]

Caramello Jr, Henrique A

Francisco C. Caramello Jr, Henrique A. Puel Martins, and Ivan P. Costa e Silva.A Hadamard theorem in transversely affine geometry with applications to affine orbifolds
[28]

Caramello Jr, Henrique A

Francisco C. Caramello Jr, Henrique A. Puel Martins, and Ivan P. Costa e Silva.Trans- verse Geometry of Lorentzian foliations with applications to Lorentzian orbifolds. 2024. arXiv:2402.05907 [math.DG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.05907

2024 arXiv
[29]

Lorentzian length spaces

M. Kunzinger and C. Sämann. “Lorentzian length spaces”. In:Ann. Glob. Anal. Geom. 54.3 (2018), pp. 399–447

2018
[30]

Lorentzian length spaces

M. Kunzinger and C. Sämann. “Lorentzian length spaces”. In:Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 54.3 (2018), pp. 399–447

2018
[31]

Hawking’s singularity theorem forC1,1- metrics

M. Kunzinger, R. Steinbauer, and M. Stojković. “Hawking’s singularity theorem forC1,1- metrics”. In:Class. Quantum Gravity32.7 (2015)

2015
[32]

The exponential map of aC1,1-metric

M. Kunzinger, R. Steinbauer, and M. Stojković. “The exponential map of aC1,1-metric”. In:Differ. Geom. Appl.34 (2014), pp. 14–24

2014
[33]

The Penrose singularity theorem in regularityC 1,1

M. Kunzinger, R. Steinbauer, and J. A. Vickers. “The Penrose singularity theorem in regularityC 1,1”. In:Class. Quantum Gravity32.15 (2015)

2015
[34]

The space of Lorentz metrics

David E. Lerner. “The space of Lorentz metrics”. In:Communications in Mathematical Physics32.1 (1973), pp. 19–38.doi:10.1007/BF01646426

1973 doi
[35]

The space of Lorentz metrics on a non-compact manifold

David E. Lerner. “The space of Lorentz metrics on a non-compact manifold”. PhD disser- tation. University of Pittsburgh, 1972

1972
[36]

A continuous utility theorem for closed preorders on aσ-compact metrizable space

V. L. Levin. “A continuous utility theorem for closed preorders on aσ-compact metrizable space”. In:Soviet Math. Dokl(1983)

1983
[37]

Hodge theory on transversely symplectic foliations

Yi Lin. “Hodge theory on transversely symplectic foliations”. In:The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics69.2 (June 2018), pp. 585–609.issn: 0033-5606.doi:10.1093/qmath/ hax051. eprint:https : / / academic . oup . com / qjmath / article - pdf / 69 / 2 / 585 / 25015087/hax051.pdf.u...

2018 doi
[38]

Starbird M. and F. E. Su.Topology Through Inquiry. AMS/MAA Textbooks 58. MAA Press, 2019.isbn: 1470452766; 9781470452766

2019
[39]

Margalef-Roig and E

J. Margalef-Roig and E. Outerelo Domínguez.Differential Topology. Amsterdam: North- Holland, 1992

1992
[40]

Stability ofC ∞ mappings II. Infinitesimal stability implies stability

JN Mather. “Stability ofC ∞ mappings II. Infinitesimal stability implies stability”. In: Ann. of Math89 (1969), pp. 254–291

1969
[41]

Causality theory for closed cone structures with applications

E. Minguzzi. “Causality theory for closed cone structures with applications”. In:Rev. Math. Phys.31.5 (2019)

2019
[42]

K-CausalityCoincideswithStableCausality

E.Minguzzi.“K-CausalityCoincideswithStableCausality”.In:Communications in Math- ematical Physics290.1 (Apr. 2009), pp. 239–248.issn: 1432-0916.doi:10.1007/s00220- 009-0794-4.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-009-0794-4. 36

2009 doi
[43]

Lorentzian causality theory

E. Minguzzi. “Lorentzian causality theory”. In:Living Reviews in Relativity22,3 (2019). doi:10.1007/s41114-019-0019-x

2019 doi
[44]

The causal ladder and the strength of K-causality: I

E. Minguzzi. “The causal ladder and the strength of K-causality: I”. In:Classical and Quantum Gravity25.1 (Dec. 2007), p. 015009.issn: 1361-6382.doi:10 . 1088 / 0264 - 9381/25/1/015009.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/25/1/015009

2007 doi
[45]

The causal ladder and the strength of K-causality: II

E. Minguzzi. “The causal ladder and the strength of K-causality: II”. In:Classical and Quantum Gravity25.1 (Dec. 2007), p. 015010.issn: 1361-6382.doi:10 . 1088 / 0264 - 9381/25/1/015010.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/25/1/015010

2007 doi
[46]

Time Functions as Utilities

E. Minguzzi. “Time Functions as Utilities”. In:Communications in Mathematical Physics (2010)

2010
[47]

The causal hierarchy of spacetimes

E. Minguzzi and M. Sánchez. “The causal hierarchy of spacetimes”. In:ESI Lectures in Mathematics and Physics(2008)

2008
[48]

Moerdijk and J

I. Moerdijk and J. Mrčun.Introduction to Foliations and Lie Groupoids. Cambridge Uni- verisity Press, 2003

2003
[49]

Feuilletages riemanniens sur les variétés compactes; champs de Killing trans- verses

P. Molino. “Feuilletages riemanniens sur les variétés compactes; champs de Killing trans- verses”. In:Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences289 (1974), pp. 421–423

1974
[50]

Molino.Riemannian Foliations

P. Molino.Riemannian Foliations. Birkhäuser, 1988

1988
[51]

O’Neill.Semi-Riemannian Geometry with Applications to Relativity

B. O’Neill.Semi-Riemannian Geometry with Applications to Relativity. Academic Press, 1983

1983
[52]

Top-Dimensional Group of the Basic Intersection Cohomology for Singular Riemannian Foliations

José Royo Prieto, Martintxo Saralegi-Aranguren, and Robert Wolak. “Top-Dimensional Group of the Basic Intersection Cohomology for Singular Riemannian Foliations”. In: Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Mathematics53.4 (2005), pp. 429–440

2005
[53]

On transverse foliations

Atsushi Sato and Itiro Tamura. “On transverse foliations”. en. In:Publications Math- ématiques de l’IHÉS54 (1981), pp. 5–35.doi:10 . 1007 / BF02698690.url:https : //www.numdam.org/articles/10.1007/BF02698690/

1981 doi
[54]

Wald.General relativity

Robert M. Wald.General relativity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984

1984
[55]

Reeb flows transverse to foliations

Jonathan Zung. “Reeb flows transverse to foliations”. In:Geometry & Topology28.8 (Dec. 2024), pp. 3661–3695.issn: 1465-3060.doi:10.2140/gt.2024.28.3661.url:http: //dx.doi.org/10.2140/gt.2024.28.3661. Departamento de Matemática, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, R. Eng. A...

2024 doi
[2025]

arXiv:2503.06344 [math.DG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06344

arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Transversal Hard Lefschetz Theorem on Transversely Symplectic Foliations

Jesús A Álvarez López and Seoung Dal Jung. “Transversal Hard Lefschetz Theorem on Transversely Symplectic Foliations”. In:The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics72.4 (Dec. 2021), pp. 1235–1251.issn: 0033-5606.doi:10.1093/qmath/haaa071. eprint:https: //academic.oup.com/qjmath/article-pdf/72/4/1235/43803079/haaa071.pdf.url: https://doi.org/10.1093/qmath/haaa071

work page doi:10.1093/qmath/haaa071 2021

[2] [2]

J. K. Beem, P. E. Ehrlich, and K. Easley.Global Lorentzian geometry. 2nd. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 1996

work page 1996

[3] [3]

Smoothness of Time Functions and the Met- ric Splitting of Globally Hyperbolic Spacetimes

Antonio N. Bernal and Miguel Sánchez. “Smoothness of Time Functions and the Met- ric Splitting of Globally Hyperbolic Spacetimes”. In:Communications in Mathematical Physics257.1 (Apr. 2005), pp. 43–50.issn: 1432-0916.doi:10.1007/s00220-005-1346- 1.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-005-1346-1

work page doi:10.1007/s00220-005-1346- 2005

[4] [4]

Lyapounov functions of closed cone fields from Conley theory to time functions

P. Bernard and S. Suhr. “Lyapounov functions of closed cone fields from Conley theory to time functions”. In:Comm. Math. Phys.359.2 (2018), pp. 467–498

work page 2018

[5] [5]

Convex optimization

S. Boyd and L. Vandenberge. “Convex optimization”. In:Cambridge university press (2009)

work page 2009

[6] [6]

Time functions on Lorentzian length spaces

A. Burtscher and L. Garcia-Heveling. “Time functions on Lorentzian length spaces”. In: Annales Henri Poincaré(2024)

work page 2024

[7] [7]

H.Busemann.Timelike spaces.Warszawa:InstytutMatematycznyPolskiejAkademiNauk, 1967.url:http://eudml.org/doc/268386

work page 1967

[8] [8]

Candel and Conlon L.Foliations I

A. Candel and Conlon L.Foliations I. American Mathematical Society, 2000

work page 2000