MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136643720 · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/abf1c9

Canonical Noether and the energy–momentum non-uniqueness problem in linearized gravity

2021· article· en· W3136643720 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Robert Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoether's theoremPhysicsSuperpotentialMathematical physicsStress–energy tensorTensor (intrinsic definition)Symmetric tensorUniquenessClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsExact solutions in general relativitySupersymmetryMathematical analysisMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent research has highlighted the non-uniqueness problem of energy–momentum tensors in linearized gravity; many different tensors are published in the literature, yet for particular calculations a unique expression is required. It has been shown that (A) none of these spin-2 energy–momentum tensors are gauge invariant and (B) the Noether and Hilbert energy–momentum tensors are not, in general, equivalent; therefore uniqueness criteria is difficult to specify. Conventional wisdom states that the various published energy–momentum tensors for linearized gravity can be derived from the canonical Noether energy–momentum tensor of spin-2 Fierz-Pauli theory by adding ad-hoc ‘improvement’ terms (the divergence of a superpotential and terms proportional to the equations of motion), that these superpotentials are in some way unique or physically significant, and that this implies some meaningful connection to the Noether procedure. To explore this question of uniqueness, we consider the most general possible energy–momentum tensor for linearized gravity with free coefficients using the Fock method. We express this most general energy–momentum tensor as the canonical Noether tensor, supplemented by the divergence of a general superpotential plus all possible terms proportional to the equations of motion. We then derive systems of equations which we solve in order to prove several key results for spin-2 Fierz–Pauli theory, most notably that there are infinitely many conserved energy–momentum tensors derivable from the ‘improvement’ method, and there are infinitely many conserved symmetric energy–momentum tensors that follow from specifying the Belinfante superpotential alone. This disproves several recent claims that the Belinfante tensor is uniquely associated to the Hilbert tensor in spin-2 Fierz–Pauli theory. We give two new energy–momentum tensors of this form. Most importantly, since there are infinitely many energy–momentum tensors of this form, no meaningful or unique connection to Noether’s first theorem can be claimed by application of the canonical Noether ‘improvement’ method.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207