On the Constraint Algebra of Degenerate Relativity
Joseph D. Romano

TL;DR
This paper compares the constraint algebra of an alternative degenerate extension of general relativity with Ashtekar's original theory, classifying differences based on triad degeneracy and surface-forming properties.
Contribution
It explicitly evaluates the constraint algebra of a specific alternative theory and provides a classification of differences from Ashtekar's original degenerate extension.
Findings
When triad vectors are degenerate and surface-forming, secondary constraints are weaker.
If triad vectors are not surface-forming, the theories are equivalent at the secondary constraint level.
The classification depends on degeneracy and surface-forming properties of triad vectors.
Abstract
As shown by Ashtekar in the mid 80's, general relativity can be extended to incorporate degenerate metrics. This extension is not unique, however, as one can change the form of the hamiltonian constraints and obtain an {\it alternative} degenerate extension of general relativity that disagrees with Ashtekar's original theory when the triads vectors are degenerate. In this paper, the constraint algebra of a particular alternative theory is explicitly evaluated and compared with that of Ashtekar's original degenerate extension. A generic classification of the difference between the two theories is given in terms of the degeneracy and surface-forming properties of the triad vectors. (This classification is valid when the degeneracy and surface-forming properties of the triad vectors is the same everywhere in an open set about a point in space.) If the triad vectors are degenerate and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
