dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-20T14:07:03Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-05T15:01:13Z
dc.date.available2014-05-20T14:07:03Z
dc.date.available2022-10-05T15:01:13Z
dc.date.created2014-05-20T14:07:03Z
dc.date.issued2006-01-30
dc.identifierInternational Journal of Modern Physics A. Singapore: World Scientific Publ Co Pte Ltd, v. 21, n. 3, p. 559-573, 2006.
dc.identifier0217-751X
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/23555
dc.identifier10.1142/S0217751X06025511
dc.identifierWOS:000236289000009
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3896892
dc.description.abstractThe addition of a topologically massive term to an admittedly nonunitary three-dimensional massive model, be it an electromagnetic system or a gravitational one, does not cure its nonunitarity. What about the enlargement of avowedly unitary massive models by way of a topologically massive term? the electromagnetic models remain unitary after the topological augmentation but, surprisingly enough, the gravitational ones have their unitarity spoiled. Here we analyze these issues and present the explanation why unitary massive gravitational models, unlike unitary massive electromagnetic ones, cannot coexist from the viewpoint of unitarity with topologically massive terms. We also discuss the novel features of the three-term effective field models that are gauge-invariant.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherWorld Scientific Publ Co Pte Ltd
dc.relationInternational Journal of Modern Physics A
dc.relation1.291
dc.rightsAcesso restrito
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjecttopologically massive models
dc.subjectmassive electromagnetic models
dc.subjectmassive gravitational models
dc.subjectunitarity
dc.subjecteffective field models
dc.titleIs it physically sound to add a topologically massive term to three-dimensional massive electromagnetic or gravitational models?
dc.typeArtigo


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución