Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Geometric-Field Formulation of Relativistic Phenomena in Cosmic Energy Inversion CEIT Theory

Submitted:

11 September 2025

Posted:

15 September 2025

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
This study investigates a fundamental revision of relativistic phenomena, including time dilation and mass increase, within the framework of the Cosmic Energy Inversion Theory (CEIT-v2). In contrast to the conventional interpretation of special relativity, which attributes these effects solely to spacetime geometry, the new theory explains these phenomena as dynamic responses to the dynamic energy field ℰ and its spatial gradients. The findings indicate that time dilation depends not only on relative velocity but also on the strength of the local energy field, and similarly, relativistic mass variations are influenced by energy field gradients. This theoretical framework maintains full consistency with established experimental results of relativity while offering novel predictions for empirical testing. It enables a unified explanation of phenomena ranging from fundamental particles to cosmology. The results of this study open new horizons for the unification of fundamental physics and a deeper understanding of the nature of spacetime.
Keywords: 
Cosmic Energy Inversion Theory
;  
spacetime torsion
;  
energy gradients
;  
modified relativity
;  
Lorentz Invariance Violation
;  
Ehresmann-Cartan Geometry
;  
primordial energy field
;  
dynamic mass variation
Subject: 
Physical Sciences  -   Astronomy and Astrophysics

Introduction

Phenomena such as time dilation and relativistic mass increase, formulated within the framework of special relativity, are among the most fundamental concepts in modern physics and have been confirmed in countless experiments with remarkable precision. However, the interpretation of these phenomena has consistently been viewed as purely geometric consequences of motion in a flat Minkowski spacetime. The Cosmic Energy Inversion Theory (CEIT-v2) proposes a novel conceptual framework, suggesting that these effects can be reinterpreted as dynamic interactions between matter and an inhomogeneous primordial energy field, referred to as the \mathcal{E}-field. Within this paradigm, intrinsic properties of particles, including their rest mass, are not fixed quantities but rather environment-dependent variables determined by the local value of this energy field. This new perspective necessitates a fundamental reconsideration of the roots of relativistic phenomena. According to CEIT-v2, time dilation does not depend solely on the relative velocity of the observer but is also influenced by the strength of the local energy field and its spatial gradients. Similarly, relativistic mass increase is not only a function of velocity but also a function of the rate of change of the \mathcal{E}-field along the particle's trajectory. This dynamic energy field, itself described by a nonlinear partial differential equation with quantum source terms, imparts a new structure to spacetime that, on macroscopic scales, can explain observable gravitational effects—including phenomena typically attributed to dark matter—without requiring the postulate of invisible matter. This section of the paper is dedicated to the precise mathematical formulation and development of the governing equations for time dilation and relativistic mass variations within the CEIT-v2 framework. We will demonstrate how, by generalizing the particle Lagrangian and considering their direct coupling to the \mathcal{E}-field and its gradient, modified equations of motion can be derived that reduce to the standard results of special relativity in the limit of a homogeneous and constant field. Furthermore, we will examine the implications of this new formulation, including the local violation of Lorentz invariance in regions with strong energy field gradients, as well as its testable predictions for high-precision experiments. This examination not only tests the internal consistency of the theory but also opens new pathways for exploration in fundamental physics and observational cosmology.

Methodology

The foundational framework of Cosmic Energy Inversion Theory version 2 (CEIT-v2) reinterprets the nature of spacetime, mass, and time through the lens of a dynamic, primordial energy field E ( x μ ) . This field is not a static background but an active participant in physical processes, whose spatial and temporal variations generate spacetime torsion T μ ν α , which in turn governs the inertial and gravitational behavior of matter. The theory is built upon the mathematical structure of Ehresmann-Cartan geometry, which naturally incorporates torsion as a geometric entity sourced by energy-momentum distributions. Within this framework, the apparent phenomena of time dilation and relativistic mass increase are not solely consequences of kinematic geometry, as in Special Relativity, but emerge from dynamic interactions between particles and the inhomogeneous E -field. The coupling between matter and the energy field is encoded in the fundamental relation between the effective mass of a particle and the local expectation value of E . This is expressed by the Yukawa-type interaction term in the matter Lagrangian:
L mass = ∑ i   y i E ψ ‾ i ψ i ,
where y i is the coupling constant for particle species i , ψ i its Dirac field, and ⟨ E ⟩ denotes the expectation value of the energy field. This directly implies that the rest mass of a particle is not an immutable property but a function of its local energetic environment: m 0 , i = y i ⟨ E ⟩ . Consequently, spatial or temporal variations in E will induce corresponding variations in the inertial mass of particles. This foundational principle necessitates a revision of the laws of motion in environments with strong energy field gradients. The dynamics of the energy field itself are governed by a nonlinear, diffusion-like equation with source terms derived from quantum gravitational corrections and matter couplings:
∂ E ∂ t = D ∇ 2 E − κ s E ( ∇ E ) 2 + Γ BH E prim + α ∇ 2 B 2 .
Here, D is a diffusion coefficient quantifying the field's tendency to homogenize, the κ s term introduces nonlinear self-interaction suppressing large gradients, Γ BH governs energy injection from primordial black hole evaporation, and the final term couples the field to electromagnetic energy densities. The solution to this equation, E ( x μ ) , provides the background upon which all particle dynamics unfold. Its gradient, ∇ E , defines a preferred directional structure in spacetime, breaking strict Lorentz invariance locally while preserving it globally on cosmological scales. To derive the modified relativistic laws, we consider the action of a massive particle moving through this inhomogeneous field. The action integral must be modified to include interaction terms with the gradient of E . The resulting equation of motion for a test particle is found by applying the principle of least action to the Lagrangian:
L = − m ( E ) c 2 1 − v 2 c 2 + β m 0 c 2 ( ∇ μ E ) u μ ,
where u μ is the particle's four-velocity and β is a dimensionless coupling constant. The first term is the standard relativistic Lagrangian with a variable mass, while the second represents a new interaction between the particle's velocity and the energy field gradient. Variation of this action leads to a modified geodesic equation containing an extra force term proportional to ∇ E . The generalized expression for time dilation in a frame moving with velocity v relative to the local E -field background is derived by considering the phase of the particle's quantum wavefunction. The rate of clock ticks is tied to the Compton frequency ω C = m ( E ) c 2 / ℏ . In a region where E and hence m is larger, the Compton frequency is higher, and proper time τ flows more slowly relative to coordinate time t . The modified time dilation formula becomes:
d τ d t = 1 − v 2 c 2 ⋅ 1 + γ E − E 0 E 0 − 1 ,
where γ is a parameter of order unity, and E 0 is a reference field value. This equation indicates that time dilation has two independent sources: the relative velocity v (the kinematic effect) and the deviation of the local energy field from its reference value (the environmental effect). In the limit of a homogeneous field ( E = E 0 ), the standard result of Special Relativity is recovered. Similarly, the effective relativistic mass of a particle moving through a gradient in E acquires a dependence on both its velocity and the local field environment. The generalized expression is obtained from the time-time component of the stress-energy tensor derived from the modified Lagrangian:
m rel = m 0 1 − v 2 c 2 ⋅ 1 + λ ‖ ∇ E ‖ ⋅ v c E 0 .
The first factor is the familiar Lorentz transformation for mass. The second factor is new and represents a coupling between the particle's speed and the magnitude of the energy field gradient in the direction of motion. The dimensionless parameter λ must be determined experimentally. This implies that achieving a given acceleration a → in a region of high ‖ ∇ E ‖ requires more force than would be predicted by Special Relativity alone, as the particle is effectively "climbing" a potential hill in the energy landscape. The energy required to accelerate a particle from rest to velocity v in an inhomogeneous E -field is found by integrating the work done against the inertial forces, including the new torsion-induced term. The total kinetic energy T is given by:
T = ∫   F → ⋅ d x → = m rel c 2 − m 0 c 2 + β m 0 c 2 ∫   ( ∇ E ) ⋅ d x → .
The first term is the standard relativistic kinetic energy. The second term is a path-dependent potential energy contribution arising from the change in the energy field along the particle's trajectory. This signifies that the energy cost of motion is not purely kinetic but also depends on the topography of the cosmic energy field through which the particle moves. The consistency of this formulation with the classical limit and with gravitational phenomena is ensured by deriving the non-relativistic equation of motion from the generalized geodesic equation. In the low-velocity, weak-field limit, the acceleration of a test particle reduces to:
a → = − ∇ Φ − β c 2 E 0 ∇ E ,
where Φ is the gravitational potential. The second term represents a universal, acceleration-like effect driven by gradients in E . This term is responsible for mimicking dark matter effects in galactic rotation curves without postulating invisible matter, as the term ∝ ∇ E provides the extra force needed to bind stars at large galactic radii. Finally, the local Lorentz invariance is examined within this framework. While global Lorentz symmetry is preserved, local invariance is broken in regions of significant ∇ E . The degree of violation is governed by the ratio ‖ ∇ E ‖ / E 0 , which is typically very small on laboratory scales but can become significant in astrophysical contexts like near galactic centers or in interstellar space. This offers a potential pathway for experimental tests of the theory, as precision measurements of Lorentz symmetry violation could constrain the parameters β , γ , and λ , and map the distribution of the cosmic energy field E across the galaxy.

Discussion and Conclusion

This study has established a novel theoretical framework within Cosmic Energy Inversion Theory (CEIT-v2) that fundamentally reinterprets relativistic phenomena through dynamic interactions with a primordial energy field. The derivation of modified equations for time dilation and relativistic mass variation demonstrates that these effects depend not only on relative velocity but also on local energy field strength and its spatial gradients. This represents a significant departure from conventional geometric interpretations of relativity while remaining fully consistent with established experimental constraints. The mathematical formulation reveals several profound implications for fundamental physics. The coupling between relativistic effects and energy field gradients provides a natural mechanism for explaining observational anomalies in galactic dynamics without invoking dark matter. The additional terms in the equations of motion suggest that inertial properties emerge from interactions with the energy field rather than representing intrinsic particle characteristics. This environmental dependence of physical constants addresses long-standing questions about the nature of mass and time while maintaining compatibility with quantum field theory. Our results indicate that the proposed framework makes several testable predictions that could distinguish it from standard relativity. Precision measurements of time dilation using atomic clocks in varying gravitational potentials and energy densities could detect the predicted environmental dependence. Particle acceleration experiments might reveal subtle influences of energy field gradients on mass increase rates. Furthermore, the predicted violations of local Lorentz invariance in regions of strong field gradients offer compelling avenues for experimental investigation using advanced interferometric techniques. The theoretical implications extend beyond fundamental physics to practical applications in cosmology and precision navigation. The varying strength of the energy field across different cosmic environments could explain observed variations in fundamental constants and provide new insights into dark energy phenomenology. For technological applications, this environmental dependence would necessitate revisions to precision navigation systems and deep-space mission planning. While this framework shows considerable promise, several limitations warrant further investigation. The precise values of coupling parameters require determination through sophisticated experimental constraints. The quantum mechanical origins of the energy field and its relationship with vacuum energy deserve deeper theoretical exploration. Additionally, the complete integration of this framework with general relativity remains an important challenge for future work. In conclusion, CEIT-v2 provides a compelling reinterpretation of relativistic phenomena that successfully bridges quantum field theory, relativity, and cosmology. By attributing time dilation and mass variation to dynamic interactions with an energy field, this theory offers novel explanations for outstanding problems in modern physics while remaining grounded empirical principles. The framework opens new possibilities for experimental verification and theoretical unification that could fundamentally advance our understanding of space, time, and matter.

References

  1. Einstein, A. Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper. Annalen der Physik 1905, 17(10), 891–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Minkowski, H. Raum und Zeit. Physikalische Zeitschrift 1908, 9, 104–111. [Google Scholar]
  3. Cartan, E. Sur une généralisation de la notion de courbure de Riemann et les espaces à torsion. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences 1922, 174, 593–595. [Google Scholar]
  4. Hehl, F. W.; Von der Heyde, P.; Kerlick, G. D.; Nester, J. M. General relativity with spin and torsion: Foundations and prospects. Reviews of Modern Physics 1976, 48(3), 393–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Weinberg, S. Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity; John Wiley & Sons, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  6. Misner, C. W.; Thorne, K. S.; Wheeler, J. A. Gravitation; W. H. Freeman, 1973. [Google Scholar]
  7. Carroll, S. M. Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity; Addison Wesley, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  8. Penrose, R. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe; Jonathan Cape, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  9. Wald, R. M. General Relativity; University of Chicago Press, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  10. Hawking, S. W.; Ellis, G. F. R. The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time; Cambridge University Press, 1973. [Google Scholar]
  11. Weinberg, S. The Quantum Theory of Fields; Cambridge University Press, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  12. Peskin, M. E.; Schroeder, D. V. An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory; Addison-Wesley, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  13. Itzykson, C.; Zuber, J. B. Quantum Field Theory; McGraw-Hill, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ryder, L. H. Quantum Field Theory; Cambridge University Press, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  15. Bailin, D.; Love, A. Introduction to Gauge Field Theory; Institute of Physics Publishing, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  16. Ehresmann, C. Les connexions infinitésimales dans un espace fibré différentiable; Colloque de topologie, 1950; pp. 29–55. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kobayashi, S.; Nomizu, K. Foundations of Differential Geometry; Interscience Publishers, 1963. [Google Scholar]
  18. Spivak, M. Differential Geometry; Publish or Perish, 1979. [Google Scholar]
  19. Abraham, R.; Marsden, J. E. Foundations of Mechanics; Benjamin/Cummings, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  20. Arnold, V. I. Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics; Springer-Verlag, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  21. Goldstein, H.; Poole, C.; Safko, J. Classical Mechanics; Addison Wesley, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  22. Landau, L. D.; Lifshitz, E. M. The Classical Theory of Fields; Pergamon Press, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  23. Jackson, J. D. Classical Electrodynamics; John Wiley & Sons, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  24. Griffiths, D. J. Introduction to Electrodynamics; Cambridge University Press, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  25. French, A. P. Special Relativity; W. W. Norton & Company, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rindler, W. Introduction to Special Relativity; Oxford University Press, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  27. Taylor, E. F.; Wheeler, J. A. Spacetime Physics; W. H. Freeman, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  28. Møller, C. The Theory of Relativity; Oxford University Press, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  29. Sexl, R. U.; Urbantke, H. K. Relativity, Groups, Particles; Springer-Verlag, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  30. Will, C. M. The confrontation between general relativity and experiment. Living Reviews in Relativity 2014, 17(1), 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hafele, J. C.; Keating, R. E. Around-the-world atomic clocks: Predicted relativistic time gains. Science 1972, 177(4044), 166–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Pound, R. V.; Rebka, G. A., Jr. Apparent weight of photons. Physical Review Letters 1960, 4(7), 337–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ives, H. E.; Stilwell, G. R. An experimental study of the rate of a moving atomic clock. Journal of the Optical Society of America 1938, 28(7), 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kennedy, R. J.; Thorndike, E. M. Experimental establishment of the relativity of time. Physical Review 1932, 42(3), 400–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Michelson, A. A.; Morley, E. W. On the relative motion of the Earth and the luminiferous ether. American Journal of Science 1887, 34(203), 333–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lorentz, H. A. Electromagnetic phenomena in a system moving with any velocity smaller than that of light. Proceedings of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences 1904, 6, 809–831. [Google Scholar]
  37. Poincaré, H. Sur la dynamique de l'électron. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences 1905, 140, 1504–1508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dirac, P. A. M. The quantum theory of the electron. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 1928, 117(778), 610–624. [Google Scholar]
  39. Feynman, R. P. The theory of positrons. Physical Review 1949, 76(6), 749–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Schwinger, J. On quantum-electrodynamics and the magnetic moment of the electron. Physical Review 1948, 73(4), 416–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Tomonaga, S. I. On a relativistically invariant formulation of the quantum theory of wave fields. Progress of Theoretical Physics 1946, 1(2), 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Yang, C. N.; Mills, R. L. Conservation of isotopic spin and isotopic gauge invariance. Physical Review 1954, 96(1), 191–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Higgs, P. W. Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons. Physical Review Letters 1964, 13(16), 508–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Weinberg, S. A model of leptons. Physical Review Letters 1967, 19(21), 1264–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Glashow, S. L. Partial-symmetries of weak interactions. Nuclear Physics 1961, 22(4), 579–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Salam, A. Weak and electromagnetic interactions. In Proceedings of the 8th Nobel Symposium; 1968; pp. 367–377. [Google Scholar]
  47. Zwicky, F. Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln. Helvetica Physica Acta 1933, 6, 110–127. [Google Scholar]
  48. Rubin, V. C.; Ford, W. K., Jr. Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a spectroscopic survey of emission regions. Astrophysical Journal 1970, 159, 379–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Peebles, P. J. E. Principles of Physical Cosmology; Princeton University Press, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  50. Planck Collaboration. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astronomy & Astrophysics 2020, 641, A6. [Google Scholar]
  51. Riess, A. G.; et al. Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. Astronomical Journal 1998, 116(3), 1009–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Perlmutter, S.; et al. Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 high-redshift supernovae. Astrophysical Journal 1999, 517(2), 565–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Weinberg, S. The cosmological constant problem. Reviews of Modern Physics 1989, 61(1), 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Padmanabhan, T. Cosmological constant—the weight of the vacuum. Physics Reports 2003, 380(5-6), 235–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Clifton, T.; Ferreira, P. G.; Padilla, A.; Skordis, C. Modified gravity and cosmology. Physics Reports 2012, 513(1-3), 1–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sotiriou, T. P.; Faraoni, V. f(R) theories of gravity. Reviews of Modern Physics 2010, 82(1), 451–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. De Felice, A.; Tsujikawa, S. f(R) theories. Living Reviews in Relativity 2010, 13(1), 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Capozziello, S.; De Laurentis, M. Extended theories of gravity. Physics Reports 2011, 509(4-5), 167–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Nojiri, S.; Odintsov, S. D. Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: from F(R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models. Physics Reports 2011, 505(2-4), 59–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Brans, C.; Dicke, R. H. Mach's principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation. Physical Review 1961, 124(3), 925–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kaluza, T. Zum Unitätsproblem der Physik; Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1921; pp. 966–972. [Google Scholar]
  62. Klein, O. Quantentheorie und fünfdimensionale Relativitätstheorie. Zeitschrift für Physik 1926, 37(12), 895–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Green, M. B.; Schwarz, J. H.; Witten, E. Superstring Theory; Cambridge University Press, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  64. Polchinski, J. String Theory; Cambridge University Press, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  65. Randall, L.; Sundrum, R. Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension. Physical Review Letters 1999, 83(17), 3370–3373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Arkani-Hamed, N.; Dimopoulos, S.; Dvali, G. The hierarchy problem and new dimensions at a millimeter. Physics Letters B 1998, 429(3-4), 263–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Horava, P. Quantum gravity at a Lifshitz point. Physical Review D 2009, 79(8), 084008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Jacobson, T. Thermodynamics of spacetime: the Einstein equation of state. Physical Review Letters 1995, 75(7), 1260–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Verlinde, E. On the origin of gravity and the laws of Newton. Journal of High Energy Physics 2011, 2011(4), 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Padmanabhan, T. Thermodynamical aspects of gravity: new insights. Reports on Progress in Physics 2010, 73(4), 046901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Bekenstein, J. D. Black holes and entropy. Physical Review D 1973, 7(8), 2333–2346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hawking, S. W. Particle creation by black holes. Communications in Mathematical Physics 1975, 43(3), 199–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Unruh, W. G. Notes on black-hole evaporation. Physical Review D 1976, 14(4), 870–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Davies, P. C. W. Scalar production in Schwarzschild and Rindler metrics. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 1975, 8(4), 609–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Birrell, N. D.; Davies, P. C. W. Quantum Fields in Curved Space; Cambridge University Press, 1982. [Google Scholar]
  76. DeWitt, B. S. Quantum field theory in curved spacetime. Physics Reports 1975, 19(6), 295–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Fulling, S. A. Nonuniqueness of canonical field quantization in Riemannian space-time. Physical Review D 1973, 7(10), 2850–2862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Parker, L. Quantized fields and particle creation in expanding universes, I. Physical Review 1969, 183(5), 1057–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Kostelecký, V. A.; Samuel, S. Spontaneous breaking of Lorentz symmetry in string theory. Physical Review D 1989, 39(2), 683–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Mattingly, D. Modern tests of Lorentz invariance. Living Reviews in Relativity 2005, 8(1), 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Liberati, S. Tests of Lorentz invariance: a 2013 update. Classical and Quantum Gravity 2013, 30(13), 133001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Amelino-Camelia, G. Quantum-spacetime phenomenology. Living Reviews in Relativity 2013, 16(1), 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Hooft, G. T. Dimensional reduction in quantum gravity. arXiv preprint gr-qc/9310026 1993. [Google Scholar]
  84. Susskind, L. The world as a hologram. Journal of Mathematical Physics 1995, 36(11), 6377–6396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Maldacena, J. The large-N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 1999, 38(4), 1113–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Witten, E. Anti de Sitter space and holography. Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 1998, 2(2), 253–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Gubser, S. S.; Klebanov, I. R.; Polyakov, A. M. Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory. Physics Letters B 1998, 428(1-2), 105–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ryu, S.; Takayanagi, T. Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from the anti–de Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence. Physical Review Letters 2006, 96(18), 181602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Van Raamsdonk, M. Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement. General Relativity and Gravitation 2010, 42(10), 2323–2329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
bsky
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated