Skip to main content
Physics

Return to Question

replaced http://physics.stackexchange.com/ with https://physics.stackexchange.com/
Source Link
Community Bot
Community Bot
  • 1

The answer to this questionthis question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?

The answer to this question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?

The answer to this question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?

deleted 78 characters in body
Source Link
Qmechanic ♦
Qmechanic ♦
  • 213.1k
  • 48
  • 590
  • 2.3k

The answer to this questionthis question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paperthis paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?

The answer to this question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?

The answer to this question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?

Source Link
user3730940
user3730940
  • 21
  • 1

Rigorous Proof of General Relativity's Non-renormalizability?

The answer to this question and the comments on it implies that general relativity has not been rigorously shown to be non-renormalizable for all loop diagrams -- only shown for two loops. However, doesn't this paper give a complete proof that GR is non-renormalizable without referring to the two-loop computation mentioned in the question's answer?