Ioan Oprea
May17-04, 08:06 PM
<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>Hello everyone!\n\nIn paper gr-qc/0210051 A. Mikovic claims that one can somehow insert\nthe volume operator in the Barrett-Crane vertex amplitude such that he\nobtains a spin network (eq. (37)). However he does not provide a proof\nof this. Also Oriti & Pfeiffer in gr-qc/0207041 say that this is true\n(eq. 3.17), but they don\'t prove this (because their approach is\ndifferent).\nCan anyone please give me a hint of how to prove this (or at least\ngive me some reference)?\n\nThank you!\n\ni.o.\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form"> View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>Hello everyone!
In paper http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0210051 A. Mikovic claims that one can somehow insert
the volume operator in the Barrett-Crane vertex amplitude such that he
obtains a spin network (eq. (37)). However he does not provide a proof
of this. Also Oriti & Pfeiffer in http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0207041 say that this is true
(eq. 3.17), but they don't prove this (because their approach is
different).
Can anyone please give me a hint of how to prove this (or at least
give me some reference)?
Thank you!
i.o.
In paper http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0210051 A. Mikovic claims that one can somehow insert
the volume operator in the Barrett-Crane vertex amplitude such that he
obtains a spin network (eq. (37)). However he does not provide a proof
of this. Also Oriti & Pfeiffer in http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0207041 say that this is true
(eq. 3.17), but they don't prove this (because their approach is
different).
Can anyone please give me a hint of how to prove this (or at least
give me some reference)?
Thank you!
i.o.