<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Dynamical and Hamiltonian formulation of General Relativity · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1505.01403/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1505.01403/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Dynamical and Hamiltonian formulation of General Relativity — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20327214</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1505.01403:20327214</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 16:49:03 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, all true, but we have the Hamiltonian formulation (e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.01403 which is a nice book chapter) which “… is also the starting point for the canonical quantization program, which constitutes one main approach to the as yet unsolved problems of Quantum Gravity. In this approach one tries to make essential use of the Hamiltonian structure of the classical theory in formulating the corresponding quantum theory.” From there you could jump to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_quantum_gravity which has references.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1505.01403/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item><item><title>Dynamical and Hamiltonian formulation of General Relativity — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17421503</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1505.01403:17421503</guid><pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:19:36 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Even though your two-link reply seems like an obvious &amp;quot;I don&amp;#x27;t want to talk any more&amp;quot;, I&amp;#x27;ll leave you with three things. Firstly, there is nothing special about natural units compared to any other system of units, except that some popular formulae can take on especially simple forms in that system of units, provided one takes care not to lose dimensionality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_analysis You (still) are confusing two different dimensions, length and time. Again, this matters in a spacetime like ours, where the difference in dimensionality gives us a system of causality[1]…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1505.01403/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item></channel></rss>
