- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Quantizability of Lorentz-violating field theories with singular Hamiltonians

Md Saif* and Sandeep Aashish†

  • *Contact author: saif_2421ph04@iitp.ac.in
  • †Contact author: aashish@iitp.ac.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 085023 – Published 22 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/lhzh-wpk9

Abstract

Spontaneous Lorentz-violating models of an antisymmetric tensor field are known to possess a singular Hamiltonian on the vacuum manifold, leading to unresolvable pathologies that render such theories unfit for cosmological studies. In this work, we introduce an auxiliary vector field inspired by the Stückelberg mechanism to investigate whether this resolves the fundamental phase space singularities. The total Hamiltonian is found to be globally ill defined. For completeness, in an effective field theoretic sense where the phase space is restricted to near the vacuum manifold of Lorentz-violating models, we derive the singularity conditions near the vacuum manifold for an explicit model and find that the resulting constraint matrix acquires an explicit dependence on the gradients and conjugate momenta of the Stückelberg field components that can still lead to a singular Hamiltonian.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (61)

  1. Don Colladay and V. Alan Kostelecky, CPT violation and the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 55, 6760 (1997).
  2. V. Alan Kostelecky, Lorentz violating and CPT violating extension of the standard model, in 2nd International Conference Physics Beyond the Standard Model: Beyond the Desert 99: Accelerator, Nonaccelerator and Space Approaches (1999), p. 151.
  3. V. Alan Kostelecky and Stuart Samuel, Spontaneous breaking of Lorentz symmetry in string theory, Phys. Rev. D 39, 683 (1989).
  4. K. Bardakci, Spontaneous symmetry breakdown in the standard dual string model, Nucl. Phys. B133, 297 (1978).
  5. K. Bardakci, Dual models and spontaneous symmetry breaking, Nucl. Phys. B68, 331 (1974).
  6. V. Alan Kostelecky and Matthew Mewes, Signals for Lorentz violation in electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 66, 056005 (2002).
  7. V. Alan Kostelecky, Gravity, Lorentz violation, and the Standard Model, Phys. Rev. D 69, 105009 (2004).
  8. Michael D. Seifert, Generalized bumblebee models and Lorentz-violating electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 81, 065010 (2010).
  9. Robert Bluhm, Shu-Hong Fung, and V. Alan Kostelecky, Spontaneous Lorentz and diffeomorphism violation, massive modes, and gravity, Phys. Rev. D 77, 065020 (2008).
  10. Carlos A. Hernaski, Spontaneous breaking of Lorentz symmetry with an antisymmetric tensor, Phys. Rev. D 94, 105004 (2016).
  11. V. Alan Kostelecky and Robertus Potting, Gravity from spontaneous Lorentz violation, Phys. Rev. D 79, 065018 (2009).
  12. Quentin G. Bailey and V. Alan Kostelecky, Signals for Lorentz violation in post-Newtonian gravity, Phys. Rev. D 74, 045001 (2006).
  13. Michael D. Seifert, Stability of spherically symmetric solutions in modified theories of gravity, Phys. Rev. D 76, 064002 (2007).
  14. Xiaofang Liu, Wentao Liu, Zhilong Liu, and Jieci Wang, Harvesting correlations from BTZ black hole coupled to a Lorentz-violating vector field, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2025) 094.
  15. V. Alan Kostelecký, Gravity, Lorentz violation, and the standard model, Living Rev. Relativity 8, 71 (2005).
  16. Michael Kalb and Pierre Ramond, Classical direct interstring action, Phys. Rev. D 9, 2273 (1974).
  17. E. S. Fradkin and Arkady A. Tseytlin, Effective field theory from quantized strings, Phys. Lett. B 158, 316 (1985).
  18. Curtis G. Callan, Jr., E. J. Martinec, M. J. Perry, and D. Friedan, Strings in background fields, Nucl. Phys. B262, 593 (1985).
  19. M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, Pre—big bang in string cosmology, Astropart. Phys. 1, 317 (1993).
  20. Sandeep Aashish and Sukanta Panda, On the quantum equivalence of an antisymmetric tensor field with spontaneous Lorentz violation, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 35, 2050087 (2020).
  21. Sandeep Aashish and Sukanta Panda, Quantum aspects of antisymmetric tensor field with spontaneous Lorentz violation, Phys. Rev. D 100, 065010 (2019).
  22. P. Van Nieuwenhuizen, On ghost-free tensor Lagrangians and linearized gravitation, Nucl. Phys. B60, 478 (1973).
  23. Sandeep Aashish, Abhilash Padhy, and Sukanta Panda, Avoiding instabilities in antisymmetric tensor field driven inflation, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 784 (2019).
  24. Abhijith Ajith and Sukanta Panda, Inflation using a triplet of antisymmetric tensor fields, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 770 (2023).
  25. Brett Altschul, Quentin G. Bailey, and V. Alan Kostelecky, Lorentz violation with an antisymmetric tensor, Phys. Rev. D 81, 065028 (2010).
  26. J. F. Assunção, T. Mariz, J. R. Nascimento, and A. Yu. Petrov, Dynamical Lorentz symmetry breaking in a tensor bumblebee model, Phys. Rev. D 100, 085009 (2019).
  27. Sandeep Aashish, Abhilash Padhy, Sukanta Panda, and Arun Rana, Inflation with an antisymmetric tensor field, Springer Proc. Phys. 261, 367 (2021).
  28. Michael D. Seifert, Singular Hamiltonians in models with spontaneous Lorentz symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D 100, 065017 (2019).
  29. Michael D. Seifert, Constraints and degrees of freedom in Lorentz-violating field theories, Phys. Rev. D 99, 045003 (2019).
  30. Robertus Potting, Stable Lorentz-breaking model for an antisymmetric two-tensor, Phys. Rev. D 110, 045014 (2024).
  31. E. C. G. Stueckelberg, Interaction forces in electrodynamics and in the field theory of nuclear forces, Helv. Phys. Acta 11, 299 (1938).10.5169/seals-110855
  32. E. C. G. Stueckelberg, Interaction energy in electrodynamics and in the field theory of nuclear forces, Helv. Phys. Acta 11, 225 (1938). 10.5169/seals-110852
  33. H. Ruegg and M. Ruiz-Altaba, The Stueckelberg field, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 19, 3265 (2004).
  34. I. L. Buchbinder, E. N. Kirillova, and N. G. Pletnev, Quantum equivalence of massive antisymmetric tensor field models in curved space, Phys. Rev. D 78, 084024 (2008).
  35. Kurt Hinterbichler, Theoretical aspects of massive gravity, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 671 (2012).
  36. T. R. Govindarajan, Stueckelberg field and Cosmology, in 17th Marcel Grossmann Meeting: On Recent Developments in Theoretical and Experimental General Relativity, Gravitation, and Relativistic Field Theories (2025).
  37. L. D. Faddeev and V. N. Popov, Feynman diagrams for the Yang-Mills field, Phys. Lett. B 25, 29 (1967).
  38. Michael E. Peskin and Daniel V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory (Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995).
  39. Robert Bluhm, Nolan L. Gagne, Robertus Potting, and Arturs Vrublevskis, Constraints and stability in vector theories with spontaneous Lorentz violation, Phys. Rev. D 77, 125007 (2008); 79, 029902(E) (2009).
  40. P. A. M. Dirac, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics (Yeshiva University, New York, 1964).
  41. J. A. Isenberg and J. M. Nester, The effect of gravitational interaction on classical fields: A Hamilton-Dirac Analysis, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 107, 56 (1977).
  42. J. David Brown, Singular Lagrangians and the Dirac–Bergmann algorithm in classical mechanics, Am. J. Phys. 91, 214 (2023).
  43. David Garfinkle, James Isenberg, and Jose M. Martin-Garcia, On the constraint equations in Einstein-aether theories and the weak gravitational field limit, Phys. Rev. D 86, 084009 (2012).
  44. Andrés Lueiza-Colipí, Andronikos Paliathanasis, and Nikolaos Dimakis, Dirac–Bergmann algorithm and canonical quantization of k-essence cosmology, Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 279 (2026).
  45. C. Grosse-Knetter and R. Kögerler, Unitary gauge, Stückelberg formalism, and gauge-invariant models for effective Lagrangians, Phys. Rev. D 48, 2865 (1993).
  46. I. L. Buchbinder, G. de Berredo-Peixoto, and I. L. Shapiro, Quantum effects in softly broken gauge theories in curved space–times, Phys. Lett. B 649, 454 (2007).
  47. A. O. Barvinsky and G. A. Vilkovisky, The generalized Schwinger-Dewitt technique in gauge theories and quantum gravity, Phys. Rep. 119, 1 (1985).
  48. I. A. Batalin and E. S. Fradkin, A generalized canonical formalism and quantization of reducible gauge theories, Phys. Lett. 122B, 157 (1983).
  49. I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, Quantization of gauge theories with linearly dependent generators, Phys. Rev. D 28, 2567 (1983).
  50. Sandeep Aashish and Sukanta Panda, Covariant effective action for an antisymmetric tensor field, Phys. Rev. D 97, 125005 (2018).
  51. R. V. Maluf and Juliano C. S. Neves, Bianchi type I cosmology with a Kalb–Ramond background field, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 135 (2022).
  52. L. A. Lessa, J. E. G. Silva, R. V. Maluf, and C. A. S. Almeida, Modified black hole solution with a background Kalb–Ramond field, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 335 (2020).
  53. Farruh Atamurotov, Dilmurod Ortiqboev, Ahmadjon Abdujabbarov, and G. Mustafa, Particle dynamics and gravitational weak lensing around black hole in the Kalb–Ramond gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 659 (2022).
  54. Ednaldo L. B. Junior, José Tarciso S. S. Junior, Francisco S. N. Lobo, Manuel E. Rodrigues, Diego Rubiera-Garcia, Luís F. Dias da Silva, and Henrique A. Vieira, Gravitational lensing of a Schwarzschild-like black hole in Kalb–Ramond gravity, Phys. Rev. D 110, 024077 (2024).
  55. Richard P. Woodard, Ostrogradsky’s theorem on Hamiltonian instability, Scholarpedia 10, 32243 (2015).
  56. John F. Donoghue and Gabriel Menezes, Ostrogradsky instability can be overcome by quantum physics, Phys. Rev. D 104, 045010 (2021).
  57. A. Pais and G. E. Uhlenbeck, On field theories with nonlocalized action, Phys. Rev. 79, 145 (1950).
  58. Wolfram Research, Inc, Mathematica, Version 14.1, Champaign, IL, 2024.
  59. Michael D. Seifert, A monopole solution in a Lorentz-violating field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 201601 (2010).
  60. Michael D. Seifert, Dynamical Lorentz symmetry breaking and topological defects, Phys. Rev. D 82, 125015 (2010).
  61. https://github.com/gomdsaif/Hamiltonian_Constraint_Analysis.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 085023– Published 22 October, 2026
  • Received 25 July 2026
  • Accepted 23 September 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2026 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation