Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.00422 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- Three decades ago, Ted Jacobson surprised us with a very appealing approach to classical gravity. According to him, the gravitational field equations are the consequence of the first law of thermodynamics applied to a Rindler observer. Jacobson's approach being formulated for Riemannian geometries, we have wondered what its consequences would be for non-Riemannian geometries. The results of our quest have been particularly appealing: we have found that the theory that derives from the Einstein-Hilbert action, arguably ``the simplest one'', does not belong to the pool of gravitational theories available for Nature's selection (except in the Riemannian case). In the search of a unique alternative, we have considered the hypotheses employed in the formulation of the Lanczos-Lovelock theories of gravity. Together, the two approaches point towards the theory that derives from the Einstein-Hilbert action plus a term quadratic in the torsion vector as the one that would be selected by Nature in the non-Riemannian case without non metricity (when the energy-momentum tensor is identified as its metric version). The same strategy cannot be followed in the full non-Riemannian case (and in the previous case when the energy-momentum tensor is identified as its canonical version) as the two approaches are mutually inconsistent.