Talk:Self-dual Palatini action

Article has several issues:

1. It is not an encyclopedia article, it is the outline of a specific proof. 2. Scientific communications are often written with "we" or "I" in the derivation of a proof, but not encyclopedia articles. 3. From the history it is almost entirely the product of one editor. Some one needs to go over the proof to catch errors. 4. Explanation of the steps, their physical plausibility, and mathematically precise definitions, extremely important to ADM Formulation proofs. 5. Papers important to the derivation are not cited. (e.g. Jacobson & Smolin)

Or, in short, this reads like an unpubllished extrapolation of a proof, not an article. Article needs attention from experts still. Without pulling out the original papers, there is no way to verify the correctness of the proof and the presentation needs work.

Slight additions:

Added ref where results are proved and ref where results are stated. I haven't finished writing the article - thanks for the points you made, will help. By the way I've got a PhD in theoretical physics and I think the calculations of the proof are correct - Ibayn.

26/07/2014

Added new section. Give me a bit of time to format and ref properly. IBayn.

"Here we in particular fill in details of the proof of results for self-dual variables not given in text books." Wikipedia is not a textbook, nor your scratch book! The text is nowhere near being an encyclopedia article.134.160.214.17 (talk) 03:02, 4 July 2018 (UTC)