A Comparative Analysis of Classical and Quantum Worldviews: Geometry, Knowledge Graphs, and the Unifying Role of Topology

Co-developed by the Catalyzer Think Tank divergent thinking and Gemini Deep Research tool.

Introduction: Contrasting Worldviews and the Quest for Unification

The history of physics is marked by paradigm shifts that have fundamentally altered our understanding of the universe. Two of the most profound of these are the development of classical physics, which reigned supreme for centuries, and the emergence of quantum mechanics in the early 20th century. Classical physics, with its roots in Newtonian mechanics and its reliance on Euclidean geometry, provided an intuitive and remarkably successful framework for describing the macroscopic world. However, it faltered when confronted with phenomena at the atomic and subatomic scales, necessitating the development of quantum mechanics. This new theory introduced a radically different picture of reality, characterized by principles such as superposition, entanglement, and quantization, and hinting at the importance of non-Euclidean geometries in its formulation.

At the heart of these contrasting worldviews lie fundamental differences in their descriptions of space, time, causality, and energy. Classical physics envisions a deterministic universe unfolding against the backdrop of an absolute Euclidean space and time, where objects possess definite properties and interact through local forces. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, paints a probabilistic picture where particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously, exhibit non-local correlations, and possess quantized properties. The very fabric of space and time, as understood in classical physics, undergoes a transformation in the quantum realm, with non-Euclidean geometries like hyperbolic space emerging as potentially more suitable for describing quantum phenomena, particularly in the context of gravity.

In the modern era, the concept of knowledge graphs has gained prominence as a powerful tool for representing structured knowledge across various domains. Classical knowledge graphs, typically embedded in Euclidean space, have proven effective in capturing many types of relationships between entities. However, the complexities of knowledge, especially when dealing with uncertainty, hierarchical structures, and the potential for quantum-level information processing, might necessitate a shift towards quantum knowledge graphs residing in non-Euclidean spaces.

This report aims to bridge the conceptual gap between these classical and quantum worldviews by exploring the unifying power of homology and topology. These mathematical fields provide tools to analyze the fundamental structure and connectivity of spaces and networks, independent of their specific geometric embeddings. By examining classical knowledge graphs in Euclidean space and continuously learned quantum knowledge graphs in hyperbolic 3-manifolds through the lens of homology and topology, we seek to uncover underlying relationships and invariant properties. Furthermore, we will consider the implications of the Thurston geometrization conjecture, a deep result in the topology of 3-manifolds, for understanding the nature of the embedding spaces themselves and the potential connections between them. Our goal is to provide an expert-level analysis that illuminates the similarities and differences between these fundamental descriptions of reality and our knowledge within them.

The Classical Foundation: Euclidean Space and Observational Principles

2.1. Fundamental Principles of Classical Mechanics: Space, Time, Causality, and Energy
Classical mechanics, as the quantitative study of motion for macroscopic physical systems with mass, is fundamentally based on Newton’s Laws of Motion. These laws are typically expressed as second-order differential equations that govern the time evolution of vectors within a configuration space.1 In elementary settings, this configuration space is often considered to be the familiar three-dimensional Euclidean space, where the positions of point particles can be readily described.1 However, for more complex systems involving extended objects or constrained motions, classical mechanics can also utilize higher-dimensional and more abstract spaces, which may be differentiable manifolds mathematically.2
A cornerstone of classical mechanics is the set of three fundamental conservation principles: the conservation of energy, linear momentum, and angular momentum.4 These principles, which state that the total amount of each of these quantities remains constant in a closed system, are not merely empirical observations but are, in fact, profound consequences of certain fundamental spatial-temporal symmetries inherent in classical mechanical systems.5 This deep connection between symmetries and conservation laws can be rigorously demonstrated using the more advanced Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formulations of classical mechanics.2
Classical mechanics operates on the assumption that matter and energy possess definite and knowable attributes, such as a precise location in space and a specific speed at any given time.1 Furthermore, within the framework of non-relativistic classical mechanics, it is generally assumed that forces between objects act instantaneously, without any time delay, regardless of the distance separating them.1 This notion of instantaneous action at a distance simplifies many calculations but stands in contrast to the finite speed of light that governs interactions in relativistic theories.
The treatment of time in classical physics is also a key characteristic. Time is considered to be a universal quantity of measurement, flowing uniformly throughout all of space and entirely separate from it.7 Its rate of passage is assumed to be constant and independent of the observer’s state of motion or any external influences.7 This concept of absolute time, as Newton termed it, provides a fixed temporal backdrop against which all physical events unfold. Complementary to this is the assumption that the structure of space itself adheres to Euclidean geometry, the geometry of common sense, characterized by flatness and well-defined rules for distances and angles.1
Causality in the classical world operates in a linear and sequential manner, with a clear distinction between cause and effect, and a forward directionality dictated by the arrow of time.11 This mechanical causation, often likened to a chain reaction, is typically described by deterministic mathematical equations, allowing for the prediction of future states given sufficient knowledge of the past.11 While this model of causality works remarkably well for phenomena within our everyday experience, it encounters limitations when dealing with the inherent randomness observed at the quantum level.11
Finally, energy in classical mechanics is a fundamental concept associated with the state of a physical system. It is conserved in closed systems and can exist in various forms, primarily as kinetic energy, which is the energy of motion, and potential energy, which is energy associated with the position or configuration of an object.13 Energy can be transferred between these forms or exchanged with other systems through the action of work, which represents the energy added to or removed from a system by external forces.13
2.2. The Axiomatic Basis of Euclidean Geometry and its Physical Manifestations
Euclidean geometry, a mathematical system attributed to the ancient Greek mathematician Euclid, is detailed in his seminal work, the Elements.16 Euclid’s approach was to establish a small set of intuitively appealing axioms and postulates, from which a vast number of other propositions, or theorems, could be logically deduced.16 This axiomatic method provided a rigorous foundation for the understanding of geometric shapes and their properties.
The fundamental building blocks of Euclidean geometry are defined through these initial postulates. These include the ability to draw a unique straight line between any two points, to extend any finite straight line indefinitely in a straight line, and to describe a circle with any given center and radius.17 Another crucial postulate states that all right angles are equal to one another.17 Perhaps the most famous and consequential is the parallel postulate, which, in modern terms, asserts that for any line and a point not on that line, there is exactly one line passing through the point that is parallel to the given line.17 David Hilbert later refined these axioms, for instance, by explicitly stating the uniqueness of the line joining two points and the uniqueness of the parallel line.17
These axioms collectively define a space that is flat, meaning it has zero Gaussian curvature.18 A key consequence of the parallel postulate in Euclidean geometry is the uniqueness of parallel lines. Another defining property is that the sum of the interior angles of any triangle formed within this space is always precisely equal to 180 degrees.17 This familiar property distinguishes Euclidean geometry from non-Euclidean geometries, where the angle sum of a triangle can be greater than or less than 180 degrees.
Euclidean geometry has served as the fundamental mathematical framework for classical mechanics since its inception. It provides the essential concepts and tools necessary to describe spatial relationships, measure distances between objects, define angles and shapes, and mathematically formulate the motion of objects within a three-dimensional space that was long considered to be inherently Euclidean.1 The success of classical mechanics in explaining a wide range of macroscopic phenomena solidified the belief in the Euclidean nature of physical space.
2.3. Classical Knowledge Graphs: Structure and Representation in Euclidean Space
Classical knowledge graphs are structured representations of information that model knowledge as a network. This network consists of entities, which are the fundamental objects of interest, and relationships, which describe how these entities are connected. Typically, this information is represented in the form of triples, where each triple consists of a subject entity, a predicate (or relation), and an object entity.22 These triples can be visualized as a directed graph where entities are nodes and relationships are labeled edges connecting these nodes.22
Within the realm of classical knowledge representation and observational sciences, these knowledge graphs are frequently embedded into a continuous, low-dimensional Euclidean vector space.28 This process, known as knowledge graph embedding (KGE), aims to learn vector representations, or embeddings, for both the entities and the relationships present in the knowledge graph. The objective is to map these discrete elements into a continuous Euclidean space in such a way that their relative positions and orientations in this space capture and preserve the semantic relationships and underlying structural patterns that exist in the original graph.29
The rationale behind using Euclidean space for these embeddings is rooted in the classical understanding of space as fundamentally Euclidean. By representing knowledge graph elements as vectors in this space, researchers can leverage the well-established tools of vector algebra and distance metrics to analyze the relationships between entities. For instance, the proximity of the vector embeddings of two entities in the Euclidean space can be interpreted as a measure of their semantic similarity or relatedness.22 Various KGE models, such as translational models like TransE, bilinear models like ComplEx and DistMult, and neural network-based models, have been developed to learn these Euclidean embeddings and have shown success in tasks like link prediction, where the goal is to infer missing relationships between entities.22 Euclidean embeddings have proven particularly effective at capturing certain types of relationships, including chain-like structures and translational patterns, where the relationship can be modeled as a vector displacement in the embedding space.29 Scoring functions based on the intuitive Euclidean distance are commonly used to evaluate the plausibility of relational triples within this embedded space.22

The Quantum Revolution: Hyperbolic Geometry and Fundamental Quantum Concepts

3.1. Core Principles of Quantum Mechanics: Superposition, Entanglement, and Quantization
Quantum mechanics, which emerged in the early 20th century, provides a description of the physical world at the scale of atoms and subatomic particles that is fundamentally different from classical mechanics.36 It introduces principles that often contradict our everyday intuitions about how the universe should behave.
One of the most foundational principles of quantum mechanics is superposition.44 This principle states that a quantum system, such as an electron or a photon, can exist in a combination of multiple states or configurations simultaneously. Instead of being in one definite state (like a classical bit being either 0 or 1), a quantum system can be in a linear combination of all its possible states. This is mathematically described by a wave function, which assigns a complex number, called a probability amplitude, to each possible state.46 The square of the absolute value of this amplitude gives the probability of finding the system in that particular state when a measurement is performed. It is only upon measurement that the system “collapses” into one of the definite states, with the probability determined by the wave function.45 This ability of quantum systems to exist in multiple states at once is a key resource that underlies the potential power of quantum computation, allowing for quantum parallelism where multiple possibilities can be explored concurrently.45
Another remarkable principle of quantum mechanics is quantum entanglement.38 This phenomenon occurs when two or more quantum particles become correlated in such a way that their quantum states are linked together. This connection persists even when the particles are separated by large distances. The state of each particle in an entangled group cannot be described independently of the state of the others.52 A measurement performed on one entangled particle instantaneously affects the state of the other entangled particles, regardless of the distance between them.51 This strong correlation, which has no classical analogue, was famously referred to by Albert Einstein as “spooky action at a distance”.54 Entanglement is not only a fascinating aspect of quantum reality but also a crucial resource for various quantum technologies, including quantum communication, such as quantum key distribution, and quantum computing, where it enables the creation of complex quantum algorithms.38
The third core principle of quantum mechanics is quantization.40 This principle states that certain physical quantities, such as the energy of an electron in an atom, momentum, and angular momentum, can only exist in discrete, specific values, called quanta. These quantities cannot take on any arbitrary value within a continuous range, as is often assumed in classical physics.41 For example, the energy of a photon, a quantum of light, is directly proportional to its frequency (E = hf, where h is Planck’s constant), and can only exist in discrete packets of this size.58 This discreteness is a fundamental characteristic of the quantum world and is essential for understanding the stability of atoms, the emission and absorption of light, and many other phenomena at the microscopic level.60 The term “quantum” itself refers to this fact that many physical properties come in discrete amounts.56
3.2. Exploring Hyperbolic Geometry: A Non-Euclidean Foundation for Quantum Phenomena
Hyperbolic geometry is a type of non-Euclidean geometry that is characterized by a constant negative Gaussian curvature.18 This is in contrast to Euclidean geometry, which has zero curvature, and spherical geometry, which has positive curvature. Hyperbolic geometry arises from modifying one of the fundamental postulates of Euclidean geometry, specifically Euclid’s fifth postulate, also known as the parallel postulate.19 In Euclidean geometry, this postulate states that for a given line and a point not on it, there is exactly one line passing through the point that is parallel to the given line. Hyperbolic geometry, however, rejects this postulate and instead posits that for a given line and a point not on it, there are infinitely many lines passing through the point that do not intersect the given line; these are often referred to as ultraparallel lines.18
This fundamental difference in the parallel postulate leads to a number of properties in hyperbolic geometry that are quite counterintuitive from a Euclidean perspective.18 For instance, in hyperbolic geometry, the sum of the interior angles of a triangle is always less than 180 degrees, and this angle deficit is proportional to the area of the triangle.18 Furthermore, in hyperbolic space, the circumference and the area of a circle grow exponentially with its radius, in contrast to the linear and quadratic growth observed in Euclidean space.66 This exponential growth of space is a key property that makes hyperbolic geometry particularly well-suited for embedding hierarchical data structures, where the number of elements can increase exponentially with each level of the hierarchy.66
Mathematicians and physicists have developed various models to visualize and work with hyperbolic geometry, as it cannot be easily pictured using our Euclidean intuition.18 One prominent model is the Poincaré disk model, which maps the entire infinite hyperbolic plane onto the interior of a unit disk in the Euclidean plane. In this model, hyperbolic lines are represented by circular arcs that are perpendicular to the boundary of the disk.18 Another important model is the hyperboloid model, which embeds hyperbolic n-space as a hyperboloid in (n+1)-dimensional Minkowski space.35 These models, while introducing distortions in distances and angles when viewed from a Euclidean perspective, preserve certain crucial properties and allow for the application of familiar mathematical tools to study the intricacies of hyperbolic geometry.65 The existence and properties of these models demonstrate that hyperbolic geometry is a consistent and well-defined mathematical system, offering a non-Euclidean foundation that has found increasing relevance in various areas of physics, particularly in the context of quantum phenomena and the structure of spacetime.

Bridging the Divide: Quantum Mechanics in Hyperbolic Space

4.1. Theoretical Frameworks and Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Curved Spacetime
The formulation of quantum mechanics in curved spacetime, including the specific case of hyperbolic space, presents a significant challenge in theoretical physics.71 The standard formulation of quantum mechanics relies on the flat spacetime of Minkowski space, which is the arena of special relativity. Extending quantum principles to the curved spacetime described by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, where gravity is manifested as the curvature of spacetime, is a crucial step towards a unified theory of quantum gravity.
One of the central tools of quantum mechanics, the Schrödinger equation, which describes the time evolution of the wave function of a quantum system, needs to be adapted when considering curved spacetime.71 This adaptation involves modifying the Hamiltonian operator, which represents the total energy of the system. In curved space, the Hamiltonian includes additional terms that depend on the metric tensor, which encodes the curvature of the space, and its derivatives. The specific form of the Schrödinger equation in hyperbolic space has been explored, revealing that the behavior of quantum systems can differ significantly from that in flat Euclidean space.71 For instance, the energy levels of a hydrogen atom are affected by the curvature of the space.72
In standard quantum mechanics in flat space, plane waves serve as fundamental solutions to the Schrödinger equation, representing free particles with definite momentum. However, simple plane wave solutions do not exist in hyperbolic space due to its curvature.71 Instead, more complex wave functions, such as Shapiro plane waves, are required to describe particles with definite energy and momentum in this non-Euclidean geometry.71 These Shapiro waves have a form that depends on the hyperbolic distance and direction, reflecting the underlying geometry of the space.72
The concept of scattering length, a convenient measurable used in nuclear physics to describe low-energy interactions between particles, can also be extended to the framework of quantum mechanics in hyperbolic space.71 This extension provides a way to characterize the strength of interactions between quantum particles in a space with constant negative curvature.71 It has been shown that in the limit where the curvature of hyperbolic space approaches zero (i.e., it becomes flat Euclidean space), the expressions for quantum mechanical scattering in hyperbolic space transform back to the corresponding formulas in three-dimensional Euclidean space.71 This suggests a consistency between the two frameworks in the appropriate limit.
4.2. Connections to Quantum Gravity and High-Energy Physics
Hyperbolic geometry has emerged as a significant mathematical framework in various theoretical approaches aimed at understanding quantum gravity.70 One prominent example is the role of hyperbolic space in the context of Anti-de Sitter (AdS) space. AdS space is a maximally symmetric spacetime with a constant negative curvature, akin to the higher-dimensional analogue of hyperbolic space. It forms the basis of the AdS/CFT correspondence, a powerful conjecture in theoretical physics that posits a duality between a theory of quantum gravity in AdS space and a conformal field theory (a type of quantum field theory without a fundamental scale) living on the boundary of that AdS space.73 This holographic relationship suggests that the information about the quantum gravitational system in the bulk (AdS space) can be encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary with a structure related to hyperbolic geometry.73
In another approach to quantum gravity, loop quantum gravity (LQG), which attempts to quantize the gravitational field non-perturbatively, the mathematical framework sometimes involves quantum groups.74 These quantum groups can be seen as encoding a quantized version of hyperbolic geometry, particularly in formulations that include a non-zero cosmological constant, which is related to the curvature of spacetime.74 The use of quantum groups in LQG suggests that at the fundamental level, the geometry of quantum spacetime might be discrete and possess properties associated with hyperbolic geometry.74
Hyperbolic geometry also plays a role in the study of black holes, which are regions of spacetime where gravity becomes so intense that it warps the fabric of spacetime to an extreme degree.70 Certain theoretical spacetimes, such as anti-de Sitter spaces, which have hyperbolic properties, are invaluable for studying the quantum aspects of black holes, including their entropy and the implications of the holographic principle.73 By examining geodesics (the shortest paths between two points in a curved space) and event horizons within these hyperbolic frameworks, physicists aim to gain deeper insights into the fundamental nature of quantum gravity and the information paradox associated with black holes.73 The Poincaré disk model, a model of the hyperbolic plane, provides a concrete way to visualize how the infinite nature of hyperbolic space can be represented within finite boundaries, a concept that has parallels in the context of black hole event horizons.70

Homology and Topology: Invariants of Structure and Relationship

5.1. Fundamental Concepts of Homology and Topology in Mathematics
Topology is a branch of mathematics that studies the properties of geometric objects that remain unchanged under continuous deformations.76 These deformations include operations like stretching, twisting, bending, and shrinking, but exclude tearing or gluing.77 Often referred to as “rubber sheet geometry,” topology is concerned with the fundamental structure of objects, such as their connectedness and the presence of holes, rather than precise measurements like lengths or angles.77 Two objects are considered topologically equivalent, or homeomorphic, if one can be transformed into the other through such continuous deformations.78 For example, a coffee cup and a donut are topologically equivalent because one can be continuously deformed into the other without cutting or gluing, both having a single hole.76
Homology is a concept from algebraic topology that provides a systematic method for classifying topological spaces based on their “holes” of different dimensions.76 It does this by associating a sequence of algebraic objects, known as homology groups, to each topological space.76 The n-th homology group, denoted as Hn(X) for a space X, intuitively captures information about the n-dimensional holes in that space.76 For instance, H0(X) counts the number of connected components of X, representing zero-dimensional “holes” in the sense of separation.76 The first homology group, H1(X), describes the one-dimensional holes, or loops, that cannot be continuously shrunk to a point.76 Higher homology groups, Hn(X) for n≥2, capture the presence of higher-dimensional voids or cavities within the space.76
These homology groups are topological invariants, meaning that topologically equivalent spaces have isomorphic homology groups.76 The rank of these groups, known as the Betti numbers, provides a numerical measure of the number of independent n-dimensional holes in the space.84 Homology provides a powerful tool for distinguishing between topological spaces by transforming their geometric structure into algebraic structures that can be more readily analyzed and compared.84 The process involves constructing a chain complex associated with the topological space, defining boundary operators that relate elements of different dimensions, and then examining the kernels and images of these operators to define the homology groups as cycles modulo boundaries.85
5.2. Applications of Homology and Topology in Analyzing Complex Systems
The mathematical fields of homology and topology, particularly through the burgeoning area of Topological Data Analysis (TDA), have found a wide range of applications in the analysis of complex systems across diverse scientific and engineering disciplines.76 These methods are especially valuable for uncovering hidden, high-order structures and patterns within complex datasets that might be obscured by noise or high dimensionality.88 The focus on topological invariants, properties that remain stable under continuous deformations, allows for the extraction of robust features that are intrinsic to the underlying structure of the data.89
A central technique within TDA is persistent homology (PH).76 PH analyzes the evolution of topological features, such as connected components, loops, and voids, as a scale parameter is varied.89 Features that persist over a wide range of scales are considered more significant and robust, as they are less likely to be caused by noise or random fluctuations in the data.88 The results of persistent homology are often visualized as persistence diagrams, which plot the “birth” and “death” scales of these topological features.89 The persistence of a feature, often defined as the difference between its death and birth scales, serves as a measure of its robustness and importance.89
For graphs, which can be viewed as 1-dimensional simplicial complexes consisting of vertices (0-simplices) and edges (1-simplices), graph homology primarily focuses on the 0th homology group, which counts connected components, and the 1st homology group, which describes the cycles or loops in the graph.90 Persistent homology can be applied to graphs by defining appropriate filtration functions based on various properties of the graph, such as edge weights, node attributes, or distances between nodes.98 By analyzing the persistent homology of knowledge graphs, whether classical or quantum (if represented as graphs), we can gain insights into their fundamental structural properties, such as connectivity patterns and the presence of cycles, and how these properties evolve as the graph changes or as the scale of analysis varies.90

Knowledge in Curved Spaces: Quantum Knowledge Graphs in Hyperbolic 3-Manifolds

6.1. Theoretical Construction and Representation of Quantum Knowledge Graphs
The field of quantum knowledge graphs is an emerging area of research that explores the potential of using the principles of quantum mechanics for representing and reasoning with knowledge.23 This involves investigating how quantum states, such as qubits, and quantum operations can be employed to encode entities, relationships, and the logical structure of knowledge.
One promising approach to constructing quantum knowledge graphs draws inspiration from the theory of quantum logic.122 In this framework, predicates or concepts within the knowledge graph are represented as linear subspaces of a complex vector space. This representation allows for logical operations, such as negation, conjunction, and disjunction, to be performed directly on these vector subspaces, mirroring the operations in Boolean logic but with key differences arising from the non-distributive nature of quantum logic.122 This approach aims to embed the inherent logical structure of knowledge directly into the vector space representation, potentially enabling more sophisticated and nuanced forms of reasoning compared to classical statistical embedding methods that primarily focus on capturing semantic similarities.122
Another avenue of research focuses on leveraging quantum machine learning algorithms for tasks related to knowledge graphs, such as knowledge graph completion, which involves predicting missing relationships between entities.23 Given the potential for quantum algorithms to achieve speedups for certain computational tasks, particularly those involving large datasets and complex tensor operations, researchers are exploring how quantum resources can be used to accelerate the modeling and inference processes for knowledge graphs.23 For instance, quantum algorithms based on quantum singular value decomposition and projection have been proposed for modeling knowledge graphs, potentially offering exponential speedups compared to classical approaches in terms of the size of the knowledge graph.23
6.2. Implications of Quantum Principles for Knowledge Representation and Inference
The fundamental principles of quantum mechanics hold significant implications for how knowledge could be represented and how inferences could be made within a quantum framework. The principle of superposition, for example, could be utilized to represent entities or relationships that possess multiple possible states or interpretations simultaneously.45 This could be particularly useful for handling knowledge that is inherently uncertain, ambiguous, or context-dependent, allowing a quantum knowledge graph to maintain a richer and more nuanced representation of information compared to the binary, definite states of classical systems.
Quantum entanglement offers the potential to model complex, non-classical dependencies between different pieces of knowledge.51 Entangled quantum states exhibit correlations that go beyond what is possible in classical probability, allowing for the capture of intricate relationships and dependencies within the knowledge graph that might be difficult or impossible to represent using classical graph structures based on simple pairwise connections.52 This could enable the modeling of more holistic and interconnected knowledge systems.
Furthermore, quantum algorithms, which harness the power of superposition and entanglement, might provide more efficient and powerful mechanisms for performing inference and reasoning over knowledge graphs.123 The ability of quantum computers to explore multiple possibilities in parallel could lead to significant speedups in tasks like searching for information, identifying patterns, or deducing new knowledge from existing facts within the graph.123 Quantum algorithms might also be capable of detecting subtle relationships and identifying complex patterns within the knowledge graph that are computationally hard to uncover using classical methods.125 This suggests that quantum principles could lead to knowledge representation systems that are not only more expressive but also possess enhanced reasoning capabilities.
6.3. The Significance of Hyperbolic 3-Manifolds in Quantum Knowledge Architectures
The user’s query specifically mentions the embedding of continuously learned quantum knowledge graphs in hyperbolic 3-manifolds.130 A hyperbolic 3-manifold is a three-dimensional space that has a constant negative curvature, extending the concept of hyperbolic geometry from two dimensions to three.35
The choice of hyperbolic 3-manifolds as an embedding space for quantum knowledge graphs could be driven by several factors. As discussed earlier, hyperbolic spaces, including their higher-dimensional counterparts, are particularly well-suited for efficiently representing hierarchical data structures due to their exponential volume growth.66 Knowledge often exhibits a hierarchical organization, with broader concepts encompassing more specific ones, making hyperbolic spaces a natural fit for knowledge graph embeddings.66 Extending this to three dimensions with hyperbolic 3-manifolds might provide an even greater capacity to accommodate the complexity and depth of hierarchical relationships within a quantum knowledge graph.130 Furthermore, the added dimensionality of a 3-manifold compared to a 2-dimensional hyperbolic plane could offer more degrees of freedom to encode the intricate correlations and dependencies that might arise from quantum entanglement between different pieces of knowledge represented in the graph.
The topology of hyperbolic 3-manifolds is known to be rich and complex.130 A key feature characterizing the topology of these manifolds is their fundamental group, which is an algebraic object that encodes information about the loops within the space and its overall connectivity.130 The fundamental group captures how different paths can be deformed into one another, providing a deep insight into the topological structure of the manifold. In the context of embedding a quantum knowledge graph into a hyperbolic 3-manifold, the fundamental group of the manifold could potentially play a role in defining or constraining the relationships between the quantum entities and the way knowledge is organized within this curved space.130 The specific algebraic properties of the fundamental group might even be used to encode certain aspects of the quantum knowledge itself.

The Thurston Geometrization Conjecture: A Topological Framework for 3-Manifolds

7.1. Statement and Implications of the Thurston Geometrization Conjecture
The Thurston geometrization conjecture, a groundbreaking statement about the structure of three-dimensional manifolds, was proposed by William Thurston in the late 1970s and has since been proven by Grigori Perelman in the early 2000s.141 The conjecture states that every closed 3-manifold can be uniquely decomposed in a canonical way into pieces, and the interior of each of these pieces admits one of eight distinct types of geometric structure.142 These eight Thurston geometries are: Euclidean geometry (E3), spherical geometry (S3), hyperbolic geometry (H3), the geometry of S2×R, the geometry of H2×R, the geometry of the universal cover of the Lie group SL(2, R), Nil geometry, and Sol geometry.142
The decomposition process involves first taking the prime decomposition of the closed 3-manifold into irreducible components, which are those that cannot be non-trivially expressed as a connected sum.142 These prime manifolds are then further decomposed along essential tori (embedded tori whose fundamental group injects into the fundamental group of the 3-manifold and are not boundary-parallel) into pieces that are either Seifert fibered spaces or atoroidal manifolds (those that do not contain essential tori).142 The geometrization conjecture posits that the interior of each of these resulting atoroidal pieces should admit exactly one of the eight Thurston geometries with finite volume.142
The Thurston geometrization conjecture has profound implications for the field of 3-manifold topology. Notably, it implies several other important conjectures, including the famous Poincaré conjecture.141 The Poincaré conjecture, in its simplest form, states that every simply connected, closed 3-manifold is homeomorphic to the 3-sphere (S3).141 The fact that the geometrization conjecture encompasses and implies the truth of the Poincaré conjecture underscores its central and fundamental role in our understanding of the topology of three-dimensional spaces.141
7.2. Relevance to the Classification of 3-Manifolds and their Geometric Structures
The Thurston geometrization conjecture provides a powerful framework for classifying closed 3-manifolds based on the eight possible geometric structures that their decomposed pieces can admit.142 These eight geometries serve as local models for the geometric properties of the individual components in the canonical decomposition. By identifying which of these geometries are present in the decomposition of a particular 3-manifold, topologists can gain significant insights into its overall structure and properties. For example, the presence of hyperbolic geometry in the decomposition indicates that the corresponding piece has a constant negative curvature and often exhibits complex topological features.142
Hyperbolic geometry is conjectured to be the most prevalent among the eight Thurston geometries, particularly for irreducible 3-manifolds that are not Seifert fibered.142 This suggests that a large class of 3-manifolds, including those that might be relevant for embedding complex structures like quantum knowledge graphs, are likely to possess a hyperbolic structure in their geometric decomposition. The suitability of hyperbolic spaces for representing hierarchical data, combined with the potential of 3-dimensional hyperbolic spaces to accommodate intricate quantum relationships, makes this prevalence particularly significant in the context of the user’s query.
Furthermore, the fundamental group of a 3-manifold, which captures its essential topological structure related to loops and connectivity, is deeply intertwined with its geometric structure as described by the geometrization conjecture.141 For instance, the conjecture implies that a closed 3-manifold is hyperbolic if and only if it is irreducible, atoroidal, and has an infinite fundamental group that satisfies certain algebraic conditions.145 This close relationship between the topology (encoded in the fundamental group) and the geometry (one of the eight Thurston geometries) allows mathematicians to infer geometric properties from topological invariants and vice versa, providing a powerful tool for studying the nature of 3-manifolds.146
7.3. Potential Role in Understanding the Interplay between Classical and Quantum Knowledge Graphs
The Thurston geometrization conjecture offers a unifying framework for understanding the diverse landscape of 3-dimensional geometries.142 This framework includes Euclidean geometry, which underpins classical physics and serves as the embedding space for many classical knowledge graphs, as well as hyperbolic geometry, which is proposed in the user’s query as a potential embedding space for quantum knowledge graphs in the form of hyperbolic 3-manifolds.142 By placing these seemingly distinct geometries within a common classification scheme, the conjecture provides a potential avenue for comparing and contrasting the topological properties of knowledge graphs embedded within them.
The topological invariants of 3-manifolds, such as their homology groups and fundamental groups, are intricately linked to their underlying geometric structures as described by the geometrization conjecture.146 Studying these invariants for both classical knowledge graphs (implicitly associated with Euclidean geometry in R3) and quantum knowledge graphs (proposed to reside in hyperbolic 3-manifolds) could reveal how the change in the embedding geometry from Euclidean to hyperbolic affects their fundamental topological properties. For instance, differences in the homology groups might indicate variations in the number and types of cycles or connected components present in the knowledge graphs depending on the geometry of the space they are embedded in. Understanding these relationships could provide valuable insights into the optimal geometric framework for representing different types of knowledge and the implications of this choice for knowledge retrieval, reasoning, and learning within these graphs.

Interrelating Classical and Quantum Knowledge: A Homological and Topological Perspective

8.1. Employing Homology to Compare Topological Features of Knowledge Graphs Across Geometries
Knowledge graphs, regardless of whether they are classical or quantum, and irrespective of the geometry of the space in which they are embedded, can be fundamentally viewed as graphs. A graph, in turn, can be treated as a 1-dimensional simplicial complex, consisting of vertices (0-simplices) and edges (1-simplices).90 For such structures, we can define and compute homology groups. The 0th homology group (H0) of a knowledge graph relates to the number of its connected components, indicating how many separate, non-interacting subgraphs exist.90 The 1st homology group (H1) describes the number of independent cycles or loops within the graph, which can represent redundant pathways or complex interdependencies between entities.90
By computing and comparing the homology groups of classical knowledge graphs, typically embedded in Euclidean space, and quantum knowledge graphs, proposed to reside in hyperbolic 3-manifolds, we can potentially reveal fundamental differences or similarities in their underlying structure.90 For instance, a significant difference in the rank of the 1st homology group might indicate that one type of embedding naturally leads to more cyclical relationships or a different level of interconnectedness compared to the other. This kind of comparison, focusing on the topological features captured by homology, allows us to abstract away from the specific geometric details of the embedding space and concentrate on the intrinsic structural organization of the knowledge itself.
Furthermore, persistent homology (PH) offers a more advanced approach to analyzing the topology of knowledge graphs.89 Instead of just providing a snapshot of the topological features at a single scale, PH analyzes how these features, such as connected components and cycles, emerge and disappear as a scale parameter is varied. This provides information about the robustness and persistence of these features.89 Applying persistent homology to both classical and quantum knowledge graphs can reveal how their topological structure evolves and stabilizes across different scales or parameters, potentially highlighting differences in the emergence and persistence of connectivity and cyclical patterns depending on whether the embedding is in Euclidean or hyperbolic space.89 Features that persist over a wider range of scales are generally considered more significant and less likely to be due to noise.
8.2. Utilizing Topology to Identify Invariant Structures and Relationships
Topology, by its very definition, is concerned with the properties of objects that remain invariant under continuous deformations.77 This focus on deformation invariance allows us to identify fundamental structural characteristics of knowledge graphs that are independent of the specific geometric space in which they are embedded.77 By employing topological concepts, we can potentially discern core structural elements and relationships within knowledge graphs that are preserved even when the embedding space changes from Euclidean to hyperbolic. These invariant features might represent the most fundamental aspects of the knowledge being represented, transcending the specifics of the chosen geometric framework.
Concepts such as homeomorphism, which defines topological equivalence between two spaces, and topological invariants, which are properties that remain unchanged under homeomorphism, can be instrumental in assessing the fundamental similarity or difference in the structure of knowledge graphs across different embedding spaces.78 If a classical knowledge graph embedded in Euclidean space and a quantum knowledge graph embedded in a hyperbolic 3-manifold, both representing similar knowledge, are found to be homeomorphic, it would imply that they possess the same underlying topological structure, despite their different geometric realizations. This would suggest that the shift to a quantum framework and a hyperbolic embedding might primarily offer a different geometric perspective on a fundamentally similar knowledge organization. Conversely, if no such homeomorphism exists, it could indicate that the change in embedding space leads to a genuinely different topological organization of the knowledge.
8.3. The Potential of Persistent Homology in Analyzing the Evolution and Stability of Knowledge Graphs
Persistent homology is a particularly powerful tool for analyzing continuously learned and improved quantum knowledge graphs because it is designed to track the evolution of topological features as the underlying structure changes.76 As a quantum knowledge graph is continuously learned and refined through interaction with data or through iterative quantum algorithms, its network of entities and relationships will likely evolve over time. Persistent homology can be applied at different stages of this learning process to observe how the topological features of the graph, such as connected components and cycles, emerge, evolve in scale (persistence), and potentially stabilize as more knowledge is acquired and relationships become more defined.76
Furthermore, the persistence of the topological features identified in the knowledge graph can serve as a measure of their stability and significance.89 Features that exhibit high persistence, meaning they are present across a wide range of scales or learning parameters, are likely to represent more fundamental and robust aspects of the underlying knowledge structure.89 By comparing the persistence of topological features in continuously learned quantum knowledge graphs (in hyperbolic 3-manifolds) with those in classical knowledge graphs (in Euclidean space), we can gain insights into whether one type of embedding leads to more stable or significant topological representations of knowledge as it is learned and refined over time. This could provide valuable information for designing more effective and robust knowledge representation systems in both classical and quantum domains.

Conclusion: Towards a Unified Understanding of Knowledge and Reality

The exploration of classical and quantum worldviews reveals fundamental differences in their understanding of reality. Classical physics, grounded in Euclidean geometry, portrays a deterministic universe with continuous, perfectly knowable properties, operating within absolute space and time. In contrast, quantum mechanics, potentially finding its geometric footing in non-Euclidean spaces like hyperbolic geometry, describes a probabilistic world characterized by superposition, entanglement, and quantization, challenging our classical intuitions about space, time, and causality.

The emergence of knowledge graphs as a paradigm for representing structured information provides a modern context for comparing these worldviews. Classical knowledge graphs, embedded in Euclidean space, have proven useful but may face limitations in capturing complex, non-Euclidean relationships. The concept of quantum knowledge graphs, particularly when considered within the framework of hyperbolic 3-manifolds, offers the potential for richer and more nuanced knowledge representation, leveraging quantum principles and the unique properties of hyperbolic geometry.

The mathematical fields of homology and topology, especially the technique of persistent homology, offer a powerful and unifying lens through which to compare the structural properties of these knowledge graphs, irrespective of their specific geometric embeddings. By focusing on topological invariants such as connected components and cycles, we can identify fundamental similarities and differences in how knowledge is organized and interconnected in classical and quantum frameworks. Persistent homology further enhances this analysis by revealing the evolution and stability of these topological features as knowledge graphs are learned and refined.

The Thurston geometrization conjecture, a landmark result in the topology of 3-manifolds, provides a broader context for understanding the relationship between Euclidean and hyperbolic geometries, both of which appear as part of its classification. This conjecture suggests a deeper connection between these seemingly disparate geometric spaces, potentially offering insights into how knowledge embedded within them might be related at a fundamental topological level.

In conclusion, the quest for a unified understanding of knowledge and reality necessitates drawing upon advanced mathematical concepts that can bridge the gap between classical and quantum descriptions. Homology, topology, and non-Euclidean geometries like hyperbolic space are proving to be crucial tools in this endeavor. By applying these concepts to the study of knowledge graphs, we can hope to unlock deeper insights into the nature of knowledge itself and its representation within both the familiar realm of classical physics and the increasingly important domain of quantum mechanics, potentially leading to more powerful and expressive ways of capturing and reasoning about the complexities of the universe and our knowledge of it.

Works cited

Classical mechanics – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_mechanics
Fundamental Principles of Classical Mechanics – World Scientific Publishing, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/8947
Fundamental Principles of Classical Mechanics: a Geometrical Perspectives – NASA ADS, accessed April 1, 2025, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014fpcm.book…..L/abstract
1: Introduction to Classical Mechanics – Physics LibreTexts, accessed April 1, 2025, https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/Mechanics_and_Relativity_(Idema)/01%3A_Introduction_to_Classical_Mechanics
Fundamental Principles of Classical Mechanics, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/8947#:~:text=In%20this%20chapter%20we%20will%20demonstrate%2C%20using%20the%20Lagrangian%20and,temporal%20symmetries%20of%20classical%20mechanical
en.wikipedia.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_mechanics#:~:text=Classical%20mechanics%20assumes%20that%20matter,also%20Action%20at%20a%20distance).
en.wikipedia.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime#:~:text=Non%2Drelativistic%20classical%20mechanics%20treats,of%20motion%2C%20or%20anything%20external.
Newton’s Views on Space, Time, and Motion (Stanford Encyclopedia …, accessed April 1, 2025, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-stm/
Spacetime – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime
Time in Classical and Relativistic Physics – PhilArchive, accessed April 1, 2025, https://philarchive.org/archive/BELTIC-2
Causation | 2 Classical Mechanics – Becoming Thou, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.becomingthou.com/classical-mechanics
Causality in Classical Physics, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/reso/019/06/0523-0537
Introduction to Energy – Introductory Physics: Classical Mechanics, accessed April 1, 2025, https://opentextbooks.library.arizona.edu/erozo/chapter/conservation-of-energy/
Classical Mechanics – MIT, accessed April 1, 2025, http://web.mit.edu/10.491-md/www/CourseNotes/ClassMech/ICEMat_CN_ClassMech.html
8.3 Conservation of Energy – University Physics Volume 1 | OpenStax, accessed April 1, 2025, https://openstax.org/books/university-physics-volume-1/pages/8-3-conservation-of-energy
Euclidean geometry – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_geometry
Euclidean geometry | Definition, Axioms, & Postulates | Britannica, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/Euclidean-geometry
15.2 Basic concepts of hyperbolic geometry – Fiveable, accessed April 1, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/hs-honors-geometry/unit-15/basic-concepts-hyperbolic-geometry/study-guide/P1wtOMjr3pmLp2p5
What precisely is the difference between Euclidean Geometry, and non-Euclidean Geometry? – Mathematics Stack Exchange, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/562306/what-precisely-is-the-difference-between-euclidean-geometry-and-non-euclidean-g
www.britannica.com, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/hyperbolic-geometry#:~:text=In%20Euclidean%2C%20the%20sum%20of,differing%20areas%20do%20not%20exist.
Confused About Different Types of Geometry : r/learnmath – Reddit, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/learnmath/comments/10wbwrc/confused_about_different_types_of_geometry/
Knowledge Graph Representation: From Recent Models towards a Theoretical Understanding. – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P958uaPKtJ0
Quantum Machine Learning on Knowledge Graphs, accessed April 1, 2025, https://r2learning.github.io/assets/papers/CameraReadySubmission%2039.pdf
What Is a Knowledge Graph? – DATAVERSITY, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.dataversity.net/what-is-a-knowledge-graph/
[2206.12418] Geometry Interaction Knowledge Graph Embeddings – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.12418
Knowledge Graph Embedding: A Survey of Approaches and Applications – ResearchGate, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319947524_Knowledge_Graph_Embedding_A_Survey_of_Approaches_and_Applications
arXiv:1702.06879v2 [cs.AI] 26 Nov 2017, accessed April 1, 2025, http://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.06879
[2409.19977] Knowledge Graph Embedding by Normalizing Flows – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.19977
Geometry Interaction Knowledge Graph Embeddings – AAAI, accessed April 1, 2025, https://cdn.aaai.org/ojs/20491/20491-13-24504-1-2-20220628.pdf
Knowledge graph embedding – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_graph_embedding
Knowledge Graph Representation Learning using Ordinary Differential Equations, accessed April 1, 2025, https://aclanthology.org/2021.emnlp-main.750/
Structuring Knowledge with Cognitive Maps and Cognitive Graphs – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed April 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7746605/
Beyond Euclid: An Illustrated Guide to Modern Machine Learning with Geometric, Topological, and Algebraic Structures – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2407.09468v1
On Euclidean diagrams and geometrical knowledge – Redalyc, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.redalyc.org/journal/3397/339767297007/html/
math.osu.edu, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.osu.edu/sites/math.osu.edu/files/hyperbolicGeometry.pdf
Full article: Fundamental principles of classical mechanics: a geometrical perspective, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00107514.2015.1048299
www.futurelearn.com, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.futurelearn.com/info/courses/frontier-physics-future-technologies/0/steps/240867#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20most%20important,light%20traveling%20through%20a%20prism.
Quantum mechanics – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
What Is The Difference Between Classical And Quantum Physics? – Consensus Academic Search Engine, accessed April 1, 2025, https://consensus.app/questions/what-difference-classical-quantum-physics/
Classical and quantum systems [closed] – Physics Stack Exchange, accessed April 1, 2025, https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/183649/classical-and-quantum-systems
www.esalq.usp.br, accessed April 1, 2025, http://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/What-is-the-difference-between-classical-physics-and-quantum-physics.pdf
Difference Between Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGCphaynaYs
What Is Quantum Mechanics & How’s It Different From Classical Mechanics? | Quantum Physics Lectures – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RmBH96QNyQ
Fundamental Principles of Quantum Mechanics – Richard Fitzpatrick, accessed April 1, 2025, https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/qm/lectures/node6.html
Superposition – Microsoft Quantum, accessed April 1, 2025, https://quantum.microsoft.com/en-us/insights/education/concepts/superposition
Quantum superposition – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition
5 Concepts Can Help You Understand Quantum Mechanics and Technology — Without Math! | NIST, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/5-concepts-can-help-you-understand-quantum-mechanics-and-technology-without
What is Superposition? Quantum Jargon Explained – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAgnIj0UXLY
What Are The Principles Of Quantum Mechanics And Its Applications? – Consensus, accessed April 1, 2025, https://consensus.app/questions/what-principles-quantum-mechanics-applications/
1.4: Principles of Quantum Mechanics – Chemistry LibreTexts, accessed April 1, 2025, https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Quantum_Chemistry_(Blinder)/01%3A_Chapters/1.04%3A_Principles_of_Quantum_Mechanics
LHC experiments at CERN observe quantum entanglement at the highest energy yet, accessed April 1, 2025, https://home.cern/news/press-release/physics/lhc-experiments-cern-observe-quantum-entanglement-highest-energy-yet
Quantum entanglement – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
Quantum Entanglement: Unlocking the mysteries of particle connections – Space.com, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.space.com/31933-quantum-entanglement-action-at-a-distance.html
Quantum 101 Episode 5: Quantum Entanglement Explained – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqmIVeheTVU
What Is the Spooky Science of Quantum Entanglement?, accessed April 1, 2025, https://science.nasa.gov/what-is-the-spooky-science-of-quantum-entanglement/
Seven Essential Elements of Quantum Physics – Uncertain Principles Archive – Chad Orzel, accessed April 1, 2025, https://chadorzel.com/principles/2010/01/20/seven-essential-elements-of-qu/
en.wikipedia.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(physics)#:~:text=Quantization%20(in%20British%20English%20quantisation,quantum%20mechanics%20from%20classical%20mechanics.
Quantization (physics) – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(physics)
What is Quantization? #quantum #physics #science #atom #teleport #explore #IYQ2025 #QuantumCurious – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0mypUQyU5Y
Quantum 101 Episode 2: Quantization Explained – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bChNhy1prD4
9.3: Energy Quantization – Physics LibreTexts, accessed April 1, 2025, https://phys.libretexts.org/Courses/University_of_California_Davis/UCD%3A_Physics_7C_-_General_Physics/9%3A_Quantum_Mechanics/9.3%3A_Energy_Quantization
en.wikipedia.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbolic_geometry#:~:text=The%20hyperbolic%20plane%20is%20a,a%20constant%20negative%20Gaussian%20curvature.
Hyperbolic Geometry – Library, accessed April 1, 2025, https://library.slmath.org/books/Book31/files/cannon.pdf
Hyperbolic geometry | Non-Euclidean, Lobachevsky, Bolyai …, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/hyperbolic-geometry
Hyperbolic geometry – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbolic_geometry
Knowledge Graph Representation via Hierarchical Hyperbolic Neural Graph Embedding, accessed April 1, 2025, https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10324491
HyperE – Hazy Research, accessed April 1, 2025, https://hazyresearch.stanford.edu/hyperE/
Hyperbolic vs Euclidean Embeddings in Few-Shot Learning: Two Sides of the Same Coin, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7Czn9wNsIs
Knowledge Graph Completion Based on Entity Descriptions in Hyperbolic Space – MDPI, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/13/1/253
pardesco.com, accessed April 1, 2025, https://pardesco.com/blogs/news/hyperbolic-geometry#:~:text=In%20black%20hole%20physics%20and,be%20represented%20within%20finite%20boundaries.
Theory of Quantum Mechanical Scattering in Hyperbolic Space – MDPI, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/15/2/377
Theory of Quantum Mechanical Scattering in Hyperbolic Space – ResearchGate, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367988417_Theory_of_Quantum_Mechanical_Scattering_in_Hyperbolic_Space
Hyperbolic Geometry – Pardesco, accessed April 1, 2025, https://pardesco.com/blogs/news/hyperbolic-geometry
Quantum hyperbolic geometry in loop quantum gravity with cosmological constant – Physical Review Link Manager, accessed April 1, 2025, https://link.aps.org/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.121502
Quantum hyperbolic geometry in loop quantum gravity with cosmological constant – NASA/ADS, accessed April 1, 2025, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PhRvD..87l1502D/abstract
H is for Homology – Mathematical Institute – University of Oxford, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/outreach/oxford-mathematics-alphabet/h-homology
www.britannica.com, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/topology#:~:text=topology%2C%20branch%20of%20mathematics%2C%20sometimes,apart%20or%20gluing%20together%20parts.
Topology – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology
Topology | Types, Properties & Examples | Britannica, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/topology
Topology | Brilliant Math & Science Wiki, accessed April 1, 2025, https://brilliant.org/wiki/topology/
Topology — from Wolfram MathWorld, accessed April 1, 2025, https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Topology.html
Topological space – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topological_space
mathworld.wolfram.com, accessed April 1, 2025, https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Homology.html#:~:text=Homology%20is%20a%20concept%20that,manifolds%20mapped%20into%20a%20manifold.
Homology | Algebraic Topology, Geometric Structures & Applications – Britannica, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/homology-mathematics
Homology (mathematics) – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homology_(mathematics)
Homology — from Wolfram MathWorld, accessed April 1, 2025, https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Homology.html
What is a homology? – Evolving Thoughts, accessed April 1, 2025, https://evolvingthoughts.net/what-is-a-homology/
THREE EXAMPLES OF APPLIED & COMPUTATIONAL HOMOLOGY – Penn Math, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www2.math.upenn.edu/~ghrist/preprints/nieuwarchief.pdf
Topological Data Analysis with Persistent Homology | by Alexander Del Toro Barba (PhD), accessed April 1, 2025, https://medium.com/@deltorobarba/quantum-topological-data-analysis-the-most-powerful-quantum-machine-learning-algorithm-part-1-c6d055f2a4de
Simplicial Homology for graphs – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_9hlMtRyzY
Applications of homological algebra in the sciences and engineering, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4643431/applications-of-homological-algebra-in-the-sciences-and-engineering
“Applications of Computational Homology” by Christopher Aaron Johnson, accessed April 1, 2025, https://mds.marshall.edu/etd/672/
Topics in Persistent Homology and Complex Social Systems – eScholarship, accessed April 1, 2025, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/16f3r97k
Topology Unveiled: A New Horizon for Economic and Financial Modeling – MDPI, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/2/325
Uncovering Patterns Beneath the Surface: A Glimpse into the Applications of Algebraic Topology | Journal of Contemporary Educational Research – Bio-Byword Scientific Publishing, accessed April 1, 2025, https://ojs.bbwpublisher.com/index.php/JCER/article/view/5823
Groundbreaking study reveals how topology drives complexity in brain, climate, and AI, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1073917
Topological tools for understanding complex systems – eScholarship, accessed April 1, 2025, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1t32m3z7
How well does Persistent Homology generalize on graphs? – OpenReview, accessed April 1, 2025, https://openreview.net/forum?id=FAY6ORIvn5
On the Expressivity of Persistent Homology in Graph Learning – Hugging Face, accessed April 1, 2025, https://huggingface.co/papers/2302.09826
Stable distance of persistent homology for dynamic graph comparison – ResearchHub, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.researchhub.com/paper/3882596/stable-distance-of-persistent-homology-for-dynamic-graph-comparison
Going beyond persistent homology using persistent homology – OpenReview, accessed April 1, 2025, https://openreview.net/forum?id=27TdrEvqLD¬eId=zPOga2lvBg
A Green AI Methodology Based on Persistent Homology for Compressing BERT – MDPI, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/1/390
Can Persistent Homology provide an efficient alternative for Evaluation of Knowledge Graph Completion Methods? – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.12929
jmlr.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://jmlr.org/papers/volume25/23-1185/23-1185.pdf
toper: topological embeddings in graph representation learning – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.01778
Persistent Homology for High-dimensional Data Based on Spectral Methods – NIPS papers, accessed April 1, 2025, https://papers.nips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/file/4a32a646254d2e37fc74a38d65796552-Paper-Conference.pdf
Killian Meehan (07/10/24): Topological Node2vec: improving graph embeddings with persistent homology – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qqZVBdiTN0
Topology-aware Graph Diffusion Model with Persistent Homology – OpenReview, accessed April 1, 2025, https://openreview.net/forum?id=ZC0wgCabT2
Enhancing Graph Representation Learning with Localized Topological Features, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume26/23-1424/23-1424.pdf
Persistent Homology for High-dimensional Data Based on Spectral Methods – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2311.03087v3
Boosting Graph Pooling with Persistent Homology – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2402.16346v3
Visual Detection of Structural Changes in Time-Varying Graphs Using Persistent Homology – Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.sci.utah.edu/~beiwang/publications/Time_Varying_Graphs_BeiWang_2018.pdf
On the Expressivity of Persistent Homology in Graph Learning – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.09826
Persistence Enhanced Graph Neural Network – Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, accessed April 1, 2025, http://proceedings.mlr.press/v108/zhao20d/zhao20d.pdf
Graph homology – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_homology
soft question – Homology and Graph Theory – Mathematics Stack Exchange, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/28440/homology-and-graph-theory
What’s the relation between topology and graph theory – Mathematics Stack Exchange, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/520768/whats-the-relation-between-topology-and-graph-theory
en.wikipedia.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_homology#:~:text=In%20algebraic%20topology%20and%20graph,case%20of%20a%20simplicial%20complex.
Simplicial complex – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplicial_complex
Graphs associated with simplicial complexes, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.math.uni-bielefeld.de/~grigor/cubic.pdf
Graphs associated with simplicial complexes – Project Euclid, accessed April 1, 2025, https://projecteuclid.org/journals/homology-homotopy-and-applications/volume-16/issue-1/Graphs-associated-with-simplicial-complexes/hha/1401800084.full
Quantum Embedding of Knowledge for Reasoning – NIPS papers, accessed April 1, 2025, http://papers.neurips.cc/paper/8797-quantum-embedding-of-knowledge-for-reasoning.pdf
Quantum Machine Learning Algorithm for Knowledge Graphs – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.01077
Quantum Machine Learning Algorithm for Knowledge Graphs – Inspire HEP, accessed April 1, 2025, https://inspirehep.net/literature/2112878
Quantum Machine Learning Algorithm for Knowledge Graphs – LMU Munich, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.dbs.ifi.lmu.de/~tresp/papers/2001.01077.pdf
Comparisons of Performance between Quantum and Classical Machine Learning – SMU Scholar, accessed April 1, 2025, https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=datasciencereview
(PDF) On Cayley Graphs, Surface Codes, and the Limits of Homological Coding for Quantum Error Correction – ResearchGate, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220776025_On_Cayley_Graphs_Surface_Codes_and_the_Limits_of_Homological_Coding_for_Quantum_Error_Correction
Homological Error Correction: Classical and Quantum Codes – ResearchGate, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2198404_Homological_Error_Correction_Classical_and_Quantum_Codes
Quantum Algorithm Zoo, accessed April 1, 2025, https://quantumalgorithmzoo.org/
Hyperbolic 3-manifolds with k-free fundamental group – UIC Indigo, accessed April 1, 2025, https://indigo.uic.edu/articles/thesis/Hyperbolic_3-manifolds_with_k-free_fundamental_group/10833293/files/19341245.pdf
The geometry of k-free hyperbolic 3-manifolds – ResearchGate, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/386666741_The_geometry_of_k-free_hyperbolic_3-manifolds
Hyperbolic Hierarchical Knowledge Graph Embeddings for Link Prediction in Low Dimensions – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2204.13704v2
Low-Dimensional Hyperbolic Knowledge Graph Embedding for Better Extrapolation to Under-Represented Data – ESWC 2024, accessed April 1, 2025, https://2024.eswc-conferences.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/146640097.pdf
A question on Cayley graphs and hyperbolic 3-manifolds – MathOverflow, accessed April 1, 2025, https://mathoverflow.net/questions/139630/a-question-on-cayley-graphs-and-hyperbolic-3-manifolds
Hardness of computation of quantum invariants on 3-manifolds with restricted topology, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2503.02814v1
Nikolai Saveliev – Lectures on the Topology of 3-Manifolds – Poisson, accessed April 1, 2025, https://poisson.phc.dm.unipi.it/~camponovo/libri/3mani.pdf
Hyperbolic homology 3–spheres from drum polyhedra – MSP, accessed April 1, 2025, https://msp.org/agt/2024/24-6/agt-v24-n6-p14-s.pdf
arXiv:2503.02814v1 [math.GT] 4 Mar 2025, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.02814
Quantum Invariants of 3-Manifolds and Surface Singularities – Scholarship@Miami, accessed April 1, 2025, https://scholarship.miami.edu/view/pdfCoverPage?instCode=01UOML_INST&filePid=13426998160002976&download=true
Quantum Chaos on Hyperbolic Manifolds: A New Approach to Cosmology – Wolfram, accessed April 1, 2025, https://content.wolfram.com/sites/13/2018/02/06-2-4.pdf
Geometrization conjecture | mathematics – Britannica, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/geometrization-conjecture
Geometrization conjecture – Wikipedia, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometrization_conjecture
Thurston’s geometrization conjecture – PlanetMath.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://planetmath.org/thurstonsgeometrizationconjecture
Thurston’s Geometrization Conjecture — from Wolfram MathWorld, accessed April 1, 2025, https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ThurstonsGeometrizationConjecture.html
en.wikipedia.org, accessed April 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometrization_conjecture#:~:text=The%20geometrization%20conjecture%20implies%20that,manifolds%20with%20hyperbolic%20geometry%20expand.
Geometrization of 3-Manifolds via the Ricci Flow, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.math.stonybrook.edu/~anderson/noticesfinal.pdf
Scalar Curvature and Geometrization Conjectures for 3-Manifolds – Library, accessed April 1, 2025, https://library.slmath.org/books/Book30/files/anderson.pdf
How does Thurston’s geometrisation conjecture imply Poincaré’s conjecture?, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/324554/how-does-thurstons-geometrisation-conjecture-imply-poincar%C3%A9s-conjecture
Thurston’s Geometrization Conjecture and cosmological models – arXiv, accessed April 1, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0010002
Topology | Department of Mathematics – UC Santa Barbara, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.math.ucsb.edu/research/topology
Is there a complete set of topological invariants for smooth 3-manifolds?, accessed April 1, 2025, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4612835/is-there-a-complete-set-of-topological-invariants-for-smooth-3-manifolds
graph – What are the differences between Embedded and Topological in Graph?, accessed April 1, 2025, https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10010213/graph-what-are-the-differences-between-embedded-and-topological-in-graph
Topologic, Graphs, and Graph Machine Learning – YouTube, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW1hpW8WNmM
Topological data vs Geometrical data | by Lahiru Dilshan – Medium, accessed April 1, 2025, https://medium.com/@dilshankmg/topological-data-vs-geometrical-data-8a8334591224