1. Dirac’s Rule for Canonical Quantization
For a single degree of freedom, a momentum p and a position q, where , the Poisson bracket is , and the Hamiltonian function is given by . In addition, new variables1 may also be used, say, and , , , and .
For canonical quantization, we promote , , , along with . In addition, , , , and , BUT, . At most, only one such quan- tization can be valid while all others lead to false quantizations.
Although the classical Hamiltonians can be equal the quantum Hamiltonians are different, and the question arises which is the physically correct Hamiltonian operator. Dirac  asserts that the proper choice of the quantum Hamiltonian is the one which has been promoted from Cartesian coordinates as classical variables. Dirac does not prove his rule, but Dirac’s rule has recently been established  leading to a flat space (Fubini-Study) metric given by , where is a constant. Although we have focussed on a single degree of freedom, the case of scalar fields, for example, relies on a set of degrees of freedom so that , where is a fixed positive field2.
These variables enjoy as measures of the appropriate phase space. The same can be said about .
2. Loop Quantum Gravity
Using canonical quantization, the case of loop quantum gravity involves two sets of fields classically denoted by and , where , and x denotes a 3-dimensional spatial point in space. These variables admit the phase- space measure . However, their natural metric expressions, such as , where , fail to exhibit suitable Cartesian coordinates, and thus signal a false quantization because it does not follow Dirac’s rule.
3. Affine Quantization
What is affine quantization? While canonical quantization employs Q and P, with , as basic operators, affine quantization employs Q and , the dilation operator, with ; note: the operator D can be self-adjoint even when is self-adjoint, but then P can not be self-adjoint.
There are some systems that canonical quantization can solve, and there are some systems that affine quantization can solve. If they solve using one system they typically fail to solve using the other system. For example, canonical quantization
can solve the Hamiltonian , where , while affine can not solve it. On the other hand, the same Hamiltonian, , now with and , can be solved with affine quantization but not with canonical quantization. This example is used to illustrate the power of affine quantization in , and it points the way to affine quantum gravity.
Articles   offer an approach to resolve quantum gravity by affine quan- tization, and they lead to positive results. Although paper  is older, the author recommends that  is read first. This recommendation is because  employs a familiar Schrödinger representation, while  normally employs a less familiar current commutation representation.
The representations of the analysis in these two papers may be different, but the physics is the same: specifically, for example, the quantum gravitational metrics are not discrete, but continuous.
1e.g., and .
2In particular, in the mid-page of 114 Dirac wrote “However, if the system does have a classical analogue, its connexion with classical mechanics is specially close and one can usually assume that the Hamiltonian is the same function of the canonical coordinates and momenta in the quantum theory as in the classical theory. †” Footnote †: “This assumption is found in practice to be successful only when applied with the dynamical coordinates and momenta referring to a Cartesian system of axes and not to more general curvilinear coordinates.”