] was the use of geometrical rather than coordinate areas to quantize curvature components
of the Ashtekar connection via holonomies around closed loops. The geometrical area, measured through the
dynamical densitized triad 
, then introduces the scale dependence in holonomies appearing in the Hamiltonian
constraint. However, this procedure appears somewhat ad hoc because (i) single curvature components quantized
through holonomies by Equation (14
) refer to coordinates and thus the coordinate area is, in fact, more natural
than an invariant geometrical area, and (ii) the quantization then requires the use of the area operator in the
Hamiltonian constraint, which is not understood in the full theory. Thus, the original motivation of [27] refers to an
argument within the model but not mirrored in the full theory, and thus is suspicious. In Section 6.4 we will
discuss a more direct argument [66] for a scale-dependent discreteness suggested by typical properties of the full
dynamics.] the absolute rather than relative change of quadratic fluctuations before and after the bounce in a semiclassical
state was found to be bounded from above by another fluctuation. While this does provide limits to the growth of fluctuations,
the form of the inequality shows that strong relative changes even by factors much larger than discussed here are easily allowed
by this analysis. Relative changes, which are less sensitive to the precise scale of fluctuations, were, however, not considered
in [138].