Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf sheaves simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexstarting something -- not done yet <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1/1">v1</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1">current</a>

   starting something – not done yet

   v1, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTime2 days ago
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexadded pointer to: * Marco Astorino, Sergio Cacciatori, Dietmar Klemm, Daniela Zanon: *$AdS_2$ Supergravity and Superconformal Quantum Mechanics*, Annals Phys. **304** (2003) 128-144 &lbrack;<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4916(03)00008-3">doi:10.1016/S0003-4916(03)00008-3</a>, [arXiv:hep-th/0212096](https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0212096)&rbrack; <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1/5">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1/5">v5</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1">current</a>

   added pointer to:

   • Marco Astorino, Sergio Cacciatori, Dietmar Klemm, Daniela Zanon: $AdS_2$ Supergravity and Superconformal Quantum Mechanics, Annals Phys. 304 (2003) 128-144 [doi:10.1016/S0003-4916(03)00008-3, arXiv:hep-th/0212096]

   diff, v5, current

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTime2 days ago
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexWhat does the "nearly" mean? Presumably something is missing.

   What does the “nearly” mean? Presumably something is missing.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTime2 days ago
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexIn these low dimensions the spacetimes are not quite AdS and the field theories are not quite conformal. The established term for this situation is "nearly AdS/CFT" (cf. search results for "[nearly AdS](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22nearly+AdS%22#ip=1)" and "[nearly AdS/CFT](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22nearly+AdS%2FCFT%22)")

   In these low dimensions the spacetimes are not quite AdS and the field theories are not quite conformal.

   The established term for this situation is “nearly AdS/CFT” (cf. search results for “nearly AdS” and “nearly AdS/CFT”)

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTime2 days ago
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks!

   Thanks!

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
   • CommentTime1 day ago
   • PermaLink
   Author: DavidRoberts
   Format: MarkdownItexIs it nearly AdS because you don't need to impose that asymptotic condition (and it might indeed be), or because it can't be so?

   Is it nearly AdS because you don’t need to impose that asymptotic condition (and it might indeed be), or because it can’t be so?

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTime1 day ago
   • (edited 1 day ago)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexfrom [Maldacena, Stanford & Yang 2016](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1#MaldacenaStanfordYang16) ("Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two-dimensional nearly anti-de Sitter space"): > pure gravity in $AdS_2$ is inconsistent with the existence of finite energy excitations above the $AdS_2$ vacuum [1, 2, 3]. Nevertheless, there is a sense in which nearly $AdS_2$ gravity is well defined.

   from Maldacena, Stanford & Yang 2016 (“Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two-dimensional nearly anti-de Sitter space”):

   pure gravity in $AdS_2$ is inconsistent with the existence of finite energy excitations above the $AdS_2$ vacuum [1, 2, 3]. Nevertheless, there is a sense in which nearly $AdS_2$ gravity is well defined.

8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
   • CommentTime1 day ago
   • PermaLink
   Author: DavidRoberts
   Format: MarkdownItexThat doesn't quite answer my question. Does "pure gravity in $AdS_2$" mean in a 2d spacetime that's asymptotically AdS, or literally just AdS? I presume you are trying to tell me that the answer to my question is the second option? I don't care about a citation, because I'm not a physicist and I can't do anything with it.

   That doesn’t quite answer my question. Does “pure gravity in $AdS_2$” mean in a 2d spacetime that’s asymptotically AdS, or literally just AdS? I presume you are trying to tell me that the answer to my question is the second option? I don’t care about a citation, because I’m not a physicist and I can’t do anything with it.

9. • CommentRowNumber9.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTime1 day ago
   • (edited 1 day ago)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThe qualifier "nearly" is about something different than "asymptotically". People generally consider spacetimes that are "both": *asymptotically nearly $AdS_2$*, e.g. [Gao, Jafferis & Kolchmeyer 2022](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/nearly+AdS2%2FCFT1#GJK22).

   The qualifier “nearly” is about something different than “asymptotically”.

   People generally consider spacetimes that are “both”: asymptotically nearly $AdS_2$, e.g. Gao, Jafferis & Kolchmeyer 2022.

10. • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTime16 hours ago
    • PermaLink
    Author: DavidRoberts
    Format: MarkdownItexI understand that. Here's the article intro: >The special case of AdS/CFT duality in dimensions 2/1. is called “nearly” AdS2/CFT1 because in these degenerate low dimensions the quantum field theory in duality is not quite conformal and the ambient spacetime is not quite asymptotically anti de Sitter. Is it "not quite asymptotically anti de Sitter" because it is impossible (due to physical, or mathematical, reasons) to have the duality while being asymptotically anti de Sitter. Or is it more of a red herring principle type thing, like how non-commutative algebra includes commutative algebra, and so one just has additional freedom and can allow asymptotically AdS as well as not quite asymptotically AdS? >pure gravity in $AdS_2$ is inconsistent with the existence of finite energy excitations By "in $AdS_2$" do they mean any asymptotically AdS spacetime? Is this physicist imprecision?

    I understand that. Here’s the article intro:

    The special case of AdS/CFT duality in dimensions 2/1. is called “nearly” AdS2/CFT1 because in these degenerate low dimensions the quantum field theory in duality is not quite conformal and the ambient spacetime is not quite asymptotically anti de Sitter.

    Is it “not quite asymptotically anti de Sitter” because it is impossible (due to physical, or mathematical, reasons) to have the duality while being asymptotically anti de Sitter. Or is it more of a red herring principle type thing, like how non-commutative algebra includes commutative algebra, and so one just has additional freedom and can allow asymptotically AdS as well as not quite asymptotically AdS?

    pure gravity in $AdS_2$ is inconsistent with the existence of finite energy excitations

    By “in $AdS_2$” do they mean any asymptotically AdS spacetime? Is this physicist imprecision?

11. • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTime14 hours ago
    • PermaLink
    Author: DavidRoberts
    Format: MarkdownItexI'm sorry to be pedantic, but if I can't tell what the intro sentence is implying, even with additional clarifying remarks, then I believe it needs to be tweaked.

    I’m sorry to be pedantic, but if I can’t tell what the intro sentence is implying, even with additional clarifying remarks, then I believe it needs to be tweaked.