84:
719:
722:
74:
53:
429:
22:
376:
Somebody more expert in AQFT than I should explain what "the net" and "net monomorphism" refer to. My general sense is that an AQFT defines an allowed set of states on a "net of algebras" but it should pointed out just what that net is before the term is used. There is a monomorphism referred to
630:) it states pretty clearly on the page "The formulation of quantum field theory via these axioms has come to be known as algebraic quantum field theory or AQFT, for short." It also notes the issues with terminology but again looking at the respective pages there (
638:) you can see algebraic quantum field theory is more appropriate since the latter also can include functorial QFT which is not the main topic of the page. I will also add that recent textbooks in the area all call it algebraic quantum field theory (
462:
See below concern expressed but no official opposition. The nom, editor STEMster42, as well as editor
Polyamorph have solidified their arguments, so this request is granted. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone
248:
The entry has only the objective side of AQFT, what is IMHO missing are motives, successes, failures relative standing compared to other approaches. Any feedback whether this would be OK to add? Then I'll try to do it.
318:
were an equivalence of categories. Regrettably, it is not. The
Poincare covariance axiom is not well explained in this article and should be reformulated. Haag's famous paper from the 60s would do nicely as a source.
229:
I'm somewhat unsatisfied with this article but don't know how to proceed. So I'll start on the discussion pages (in fact I added a link before I got my user account and did a small change on QFT, BTW thanks for
293:
Also, how does one "pull an action back" to the target category, when the action is defined on the domain category? This does not make any sense, though an equivalent notion could be developed if the functor
331:
The list of researches at the end along with links to their websites seems promotional to me. So I plan to cut down the list to those researchers who are notable as evidenced by an article on them at WP.
701:) also refer to it solely as Algebraic QFT. Snowmass is a once a decade gathering of particle physicists in the United States where they talk about the future of their field. For more info see:
829:
316:
179:
742:
With the Google
Scholar links you see most of the references for Local AQFT are much older than than Algebraic QFT ones which reflects how the terminology has changed.
626:
Shows far more relevant results for the first query than the second. Furthermore if you want an example from another
Knowledge run by academics working in the field (
458:
351:
The page is written in the language of category theory. I suggest that many people who would be interested in the Haag-Kastler axioms don't speak that language.
725:
140:
728:
824:
130:
83:
819:
185:)? It perhaps looks like the former, from what is said (restriction maps are rarely going to be injective). But I think we should be told.
412:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
106:
543:
702:
464:
272:
That is completely the wrong tag (technical tag) for asking for improvements on content (which would probably make the article
526:
443:
806:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
97:
58:
33:
511:
522:
435:
648:) while the term local as mentioned in the first ncatlab article I linked comes from a book published in the 90s.
485:
403:
385:
21:
439:
381:
413:
337:
223:
204:
188:
39:
377:
earlier, maybe that's the net monomorphism, but then this should be stated. Hope someone can do this!
747:
709:
683:
653:
534:
472:
357:
789:
584:
557:
416:
after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
361:
297:
194:
Aren't functors automatically assumed to be covariant by default unless explicitly told otherwise?
182:
160:
105:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
734:
616:
605:
201:
Yes - but the notation i-sub-stuff wasn't introduced explicitly, making it harder to suss out.
320:
259:
I agree completely. Let's hope there'll be more progress towards this in the next 18 months !
621:
793:
751:
737:
713:
703:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-struggle-to-unite-around-future-plans/
688:
657:
608:
588:
561:
488:
389:
365:
341:
333:
285:
263:
645:
642:
639:
635:
529:– New name is much more widely used in the scientific literature and thus more appropriate
773:
765:
743:
705:
677:
670:
649:
596:
530:
354:
FWIW, Haag and
Kastler did not present their axioms in the language of category theory.
779:
574:
570:
547:
89:
813:
769:
731:
664:
602:
281:
627:
428:
252:
73:
52:
601:
Some quick searches says otherwise, so I do not think this is uncontroversial.
260:
211:
79:
195:
277:
673:
is right, particularly as it is the accepted term for modern textbooks.
241:
The entry doesn't read as physics but as pure mathematics. Of course an
102:
631:
480:
698:
694:
693:
To add a further authoritative reference, recent
Snowmass papers (
617:
https://www.google.com/search?q=algebraic+quantum+field+theory
423:
245:
has a strong mathematical side, but there's something beyond.
15:
718:
I did google and gscholar searches of the strings in quotes:
181:
covariant, or contravariant (as it would be in the case of a
303:
166:
622:
https://www.google.com/search?q=local+quantum+field+theory
646:
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-21894-6
643:
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-25901-7
640:
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-21353-8
636:
https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/local+quantum+field+theory
613:
May I ask what did you search? Searching both on Google:
503:
497:
300:
163:
101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
210:
does AQFT stand for axiomatic quantum field theory?
310:
173:
628:https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Haag-Kastler+axioms
347:The description is only for category theorists.
830:Start-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
8:
372:Net and net monomorphism need to be defined
19:
402:The following is a closed discussion of a
47:
726:Gscholar "Algebraic quantum field theory"
302:
301:
299:
165:
164:
162:
720:Google "Algebraic quantum field theory"
49:
729:Gscholar "Local quantum field theory"
540:This is a contested technical request
434:It was proposed in this section that
276:technical anyway). I removed it. --
7:
95:This article is within the scope of
723:Google "Local quantum field theory"
38:It is of interest to the following
632:https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/AQFT
220:QFT, though it is also axiomatic.
14:
802:The discussion above is closed.
699:https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03128
695:https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.08053
537:) 10:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
427:
82:
72:
51:
20:
825:Mid-importance physics articles
395:Requested move 20 December 2022
135:This article has been rated as
527:Algebraic quantum field theory
444:Algebraic quantum field theory
311:{\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}}
174:{\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}}
1:
794:14:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
752:15:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
738:14:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
714:14:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
689:13:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
658:12:38, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
609:12:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
589:14:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
569:This comment thread began at
562:14:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
489:19:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
342:20:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
115:Knowledge:WikiProject Physics
109:and see a list of open tasks.
820:Start-Class physics articles
118:Template:WikiProject Physics
778:Ping current participants.
390:18:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
846:
523:Local quantum field theory
436:Local quantum field theory
286:07:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
141:project's importance scale
264:19:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
226:18:34, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
134:
67:
46:
804:Please do not modify it.
512:subst:Requested move/end
409:Please do not modify it.
366:01:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
255:21:56, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
207:17:17, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
198:13:33, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
191:12:56, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
312:
175:
28:This article is rated
313:
176:
323:18:40, 2 March 2007
298:
161:
510:This is template {{
327:List of researchers
98:WikiProject Physics
308:
243:axiomatic approach
171:
34:content assessment
796:
687:
591:
564:
520:
519:
491:
455:
440:renamed and moved
155:
154:
151:
150:
147:
146:
837:
786:
777:
762:
674:
668:
600:
581:
568:
554:
538:
487:
483:
475:
453:
449:
431:
424:
411:
317:
315:
314:
309:
307:
306:
224:Charles Matthews
205:Charles Matthews
189:Charles Matthews
180:
178:
177:
172:
170:
169:
123:
122:
121:physics articles
119:
116:
113:
92:
87:
86:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
845:
844:
840:
839:
838:
836:
835:
834:
810:
809:
808:
807:
780:
763:
662:
594:
575:
548:
516:
507:
481:
473:
451:
407:
397:
374:
349:
329:
296:
295:
159:
158:
157:Is the functor
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
88:
81:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
843:
841:
833:
832:
827:
822:
812:
811:
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
760:
759:
758:
757:
756:
755:
754:
716:
691:
624:
619:
614:
518:
517:
508:
494:
493:
474:P.I. Ellsworth
456:
447:
432:
420:
419:
418:
404:requested move
398:
396:
393:
382:MorphismOfDoom
380:
373:
370:
348:
345:
328:
325:
305:
291:
290:
289:
288:
267:
266:
168:
153:
152:
149:
148:
145:
144:
137:Mid-importance
133:
127:
126:
124:
107:the discussion
94:
93:
90:Physics portal
77:
65:
64:
62:Mid‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
842:
831:
828:
826:
823:
821:
818:
817:
815:
805:
795:
791:
787:
785:
784:
775:
771:
767:
761:
753:
749:
745:
741:
740:
739:
736:
733:
730:
727:
724:
721:
717:
715:
711:
707:
704:
700:
696:
692:
690:
685:
681:
680:
679:
672:
666:
661:
660:
659:
655:
651:
647:
644:
641:
637:
633:
629:
625:
623:
620:
618:
615:
612:
611:
610:
607:
604:
598:
593:
592:
590:
586:
582:
580:
579:
572:
567:
566:
565:
563:
559:
555:
553:
552:
545:
541:
536:
532:
528:
524:
515:
513:
506:
505:
502:
499:
492:
490:
486:
484:
478:
477:
476:
469:
466:
461:
460:
454:
445:
441:
437:
433:
430:
426:
425:
422:
417:
415:
410:
405:
400:
399:
394:
392:
391:
387:
383:
378:
371:
369:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
346:
344:
343:
339:
335:
326:
324:
322:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
270:
269:
268:
265:
262:
258:
257:
256:
254:
250:
246:
244:
239:
237:
233:
227:
225:
221:
219:
214:
213:
208:
206:
202:
199:
197:
192:
190:
186:
184:
142:
138:
132:
129:
128:
125:
108:
104:
100:
99:
91:
85:
80:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
803:
782:
781:
676:
675:
577:
576:
550:
549:
539:
521:
509:
504:target title
500:
498:source title
495:
471:
470:
467:
465:stay healthy
457:
450:
448:
421:
408:
401:
379:
375:
356:
353:
350:
330:
321:myrkkyhammas
292:
273:
251:
247:
242:
240:
235:
231:
228:
222:
217:
215:
209:
203:
200:
193:
187:
156:
136:
96:
40:WikiProjects
496:Move logs:
414:move review
334:Mark viking
216:Apparently
30:Start-class
814:Categories
774:Polyamorph
766:STEMster42
744:STEMster42
706:STEMster42
678:Polyamorph
671:STEMster42
650:STEMster42
597:STEMster42
531:STEMster42
368:gregweeks
783:Steel1943
578:Steel1943
551:Steel1943
544:permalink
358:Gregweeks
218:algebraic
770:UtherSRG
732:UtherSRG
669:I think
665:UtherSRG
603:UtherSRG
772:, and
634:) and (
571:WP:RMTR
452:result:
253:Pjacobi
139:on the
112:Physics
103:Physics
59:Physics
735:(talk)
606:(talk)
459:Moved.
36:scale.
212:Lethe
183:sheaf
790:talk
748:talk
710:talk
684:talk
654:talk
585:talk
558:talk
535:talk
386:talk
362:talk
338:talk
282:talk
274:more
234:and
196:Phys
546:).
482:ed.
442:to
438:be
278:C S
261:_R_
238:).
236:fmt
131:Mid
816::
792:)
768:,
750:)
712:)
697:,
656:)
587:)
573:.
560:)
525:→
514:}}
479:,
446:.
406:.
388:)
364:)
340:)
332:--
284:)
232:sp
788:(
776::
764:@
746:(
708:(
686:)
682:(
667::
663:@
652:(
599::
595:@
583:(
556:(
542:(
533:(
501:·
468:!
384:(
360:(
336:(
304:A
280:(
167:A
143:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
