95:
730:
733:
85:
64:
440:
33:
387:
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
641:) 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 (
649:) 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 (
473:
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
259:
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.
329:
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.
240:
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
304:
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
342:
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.
712:) 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:
840:
327:
190:
753:
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.
637:
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 (
469:
362:
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.
736:
151:
739:
835:
141:
94:
830:
196:)? 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.
423:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
117:
554:
713:
475:
283:
That is completely the wrong tag (technical tag) for asking for improvements on content (which would probably make the article
537:
454:
817:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
108:
69:
44:
522:
533:
446:
659:) while the term local as mentioned in the first ncatlab article I linked comes from a book published in the 90s.
496:
414:
396:
32:
450:
392:
424:
348:
234:
215:
199:
50:
388:
earlier, maybe that's the net monomorphism, but then this should be stated. Hope someone can do this!
758:
720:
694:
664:
545:
483:
368:
800:
595:
568:
427:
after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
372:
308:
205:
Aren't functors automatically assumed to be covariant by default unless explicitly told otherwise?
193:
171:
116:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
745:
627:
616:
212:
Yes - but the notation i-sub-stuff wasn't introduced explicitly, making it harder to suss out.
17:
331:
270:
I agree completely. Let's hope there'll be more progress towards this in the next 18 months !
632:
804:
762:
748:
724:
714:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-struggle-to-unite-around-future-plans/
699:
668:
619:
599:
572:
499:
400:
376:
352:
344:
296:
274:
656:
653:
650:
646:
540:– New name is much more widely used in the scientific literature and thus more appropriate
784:
776:
754:
716:
688:
681:
660:
607:
541:
365:
FWIW, Haag and
Kastler did not present their axioms in the language of category theory.
790:
585:
581:
558:
100:
824:
780:
742:
675:
613:
292:
638:
439:
263:
84:
63:
612:
Some quick searches says otherwise, so I do not think this is uncontroversial.
271:
222:
90:
206:
288:
684:
is right, particularly as it is the accepted term for modern textbooks.
252:
The entry doesn't read as physics but as pure mathematics. Of course an
113:
642:
491:
709:
705:
704:
To add a further authoritative reference, recent
Snowmass papers (
628:
https://www.google.com/search?q=algebraic+quantum+field+theory
434:
256:
has a strong mathematical side, but there's something beyond.
26:
729:
I did google and gscholar searches of the strings in quotes:
192:
covariant, or contravariant (as it would be in the case of a
314:
177:
633:
https://www.google.com/search?q=local+quantum+field+theory
657:
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-21894-6
654:
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-25901-7
651:
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-21353-8
647:
https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/local+quantum+field+theory
624:
May I ask what did you search? Searching both on Google:
514:
508:
311:
174:
112:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
221:
does AQFT stand for axiomatic quantum field theory?
321:
184:
639:https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Haag-Kastler+axioms
358:The description is only for category theorists.
841:Start-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
8:
383:Net and net monomorphism need to be defined
30:
413:The following is a closed discussion of a
58:
737:Gscholar "Algebraic quantum field theory"
313:
312:
310:
176:
175:
173:
731:Google "Algebraic quantum field theory"
60:
740:Gscholar "Local quantum field theory"
551:This is a contested technical request
445:It was proposed in this section that
287:technical anyway). I removed it. --
7:
106:This article is within the scope of
734:Google "Local quantum field theory"
49:It is of interest to the following
643:https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/AQFT
231:QFT, though it is also axiomatic.
25:
813:The discussion above is closed.
710:https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03128
706:https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.08053
548:) 10:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
438:
93:
83:
62:
31:
836:Mid-importance physics articles
406:Requested move 20 December 2022
146:This article has been rated as
18:Talk:Local quantum field theory
538:Algebraic quantum field theory
455:Algebraic quantum field theory
322:{\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}}
185:{\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}}
1:
805:14:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
763:15:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
749:14:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
725:14:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
700:13:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
669:12:38, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
620:12:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
600:14:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
580:This comment thread began at
573:14:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
500:19:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
353:20:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
126:Knowledge:WikiProject Physics
120:and see a list of open tasks.
831:Start-Class physics articles
129:Template:WikiProject Physics
789:Ping current participants.
401:18:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
857:
534:Local quantum field theory
447:Local quantum field theory
297:07:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
152:project's importance scale
275:19:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
237:18:34, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
145:
78:
57:
815:Please do not modify it.
523:subst:Requested move/end
420:Please do not modify it.
377:01:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
266:21:56, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
218:17:17, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
209:13:33, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
202:12:56, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
323:
186:
39:This article is rated
324:
187:
334:18:40, 2 March 2007
309:
172:
521:This is template {{
338:List of researchers
109:WikiProject Physics
319:
254:axiomatic approach
182:
45:content assessment
807:
698:
602:
575:
531:
530:
502:
466:
451:renamed and moved
166:
165:
162:
161:
158:
157:
16:(Redirected from
848:
797:
788:
773:
685:
679:
611:
592:
579:
565:
549:
498:
494:
486:
464:
460:
442:
435:
422:
328:
326:
325:
320:
318:
317:
235:Charles Matthews
216:Charles Matthews
200:Charles Matthews
191:
189:
188:
183:
181:
180:
134:
133:
132:physics articles
130:
127:
124:
103:
98:
97:
87:
80:
79:
74:
66:
59:
42:
36:
35:
27:
21:
856:
855:
851:
850:
849:
847:
846:
845:
821:
820:
819:
818:
791:
774:
673:
605:
586:
559:
527:
518:
492:
484:
462:
418:
408:
385:
360:
340:
307:
306:
170:
169:
168:Is the functor
131:
128:
125:
122:
121:
99:
92:
72:
43:on Knowledge's
40:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
854:
852:
844:
843:
838:
833:
823:
822:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
765:
727:
702:
635:
630:
625:
529:
528:
519:
505:
504:
485:P.I. Ellsworth
467:
458:
443:
431:
430:
429:
415:requested move
409:
407:
404:
393:MorphismOfDoom
391:
384:
381:
359:
356:
339:
336:
316:
302:
301:
300:
299:
278:
277:
179:
164:
163:
160:
159:
156:
155:
148:Mid-importance
144:
138:
137:
135:
118:the discussion
105:
104:
101:Physics portal
88:
76:
75:
73:Mid‑importance
67:
55:
54:
48:
37:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
853:
842:
839:
837:
834:
832:
829:
828:
826:
816:
806:
802:
798:
796:
795:
786:
782:
778:
772:
764:
760:
756:
752:
751:
750:
747:
744:
741:
738:
735:
732:
728:
726:
722:
718:
715:
711:
707:
703:
701:
696:
692:
691:
690:
683:
677:
672:
671:
670:
666:
662:
658:
655:
652:
648:
644:
640:
636:
634:
631:
629:
626:
623:
622:
621:
618:
615:
609:
604:
603:
601:
597:
593:
591:
590:
583:
578:
577:
576:
574:
570:
566:
564:
563:
556:
552:
547:
543:
539:
535:
526:
524:
517:
516:
513:
510:
503:
501:
497:
495:
489:
488:
487:
480:
477:
472:
471:
465:
456:
452:
448:
444:
441:
437:
436:
433:
428:
426:
421:
416:
411:
410:
405:
403:
402:
398:
394:
389:
382:
380:
378:
374:
370:
366:
363:
357:
355:
354:
350:
346:
337:
335:
333:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
281:
280:
279:
276:
273:
269:
268:
267:
265:
261:
257:
255:
250:
248:
244:
238:
236:
232:
230:
225:
224:
219:
217:
213:
210:
208:
203:
201:
197:
195:
153:
149:
143:
140:
139:
136:
119:
115:
111:
110:
102:
96:
91:
89:
86:
82:
81:
77:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
34:
29:
28:
19:
814:
793:
792:
687:
686:
588:
587:
561:
560:
550:
532:
520:
515:target title
511:
509:source title
506:
482:
481:
478:
476:stay healthy
468:
461:
459:
432:
419:
412:
390:
386:
367:
364:
361:
341:
332:myrkkyhammas
303:
284:
262:
258:
253:
251:
246:
242:
239:
233:
228:
226:
220:
214:
211:
204:
198:
167:
147:
107:
51:WikiProjects
507:Move logs:
425:move review
345:Mark viking
227:Apparently
41:Start-class
825:Categories
785:Polyamorph
777:STEMster42
755:STEMster42
717:STEMster42
689:Polyamorph
682:STEMster42
661:STEMster42
608:STEMster42
542:STEMster42
379:gregweeks
794:Steel1943
589:Steel1943
562:Steel1943
555:permalink
369:Gregweeks
229:algebraic
781:UtherSRG
743:UtherSRG
680:I think
676:UtherSRG
614:UtherSRG
783:, and
645:) and (
582:WP:RMTR
463:result:
264:Pjacobi
150:on the
123:Physics
114:Physics
70:Physics
746:(talk)
617:(talk)
470:Moved.
47:scale.
223:Lethe
194:sheaf
801:talk
759:talk
721:talk
695:talk
665:talk
596:talk
569:talk
546:talk
397:talk
373:talk
349:talk
293:talk
285:more
245:and
207:Phys
557:).
493:ed.
453:to
449:be
289:C S
272:_R_
249:).
247:fmt
142:Mid
827::
803:)
779:,
761:)
723:)
708:,
667:)
598:)
584:.
571:)
536:→
525:}}
490:,
457:.
417:.
399:)
375:)
351:)
343:--
295:)
243:sp
799:(
787::
775:@
757:(
719:(
697:)
693:(
678::
674:@
663:(
610::
606:@
594:(
567:(
553:(
544:(
512:·
479:!
395:(
371:(
347:(
315:A
291:(
178:A
154:.
53::
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
