Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 62 references

Making the worldvolume Euclidean turns every Galilei limit into a Carroll limit and produces a new Alice particle with a central charge.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-11 08:34 UTC pith:AHGUICZH

load-bearing objection Clean unification of Galilei/Carroll limits plus a new Alice algebra and particle, both derived two independent ways; soft spots are minor and do not touch the constructions.

arxiv 2607.05115 v1 pith:AHGUICZH submitted 2026-07-06 hep-th

From Galilei to Euclidean Carroll and the Alice Particle: The Times They Are a-Changin'

Eric A. Bergshoeff , Luca Romano , Jan Rosseel , Elena Sim\'on F\'elix , Sara Zeko This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords Euclidean p-brane Carroll limitAlice algebraAlice particleBargmann algebracritical non-Lorentzian limitnull reductiontwo-time spacetimeD0*-brane
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper claims that Galilean and Carrollian non-Lorentzian limits are not opposites but two faces of one construction. You pick a (p+1)-dimensional worldvolume, rescale its directions by a large parameter, and send that parameter to infinity. If time lies inside the worldvolume you recover a p-brane Galilei limit; if time is transverse and the worldvolume is Euclidean you obtain a Euclidean p-brane Carroll limit in which the speed of light vanishes along the worldvolume. For particles (p=0) both limits admit a central extension: the familiar Bargmann algebra on the Galilei side and a new Alice algebra on the Carroll side. The corresponding free particle actions arise from a single critical limit of a relativistic massive particle or tachyon coupled to a tuned one-form, or equivalently from null reduction of a massless particle in a spacetime with one or two times. With a cosmological constant the Bargmann particle is stable only for negative Lambda while the Alice particle is stable only for positive Lambda. In ten dimensions the Alice particle is therefore the natural decoupling limit of a D0*-brane in type IIA* theory, mirroring the Bargmann particle’s relation to ordinary D0-branes.

Core claim

Allowing the worldvolume to be Euclidean converts every p-brane Galilei limit into a Euclidean p-brane Carroll limit. For p=0 the resulting symmetries admit a central extension (the Alice algebra) whose non-trivial realization is the Alice particle action, obtained uniformly from a critical limit of a relativistic tachyon or from null reduction of a massless particle in a two-time spacetime.

What carries the argument

The unified rescaling (longitudinal directions grow with a dimensionless parameter omega that is then sent to infinity) together with a sign that decides whether time is longitudinal or transverse. When time is transverse the same formal limit yields the Euclidean 0-brane Carroll contraction and, after a critical one-form coupling, the Alice particle.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that a non-trivial central extension exists only for particles (p=0) rests on an index-counting argument that the boost generator is a pure vector only then; the paper states this as an expectation without a general proof for higher p.

What would settle it

An explicit calculation showing that the contracted Euclidean p-brane Carroll algebra for some p greater than zero still admits a non-trivial central extension that can be realized by a world-volume action would falsify the restriction to p=0.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper unifies generalized p-brane Galilei and Carrollian limits via a single set of rescalings (eqs. 5, 10) of a (p+1)-dimensional worldvolume by a parameter ω→∞; the limit is Galilean when time is longitudinal and Euclidean p-brane Carrollian when time is transversal. For p=0 the Euclidean 0-brane Carroll symmetries admit a central extension (the Alice algebra, eq. 22), realized non-trivially by an Alice particle action obtained uniformly as a critical limit of a relativistic tachyon coupled to a one-form (eqs. 23–32) or by timelike null reduction of a massless particle in a two-time spacetime (eqs. 47–55). Parallel constructions recover the Bargmann particle; both particles are stable under opposite signs of a cosmological constant (eqs. 37–46). The results are interpreted as indicating that the Alice particle is a decoupling limit of a D0*-brane in type IIA*.

Significance. The unification is clean, parameter-free and algebraically explicit, with two independent derivations of the particle actions, Poisson-bracket realization of the central charges, and appendices that recover the Schrödinger/Euclidean Carroll-Schrödinger equations and dispersion relations by the same critical limit. These strengths make the Alice algebra and particle well-defined new objects rather than ad-hoc inventions. If the constructions hold, they supply a natural Carrollian counterpart to the Bargmann particle and a concrete starting point for Carrollian matrix models and dS/CFT dualities in Hull’s looking-glass theories, while clarifying why Galilean versus Carrollian limits appear in ordinary versus timelike-T-dual string theory.

minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3] Section 3 after eq. (20): the expectation that central extensions exist only for p=0 is left unproven; a short remark or reference would clarify the scope without affecting the p=0 results.
  2. [Section 4] Eqs. (37)–(46): the claim that a Newton-Hooke-like extension of the Alice algebra exists is stated as unchecked; either a brief verification or an explicit deferral would improve completeness.
  3. [Section 3] Figures 2 and 3: the spacetime diagrams are helpful but the captions could more explicitly label which cone corresponds to which limit (0-brane Galilei vs Euclidean 0-brane Carroll).
  4. [Appendix A] Appendix A: the transformation rules (63)–(64) realize the central charges; a one-line check that the remaining Alice/Bargmann commutators close on the scalar would make the appendix fully self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: Alice algebra and particle are explicit outputs of parameter-free Inönü-Wigner contractions and critical limits, not inputs renamed or forced by self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's core derivation chain is self-contained. The unified rescalings (eqs. 5, 10) are introduced by definition and applied uniformly; the resulting contracted algebras (eq. 20) and their p=0 central extensions (eq. 22, via the modified redefinitions eq. 21) are computed directly from the Poincaré algebra plus an abelian generator. The Bargmann/Alice particle actions (eqs. 28, 30, 32) follow by substituting the same redefinitions into the relativistic action (eq. 23) and taking ω→∞ after cancellation of the leading terms; the same actions reappear from null reduction of the massless particle (eqs. 51–55). Poisson brackets realizing the central charges (eqs. 36) are verified from the Noether charges of those actions. Cosmological-constant generalizations (eqs. 43, 46) are likewise obtained by the identical limit procedure on an AdS/dS background. Self-citations supply background on ordinary p-brane Galilei/Carroll geometries and string-theory context but are not invoked to force the existence of the Alice central extension or the form of the particle actions; the only soft statement (“we expect but do not prove” no central extension for p≠0) is explicitly flagged as unproven and is never used as a premise. No fitted parameters, uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work, or definitional tautologies appear. Score 1 reflects only the routine presence of non-load-bearing self-citations for geometric background.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 2 invented entities

The paper is pure mathematical physics: all free parameters are absent; the axioms are standard differential-geometric and Lie-algebraic facts plus the conventional definition of critical non-Lorentzian limits; the only invented entities are the Alice algebra and Alice particle, introduced by explicit construction rather than postulate.

axioms (4)
  • standard math Inönü–Wigner contraction of a Lie algebra by rescaling generators with a parameter ω and taking ω→∞ yields a well-defined contracted algebra.
    Used throughout Section 3 (eqs. 19–22) to obtain both Bargmann and Alice algebras from Poincaré ⊕ u(1).
  • domain assumption A relativistic particle or tachyon action coupled to a one-form whose coupling equals the mass admits a finite critical non-Lorentzian limit after the rest contribution is cancelled.
    Standard in the non-relativistic particle literature; invoked in Section 4 (eqs. 23–28) for both ε=±1.
  • domain assumption Null reduction of a massless particle in D+1 dimensions (one or two times) produces a massive particle action in D dimensions whose symmetries realize the central extension.
    Classic for Bargmann (Duval et al.); extended here to the two-time case in Section 5.
  • ad hoc to paper Central extensions of the contracted algebra exist only when p=0 because only then is the boost generator a pure vector admitting an invariant-tensor contraction.
    Stated as an expectation without general proof in Section 3 after eq. (20); load-bearing for the claim that Alice is the unique Carrollian counterpart of Bargmann.
invented entities (2)
  • Alice algebra no independent evidence
    purpose: Centrally extended symmetry algebra arising from the Euclidean 0-brane Carroll limit, dual to the Bargmann algebra.
    Defined by the non-zero commutators in eq. (22) for ε=+1; no prior literature name or structure matches it exactly.
  • Alice particle no independent evidence
    purpose: World-line action realizing the Alice algebra non-trivially; obtained as critical Euclidean 0-brane Carroll limit of a tachyon or as two-time null reduction.
    Action given in eq. (32); claimed to be the decoupling limit of a D0*-brane, but that identification is interpretive.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 31843 in / 2989 out tokens · 29621 ms · 2026-07-11T08:34:08.201779+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

In generalized, also known as $p$-brane Galilei limits, the speed of light $c$ becomes infinite in the directions transverse to a $(p+1)$-dimensional Lorentzian worldvolume. In this paper, we explain that allowing the worldvolume to be Euclidean, and thus time to be transversal, $p$-brane Galilei limits turn into Carrollian ones, that we refer to as "Euclidean $p$-brane Carroll limits", in which $c$ goes to zero in the $p+1$ worldvolume directions. This leads to a unified approach to taking Galilean and Carrollian limits, whose consequences we explore for $p=0$. We show that the spacetime symmetries that arise from the Euclidean 0-brane Carroll limit can be centrally extended to what we will call the Alice algebra, similar to how the Bargmann algebra centrally extends the Galilei symmetries. This gives rise to the novel notion of an Alice particle, and we obtain the Bargmann and Alice particle actions from a unified limit of the action of a relativistic massive particle or tachyon, suitably coupled to a one-form gauge potential. In the presence of a cosmological constant, we find that the Bargmann and Alice particles undergo stable motion for negative and positive cosmological constant, respectively. Finally, we show that the Bargmann and Alice particle actions can be obtained from null reduction of a massless particle action in a relativistic spacetime with one and two times. Our results indicate that in 10 dimensions, the Alice particle is a decoupling limit of a D$0{}^*$-brane in Hull's type IIA${}^*$ theory, similar to how the Bargmann particle is related to a D$0$-brane in type IIA string theory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.05115 by Elena Sim\'on F\'elix, Eric A. Bergshoeff, Jan Rosseel, Luca Romano, Sara Zeko.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Duality between the p-brane Galilei and Euclidean p-brane Carroll limits. 3 Bargmann through the looking-glass: Alice In this section, we will first have a closer look at the four generalized Galilean and Carrollian limits whose definition involves one longitudinal or one transversal direction, and we will interpret them physically. Next, we will focus on the two limits with one longitudinal direction and … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Spacetime diagrams that illustrate the geometry of the 0-brane Galilei (first row) and Euclidean 0-brane Carroll (second row) limits. The limits zoom in on worldlines that lie inside the red narrow cones shown in the plots in the first column. The second column shows for each limit how the (black) lightcone is perceived from the perspective of a (red) worldline that the limit focuses on. very wide cone who… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Spacetime diagrams that illustrate the geometry of the (D − 2)-brane Galilei (first row) and Euclidean (D − 2)-brane Carroll (second row) limits. The limits zoom in on worldlines that lie outside the wide red cones shown in the plots in the first column. The second column shows for each limit how the (black) lightcone is perceived from the perspective of a (red) worldline that the limit focuses on. fact th… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 50 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Timelike T duality, de Sitter space, large N gauge theories and topological field theory,

    C. M. Hull, “Timelike T duality, de Sitter space, large N gauge theories and topological field theory,”JHEP07(1998) 021,arXiv:hep-th/9806146

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Duality and the signature of space-time,

    C. M. Hull, “Duality and the signature of space-time,”JHEP11(1998) 017, arXiv:hep-th/9807127

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  3. [3]

    Branes, times and dualities,

    C. M. Hull and R. R. Khuri, “Branes, times and dualities,”Nucl. Phys. B536(1998) 219–244,arXiv:hep-th/9808069

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  4. [4]

    Aspects of supergravity theories,

    G. W. Gibbons, “Aspects of supergravity theories,” inXV GIFT Seminar on Supersymmetry and Supergravity. 6, 1984

    1984

  5. [5]

    Supergravity description of field theories on curved manifolds and a no go theorem,

    J. M. Maldacena and C. Nunez, “Supergravity description of field theories on curved manifolds and a no go theorem,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. A16(2001) 822–855, arXiv:hep-th/0007018

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  6. [6]

    Thoughts on tachyon cosmology,

    G. W. Gibbons, “Thoughts on tachyon cosmology,”Class. Quant. Grav.20(2003) S321–S346,arXiv:hep-th/0301117

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  7. [7]

    Space - like branes,

    M. Gutperle and A. Strominger, “Space - like branes,”JHEP04(2002) 018, arXiv:hep-th/0202210

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  8. [8]

    The dS / CFT correspondence,

    A. Strominger, “The dS / CFT correspondence,”JHEP10(2001) 034, arXiv:hep-th/0106113

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  9. [9]

    Mass, entropy and holography in asymptotically de Sitter spaces,

    V. Balasubramanian, J. de Boer, and D. Minic, “Mass, entropy and holography in asymptotically de Sitter spaces,”Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 123508,arXiv:hep-th/0110108

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  10. [10]

    Nonrelativistic closed string theory,

    J. Gomis and H. Ooguri, “Nonrelativistic closed string theory,”J. Math. Phys.42(2001) 3127–3151,arXiv:hep-th/0009181

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  11. [11]

    IIA/B, wound and wrapped,

    U. H. Danielsson, A. Guijosa, and M. Kruczenski, “IIA/B, wound and wrapped,”JHEP10 (2000) 020,arXiv:hep-th/0009182. 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  12. [12]

    Newtonian gravitons and d-brane collective coordinates in wound string theory,

    U. H. Danielsson, A. Guijosa, and M. Kruczenski, “Newtonian gravitons and d-brane collective coordinates in wound string theory,”JHEP03(2001) 041, arXiv:hep-th/0012183

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  13. [13]

    Unification of Decoupling Limits in String and M Theory,

    C. D. A. Blair, J. Lahnsteiner, N. A. Obers, and Z. Yan, “Unification of Decoupling Limits in String and M Theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett.132no. 16, (2024) 161603,arXiv:2311.10564 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Worldsheet formalism for decoupling limits in string theory,

    J. Gomis and Z. Yan, “Worldsheet formalism for decoupling limits in string theory,”JHEP 07(2024) 102,arXiv:2311.10565 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Matrix theory reloaded: a BPS road to holography,

    C. D. A. Blair, J. Lahnsteiner, N. A. Obers, and Z. Yan, “Matrix theory reloaded: a BPS road to holography,”JHEP02(2025) 024,arXiv:2410.03591 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Dual non-Lorentzian backgrounds for matrix theories,

    C. D. A. Blair, J. Lahnsteiner, N. A. Obers, and Z. Yan, “Dual non-Lorentzian backgrounds for matrix theories,”JHEP05(2025) 200,arXiv:2502.20310 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    On the underlying nonrelativistic nature of relativistic holography,

    A. Guijosa, “On the underlying nonrelativistic nature of relativistic holography,”JHEP08 (2025) 139,arXiv:2502.03031 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    A Membrane action for OM theory,

    J. A. Garcia, A. Guijosa, and J. D. Vergara, “A Membrane action for OM theory,”Nucl. Phys. B630(2002) 178–202,arXiv:hep-th/0201140

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  19. [19]

    Non-relativistic strings and branes as non-linear realizations of Galilei groups,

    J. Brugues, T. Curtright, J. Gomis, and L. Mezincescu, “Non-relativistic strings and branes as non-linear realizations of Galilei groups,”Phys. Lett. B594(2004) 227–233, arXiv:hep-th/0404175

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  20. [20]

    Non-relativistic superbranes,

    J. Gomis, K. Kamimura, and P. K. Townsend, “Non-relativistic superbranes,”JHEP11 (2004) 051,arXiv:hep-th/0409219

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  21. [21]

    Carroll versus Galilei from a Brane Perspective,

    E. Bergshoeff, J. M. Izquierdo, and L. Romano, “Carroll versus Galilei from a Brane Perspective,”JHEP10(2020) 066,arXiv:2003.03062 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    p-brane Galilean and Carrollian geometries and gravities,

    E. Bergshoeff, J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, K. van Helden, J. Rosseel, I. Rotko, and T. ter Veldhuis, “p-brane Galilean and Carrollian geometries and gravities,”J. Phys. A57no. 24, (2024) 245205,arXiv:2308.12852 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    Carroll Geometry Meets De Sitter Space via Holography,

    C. D. A. Blair, N. A. Obers, and Z. Yan, “Carroll Geometry Meets De Sitter Space via Holography,”arXiv:2506.19720 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    De Sitter Holography and Carrollian brane theories,

    A. Argando˜ na, A. Guijosa, and S. Pati˜ no-L´ opez, “De Sitter Holography and Carrollian brane theories,”JHEP10(2025) 133,arXiv:2507.06147 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Dynamics of Carroll Strings,

    B. Cardona, J. Gomis, and J. M. Pons, “Dynamics of Carroll Strings,”JHEP07(2016) 050, arXiv:1605.05483 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [26]

    Carroll membranes,

    D. Roychowdhury, “Carroll membranes,”JHEP10(2019) 258,arXiv:1908.07280 [hep-th]. 29

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  27. [27]

    Carroll Limit of Non-BPS Dp-Brane,

    J. Kluson, “Carroll Limit of Non-BPS Dp-Brane,”JHEP05(2017) 108,arXiv:1702.08685 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    Note about D-branes in Carrollian background,

    J. Kluson, “Note about D-branes in Carrollian background,”JHEP08(2022) 203, arXiv:2203.16824 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  29. [29]

    A Carroll Limit of AdS/CFT: A Triality with Flat Space Holography?,

    A. Fontanella and O. Payne, “A Carroll Limit of AdS/CFT: A Triality with Flat Space Holography?,”arXiv:2508.10085 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    Newton-Hooke space-times, Hpp waves and the cosmological constant,

    G. W. Gibbons and C. E. Patricot, “Newton-Hooke space-times, Hpp waves and the cosmological constant,”Class. Quant. Grav.20(2003) 5225,arXiv:hep-th/0308200

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  31. [31]

    Newton-Hooke algebras, non-relativistic branes and generalized pp-wave metrics,

    J. Brugues, J. Gomis, and K. Kamimura, “Newton-Hooke algebras, non-relativistic branes and generalized pp-wave metrics,”Phys. Rev. D73(2006) 085011,arXiv:hep-th/0603023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  32. [32]

    Bargmann Structures and Newton-cartan Theory,

    C. Duval, G. Burdet, H. P. K¨ unzle, and M. Perrin, “Bargmann Structures and Newton-cartan Theory,”Phys. Rev. D31(1985) 1841–1853

    1985

  33. [33]

    Why is the matrix model correct?,

    N. Seiberg, “Why is the matrix model correct?,”Phys. Rev. Lett.79(1997) 3577–3580, arXiv:hep-th/9710009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  34. [34]

    D0-branes onT n and matrix theory,

    A. Sen, “D0-branes onT n and matrix theory,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 51–59, arXiv:hep-th/9709220

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  35. [35]

    Constructing Carrollian field theories from null reduction,

    B. Chen, R. Liu, H. Sun, and Y.-f. Zheng, “Constructing Carrollian field theories from null reduction,”JHEP11(2023) 170,arXiv:2301.06011 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    Studies on Carrollian quantum field theories,

    A. Sharma, “Studies on Carrollian quantum field theories,”Class. Quant. Grav.43no. 4, (2026) 045006,arXiv:2502.00487 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    Carroll theories from Lorentzian light-cone theories,

    S. Majumdar, “Carroll theories from Lorentzian light-cone theories,”JHEP02(2026) 258, arXiv:2507.03081 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2026

  38. [38]

    Carroll fermions from null reduction: A case of good and bad fermions,

    S. Majumdar, A. Sharma, and S. Singha, “Carroll fermions from null reduction: A case of good and bad fermions,”arXiv:2605.05334 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  39. [39]

    M theory as a matrix model: A conjecture,

    T. Banks, W. Fischler, S. H. Shenker, and L. Susskind, “M theory as a matrix model: A conjecture,”Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 5112–5128,arXiv:hep-th/9610043

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  40. [40]

    Another conjecture about M(atrix) theory,

    L. Susskind, “Another conjecture about M(atrix) theory,”arXiv:hep-th/9704080

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    Confined dynamical systems with Carroll and Galilei symmetries,

    A. Barducci, R. Casalbuoni, and J. Gomis, “Confined dynamical systems with Carroll and Galilei symmetries,”Phys. Rev. D98no. 8, (2018) 085018,arXiv:1804.10495 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  42. [42]

    J. M. Souriau,Structure of Dynamical Systems: A Symplectic View of Physics, vol. 149 of Progress in Mathematics. Birkh¨ auser, Boston, MA, 1997.https://www.amazon.com/ Structure-Dynamical-Systems-Symplectic-Mathematics/dp/0817636951. 30

    arXiv 1997

  43. [43]

    Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time,

    C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, P. A. Horvathy, and P. M. Zhang, “Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time,”Class. Quant. Grav.31(2014) 085016, arXiv:1402.0657 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  44. [44]

    Dynamics of Carroll Particles,

    E. Bergshoeff, J. Gomis, and G. Longhi, “Dynamics of Carroll Particles,”Class. Quant. Grav.31no. 20, (2014) 205009,arXiv:1405.2264 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  45. [45]

    The Symmetries of the Carroll Superparticle,

    E. Bergshoeff, J. Gomis, and L. Parra, “The Symmetries of the Carroll Superparticle,”J. Phys. A49no. 18, (2016) 185402,arXiv:1503.06083 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  46. [46]

    Carroll Symmetry, Dark Energy and Inflation,

    J. de Boer, J. Hartong, N. A. Obers, W. Sybesma, and S. Vandoren, “Carroll Symmetry, Dark Energy and Inflation,”Front. in Phys.10(2022) 810405,arXiv:2110.02319 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  47. [47]

    A non-lorentzian primer,

    E. Bergshoeff, J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, and J. Gomis, “A non-lorentzian primer,”SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes69(2023) 1,arXiv:2206.12177 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Carroll contractions of Lorentz-invariant theories,

    M. Henneaux and P. Salgado-Rebolledo, “Carroll contractions of Lorentz-invariant theories,” JHEP11(2021) 180,arXiv:2109.06708 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    Carroll swiftons,

    F. Ecker, D. Grumiller, M. Henneaux, and P. Salgado-Rebolledo, “Carroll swiftons,”Phys. Rev. D110no. 4, (2024) L041901,arXiv:2403.00544 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  50. [50]

    Carroll/fracton particles and their correspondence,

    J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, A. P´ erez, and S. Prohazka, “Carroll/fracton particles and their correspondence,”JHEP06(2023) 207,arXiv:2305.06730 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Quantum Carroll/fracton particles,

    J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, A. P´ erez, and S. Prohazka, “Quantum Carroll/fracton particles,” JHEP10(2023) 041,arXiv:2307.05674 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  52. [52]

    Galilei particles revisited,

    J. M. Figueroa-O’Farrill, S. Pekar, A. P´ erez, and S. Prohazka, “Galilei particles revisited,” SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes93(2025) 1,arXiv:2401.03241 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Carroll–Schr¨ odinger equation as the ultra-relativistic limit of the tachyon equation,

    M. Najafizadeh, “Carroll–Schr¨ odinger equation as the ultra-relativistic limit of the tachyon equation,”Sci. Rep.15no. 1, (2025) 13884,arXiv:2403.11212 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    On the Schr¨ odinger and Carroll Schr¨ odinger Equations: Dualities and Applications,

    J. Rojas, E. Casanova, and M. Arias, “On the Schr¨ odinger and Carroll Schr¨ odinger Equations: Dualities and Applications,”arXiv:2510.21597 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  55. [55]

    Dynamics of multiparticle Carroll-Schr¨ odinger quantum systems,

    J. Rojas and M. Arias, “Dynamics of multiparticle Carroll-Schr¨ odinger quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. D113no. 8, (2026) 085019,arXiv:2512.00247 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  56. [56]

    Possible kinematics,

    H. Bacry and J. Levy-Leblond, “Possible kinematics,”J. Math. Phys.9(1968) 1605–1614

    1968

  57. [57]

    Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics. — I,

    J.-R. Derome and J.-G. Dubois, “Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics. — I,”Nuovo Cim. B9(1972) 351–376

    1972

  58. [58]

    Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics. II: Irreducible projective representations,

    J.-G. Dubois, “Hooke’s symmetries and nonrelativistic cosmological kinematics. II: Irreducible projective representations,”Nuovo Cim. B15(1973) 1–17. 31

    1973

  59. [59]

    De Sitter Musings,

    D. Anninos, “De Sitter Musings,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. A27(2012) 1230013, arXiv:1205.3855 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  60. [60]

    A Unifying Approach to Non-Lorentzian String Theory

    E. A. Bergshoeff, L. Romano, J. Rosseel, E. Sim´ on F´ elix, and S. Zeko, “A Unifying Approach to Non-Lorentzian String Theory.” work in progress

  61. [61]

    A Twisted Origin for Magnetic Carroll Supersymmetry,

    I. Bulunur, O. Ergec, O. Kasikci, M. Ozkan, and M. S. Zog, “A Twisted Origin for Magnetic Carroll Supersymmetry,”arXiv:2603.28269 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    Tachyons in the Galilean limit,

    C. Batlle, J. Gomis, L. Mezincescu, and P. K. Townsend, “Tachyons in the Galilean limit,” JHEP04(2017) 120,arXiv:1702.04792 [hep-th]. 32

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017