REVIEW 2 cited by
Snowmass White Paper: The Quest to Define QFT
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
This article provides a review of the literature on rigorous definitions and constructions in Quantum Field Theory, spanning the period of seven decades. Comparing with the ideas and constructions found in the modern physics literature, we conclude that none of the existing systems of QFT axioms can cover all the physical situations. Therefore, it is still an outstanding open problem to formulate a complete definition of QFT. We argue that the question is of relevance for both physicists and mathematicians.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Do null defects dream of conformal symmetry?
Null line defects preserve a large conformal algebra that constrains their correlators to shockwave-plane discontinuities, and a restricted test-function space resolves the ill-defined ultraboosted gauge potential.
-
Is there any Trinity of Gravity, to start with?
The teleparallel equivalents of general relativity are reformulations with unobservable extra structures, so there is no geometric trinity of gravity.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.