pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.29896 · v1 · pith:NGZGAAITnew · submitted 2026-06-29 · ✦ hep-th · gr-qc

CFT Constraints on the Weak Gravity Conjecture

Saeed Noori Gashti , Behnam Pourhassan , \.Izzet Sakall{\i} This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 05:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th gr-qc
keywords Weak Gravity ConjectureAdS/CFT correspondencequasinormal modesdRGT massive gravityEinstein-ModMaxblack holesswampland conjectures
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Weak Gravity Conjecture follows from boundary Green's function poles for black holes in dRGT massive gravity and Einstein-ModMax electrodynamics.

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

The paper derives lower bounds on the charge-to-mass ratio from the imaginary parts of quasinormal modes read off as poles of the retarded Green's function in the boundary theory. In dRGT massive gravity all massive-gravity parameters cancel and the bound saturates at q over m r plus at least one over square root of two. In the Einstein-ModMax case the bound retains dependence on the nonlinearity parameter gamma yet remains order one and recovers the standard value when gamma vanishes. The derivation uses the near-horizon limit of the charged Klein-Gordon equation. A sympathetic reader cares because the result supplies an explicit holographic test of the conjecture outside the usual Reissner-Nordstrom setting.

Core claim

We show that the WGC follows from this boundary calculation in two settings that fall outside the Reissner-Nordstrom idealisation: static spherically symmetric black holes in dRGT massive gravity, and dyonic black holes in Einstein-ModMax non-linear electrodynamics. The chain runs from the metric and gauge field, through the charged Klein-Gordon equation, into a near-horizon scaling limit whose radial equation reduces to Whittaker form; the conformal weight nu zero then enters a damping-time inequality. For the dRGT black hole every massive-gravity parameter cancels out, leaving the universal saturation q over m r plus greater than or equal to one over square root of two. For the Einstein-Mo

What carries the argument

The near-horizon scaling limit of the charged Klein-Gordon equation that reduces its radial part to Whittaker form, from which the conformal weight is extracted and inserted into a damping-time inequality.

If this is right

  • In dRGT massive gravity the bound is independent of the parameters alpha, beta, m sub g and h.
  • In Einstein-ModMax theory the bound depends on gamma and weakens monotonically as the nonlinearity increases.
  • Relaxing exact extremality, minimal coupling or the absence of higher-curvature terms reintroduces dependence on the massive-gravity parameters through controlled functional forms.
  • The resulting bounds remain of order unity across the cases examined.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The cancellation in the dRGT case suggests the bound may hold more generally when the near-horizon limit still yields Whittaker form.
  • Numerical checks of quasinormal modes in the relaxed dRGT models with higher-curvature corrections could confirm or adjust the tabulated parameter dependence.
  • The same boundary extraction might be applied to other nonlinear electrodynamics models whose equations admit an analogous near-horizon reduction.
  • If the bounds persist under further extensions they could serve as a practical constraint when fitting massive-gravity parameters to cosmological data.

Load-bearing premise

The near-horizon scaling limit reduces the radial equation of the charged Klein-Gordon field to Whittaker form so that the conformal weight enters the damping-time inequality.

What would settle it

A direct numerical computation of quasinormal frequencies for a dRGT black hole whose charge-to-mass ratio lies below one over square root of two, showing that the imaginary part violates the derived damping-time inequality, would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.29896 by Behnam Pourhassan, \.Izzet Sakall{\i}, Saeed Noori Gashti.

Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: Hawking temperature T(r+) of the dRGT massive-gravity black hole at fixed charge Q = 0.5, reference-metric constant h = 0.5, and dRGT couplings α = β = 0.1, for four values of the graviton mass mg ∈ {0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6}. The Reissner–Nordström limit (mg = 0) is the only curve that develops a maximum at small r+; increasing mg pushes T(r+) upward and lifts the small-r+ inflection. The roots of T(r+) = 0 are… view at source ↗
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: Saturation of the WGC bound in the Einstein–ModMax black hole: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: Allowed (green) and forbidden (vermilion) regions of the charge-to-mass ratio in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: Composite WGC envelope q/(mr+) ≥ e −γ/2p 1 + ξΛ/m2 on the (γ, ξΛ/m2 ) plane. Solid contours mark constant saturation values, labelled on the curves. The ModMax parameter γ runs along the horizontal axis; the non-minimal-coupling parameter ξΛ/m2 runs along the vertical axis. The value 0.707 ≈ 1/ √ 2 is the dRGT saturation of Section 3; the value 1.000 is the Reissner–Nordström saturation. with Wilson coef… view at source ↗
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.2. Figure 5.2: Conformal weight squared ν 2 0 versus charge squared q 2 for the dRGT (parameter-free, black solid) and Einstein–ModMax (three values of γ, in colour) cases at fixed mr+ = 0.20. The horizontal dashed line is the CFT cap ν 2 0 ≤ 1/4 from Eq. (3.28). Curves crossing the cap above set the WGC threshold. The stretched zoom inset displays the narrow band ν 2 0 ∈ [0.24, 0.30] over q 2 ∈ [0, 0.04], where the fo… view at source ↗
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: Analytic (ν 2 0 from Eq. 4.16) and numerical evaluations of the ModMax conformal weight at q 2 = 0.10, for three values of γ, swept across mr+ ∈ [0.10, 0.50]. The horizontal dashed line is the CFT cap ν 2 0 ≤ 1/4. The two evaluations agree to round-off, so the markers sit on the curves to within line width. To understand the origin of this difference, recall the general conformal weight formula derived i… view at source ↗
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.2. Figure 6.2: QNM damping ladder of the Einstein–ModMax black hole at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Weak Gravity Conjecture (WGC) is a swampland criterion of long standing: any consistent theory of quantum gravity must contain a charged particle whose charge-to-mass ratio exceeds that of an extremal black hole, so that gravity remains the weakest force. The AdS/CFT correspondence offers a calculable boundary handle on bulk gravity, and the imaginary parts of bulk quasinormal modes are read off the boundary as poles of a retarded Green's function. We show that the WGC follows from this boundary calculation in two settings that fall outside the Reissner--Nordstr\"om idealisation: static spherically symmetric black holes in dRGT massive gravity, and dyonic black holes in Einstein--ModMax non-linear electrodynamics. The chain runs from the metric and gauge field, through the charged Klein--Gordon equation, into a near-horizon scaling limit whose radial equation reduces to Whittaker form; the conformal weight $\nu_0$ then enters a damping-time inequality. For the dRGT black hole every massive-gravity parameter ($\alpha,\beta,m_g,h$) cancels out, leaving the universal saturation $q/(m r_+) \geq 1/\sqrt{2} \approx 0.707$. For the Einstein--ModMax black hole the duality-symmetric non-linearity parameter $\gamma$ survives, and yields $q/(m r_+) \geq e^{-\gamma/2}$, which reduces to the Reissner--Nordstr\"om bound $q/(m r_+) \geq 1$ in the Maxwell limit $\gamma \to 0$. Either result is of order unity, and the second weakens monotonically as the non-linearity grows. We then relax three of the simplifying assumptions of the dRGT derivation, namely exact extremality, minimal coupling, and the absence of higher-curvature terms. The cancellation breaks. Each correction reintroduces $m_g,\alpha,\beta$ into the bound through a controlled functional dependence, and we tabulate and plot the relaxed forms across parameter space.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the Weak Gravity Conjecture follows from a boundary CFT calculation of retarded Green's function poles (corresponding to bulk quasinormal modes) for two classes of black holes outside the Reissner-Nordström case: static spherically symmetric solutions in dRGT massive gravity and dyonic solutions in Einstein-ModMax nonlinear electrodynamics. The derivation chain starts from the metric and gauge field, proceeds through the charged Klein-Gordon equation, applies a near-horizon scaling limit that reduces the radial equation to Whittaker form, extracts a conformal weight ν₀, and inserts it into a damping-time inequality. This produces the bound q/(m r₊) ≥ 1/√2 (with all dRGT parameters α, β, m_g, h canceling) and q/(m r₊) ≥ e^{-γ/2} (with γ dependence retained, reducing to the RN bound as γ → 0). The paper also relaxes three assumptions (exact extremality, minimal coupling, absence of higher-curvature terms) and tabulates the resulting parameter-dependent corrections.

Significance. If the central technical steps hold, the work offers a CFT-derived route to the WGC in non-standard gravity and electrodynamics theories, with the exact parameter cancellation in the dRGT case and the controlled γ-dependence in ModMax constituting potentially useful results. The explicit treatment of relaxed assumptions, including tabulated and plotted forms, provides a concrete illustration of how the bound responds to corrections. These features would strengthen the case for viewing the WGC as emerging from boundary consistency conditions beyond the Einstein-Maxwell idealization.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract (derivation chain) and the section presenting the charged Klein-Gordon equation and near-horizon limit] The near-horizon scaling limit and reduction to Whittaker form (described in the abstract's derivation-chain paragraph) is load-bearing for extracting ν₀ and the subsequent bound. The manuscript must supply the explicit scaled radial ODE, the precise matching to the Whittaker equation, and the resulting expression for ν₀ in both the dRGT and ModMax backgrounds so that the claimed exact cancellation of (α, β, m_g, h) and the retention of γ can be verified at the algebraic level rather than numerically.
  2. [Abstract (damping-time inequality) and the section deriving the bound from ν₀] The damping-time inequality that converts ν₀ into the stated q/(m r₊) bound is not accompanied by an explicit statement of its form or the assumptions on the quasinormal-mode spectrum and Green's-function poles. This step is required for both the universal dRGT saturation 1/√2 and the ModMax result e^{-γ/2}; without it the chain from the Whittaker reduction to the WGC claim remains incomplete.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract is information-dense; numbering the steps of the derivation chain (metric → KG equation → scaling limit → Whittaker → ν₀ → inequality) would improve readability.
  2. Notation for the conformal weight (ν₀) and the damping time should be introduced with a brief reminder of their relation to the retarded Green's function poles when first used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive report. The two major comments correctly identify places where the technical steps require more explicit presentation to allow algebraic verification. We will revise the manuscript to supply these details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract (derivation chain) and the section presenting the charged Klein-Gordon equation and near-horizon limit] The near-horizon scaling limit and reduction to Whittaker form (described in the abstract's derivation-chain paragraph) is load-bearing for extracting ν₀ and the subsequent bound. The manuscript must supply the explicit scaled radial ODE, the precise matching to the Whittaker equation, and the resulting expression for ν₀ in both the dRGT and ModMax backgrounds so that the claimed exact cancellation of (α, β, m_g, h) and the retention of γ can be verified at the algebraic level rather than numerically.

    Authors: We agree that the explicit scaled radial ODE, the matching procedure to the Whittaker equation, and the resulting ν₀ must be displayed for both backgrounds. In the revised manuscript we will insert these derivations in the relevant sections, making the parameter cancellation in the dRGT case and the γ dependence in the ModMax case verifiable algebraically. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract (damping-time inequality) and the section deriving the bound from ν₀] The damping-time inequality that converts ν₀ into the stated q/(m r₊) bound is not accompanied by an explicit statement of its form or the assumptions on the quasinormal-mode spectrum and Green's-function poles. This step is required for both the universal dRGT saturation 1/√2 and the ModMax result e^{-γ/2}; without it the chain from the Whittaker reduction to the WGC claim remains incomplete.

    Authors: We accept that the damping-time inequality, together with the precise assumptions on the quasinormal-mode spectrum and the identification of Green's-function poles, should be stated explicitly. The revised version will contain a dedicated paragraph (or short subsection) giving the inequality, listing the assumptions, and showing how it produces the quoted bounds in each theory. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation chain is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives the WGC bound via an explicit chain (metric/gauge field → charged Klein-Gordon equation → near-horizon Whittaker limit → conformal weight ν0 → damping-time inequality) whose steps are presented as identities or direct consequences of the background solutions. In the dRGT case the cancellation of (α,β,mg,h) is an algebraic identity inside the derived inequality, not a fit; in the ModMax case γ enters as a fixed theory parameter. No load-bearing self-citation, no parameter fitted to the target bound and then relabeled as prediction, and no ansatz smuggled via prior work. The result is therefore not equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The derivation rests on the AdS/CFT dictionary relating bulk quasinormal modes to boundary retarded Green's function poles and on the existence of the stated black hole solutions in each theory. No free parameters are fitted to data; the dRGT parameters cancel and γ is an input of the ModMax Lagrangian.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption AdS/CFT correspondence maps bulk quasinormal modes to poles of the boundary retarded Green's function
    Invoked to read imaginary parts of bulk modes from boundary calculation.
  • domain assumption Near-horizon radial equation reduces to Whittaker form allowing extraction of conformal weight ν0
    Central step that produces the damping-time inequality used for the bound.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5917 in / 1522 out tokens · 37569 ms · 2026-06-30T05:28:58.481955+00:00 · methodology

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

101 extracted references · 89 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and super- gravity.Adv

    Juan Martin Maldacena. The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity.Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 2: 231–252, 1998. doi: 10.1023/A:1026654312961. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1026654312961 1998

  2. [2]

    S. S. Gubser, Igor R. Klebanov, and Alexander M. Polyakov. Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory.Phys. Lett. B, 428:105–114, 1998. doi: 10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00377-3. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00377-3

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(98)00377-3 1998

  3. [3]

    Anti-de Sitter space and holography.Adv

    Edward Witten. Anti-de Sitter space and holography.Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 2:253–291, 1998. doi: 10.4310/ATMP.1998. v2.n2.a2. URLhttps://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a2

    work page doi:10.4310/atmp.1998 1998

  4. [4]

    Klebanov and Edward Witten

    Igor R. Klebanov and Edward Witten. AdS/CFT correspondence and symmetry breaking.Nucl. Phys. B, 556:89–114, 1999. doi: 10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00387-9. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00387-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(99)00387-9 1999

  5. [5]

    Kioumarsipour and J

    M. Kioumarsipour and J. Sadeghi. Effects of the hyperscaling violation and dynamical exponents on the imaginary potential and entropic force of heavy quarkonium via holography.Eur. Phys. J. C, 81(8):735, 2021. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09524-8. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09524-8

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09524-8 2021

  6. [6]

    Schwinger-Keldysh effective action for a relativistic Brownian particle in the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys

    Yanyan Bu and Biao Zhang. Schwinger-Keldysh effective action for a relativistic Brownian particle in the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys. Rev. D, 104(8):086002, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.086002. URL https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.104.086002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.086002 2021

  7. [7]

    Flavor symmetries of six-dimensional N = (1, 0) theories from AdS/CFT correspondence.JHEP, 05:221, 2021

    Shota Fujiwara, Yosuke Imamura, and Tatsuya Mori. Flavor symmetries of six-dimensional N = (1, 0) theories from AdS/CFT correspondence.JHEP, 05:221, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2021)221. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2021)221

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2021)221 2021

  8. [8]

    Domain wall AdS/QCD.Phys

    Nick Evans and Jack Mitchell. Domain wall AdS/QCD.Phys. Rev. D, 104(9):094018, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.094018. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.094018. 24 Abbreviation Expansion AdS Anti-de Sitter spacetime AdS/CFT Anti-de Sitter / Conformal Field Theory correspondence BH Black hole CFT Conformal Field Theory dRGT de Rham–Gabadadze–Tolley (...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.094018 2021

  9. [9]

    Heavy quarkonia spectroscopy at zero and finite temperature in bottom-up AdS/QCD.Phys

    Miguel Angel Martin Contreras, Saulo Diles, and Alfredo Vega. Heavy quarkonia spectroscopy at zero and finite temperature in bottom-up AdS/QCD.Phys. Rev. D, 103(8):086008, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.086008. URL https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.086008

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.086008 2021

  10. [10]

    Kapusta, and Thomas M

    Tony Gherghetta, Joseph I. Kapusta, and Thomas M. Kelley. Chiral symmetry breaking in the soft-wall AdS/QCD model. Phys. Rev. D, 79:076003, 2009. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.076003. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.076003

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.076003 2009

  11. [11]

    Brodsky and Guy F

    Stanley J. Brodsky and Guy F. de Teramond. Light-Front Dynamics and AdS/QCD Correspondence: The Pion Form Factor in the Space- and Time-Like Regions.Phys. Rev. D, 77:056007, 2008. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.77.056007. URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.77.056007

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.056007 2008

  12. [12]

    Drag force, jet quenching, and AdS/QCD.Phys

    Eiji Nakano, Shunsuke Teraguchi, and Wen-Yu Wen. Drag force, jet quenching, and AdS/QCD.Phys. Rev. D, 75:085016,

  13. [13]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.085016

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.75.085016. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.085016

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.75.085016

  14. [14]

    Schwartz

    Emanuel Katz, Adam Lewandowski, and Matthew D. Schwartz. Tensor mesons in AdS/QCD.Phys. Rev. D, 74:086004, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.086004. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.086004

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.086004 2006

  15. [15]

    Unitarity Methods in AdS/CFT.JHEP, 03:061, 2020

    David Meltzer, Eric Perlmutter, and Allic Sivaramakrishnan. Unitarity Methods in AdS/CFT.JHEP, 03:061, 2020. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2020)061. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2020)061

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2020)061 2020

  16. [16]

    Son, and Mikhail A

    Andreas Karch, Emanuel Katz, Dam T. Son, and Mikhail A. Stephanov. Linear confinement and AdS/QCD.Phys. Rev. D, 74:015005, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.015005. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.015005

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.015005 2006

  17. [17]

    Zakharov

    Oleg Andreev and Valentin I. Zakharov. Heavy-quark potentials and AdS/QCD.Phys. Rev. D, 74:025023, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.025023. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.025023. 25

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.025023 2006

  18. [18]

    Separation of variables in AdS/CFT: functional approach for the fishnet CFT.JHEP, 06:131, 2021

    Andrea Cavaglià, Nikolay Gromov, and Fedor Levkovich-Maslyuk. Separation of variables in AdS/CFT: functional approach for the fishnet CFT.JHEP, 06:131, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2021)131. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2021)131

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2021)131 2021

  19. [19]

    Obers, and Gerben Oling

    Troels Harmark, Jelle Hartong, Niels A. Obers, and Gerben Oling. Spin Matrix Theory String Backgrounds and Penrose Limits of AdS/CFT.JHEP, 03:129, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2021)129. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2021)129

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2021)129 2021

  20. [20]

    A Weyl semimetal from AdS/CFT with flavour.JHEP, 04:162, 2021

    Kazem Bitaghsir Fadafan, Andy O’Bannon, Ronnie Rodgers, and Matthew Russell. A Weyl semimetal from AdS/CFT with flavour.JHEP, 04:162, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2021)162. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2021)162

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2021)162 2021

  21. [21]

    Retore, and Alessandro Torrielli

    Marius De Leeuw, Chiara Paletta, Anton Pribytok, Ana L. Retore, and Alessandro Torrielli. Free Fermions, vertex Hamiltonians, and lower-dimensional AdS/CFT.JHEP, 02:191, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2021)191. URL https: //doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2021)191

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep02(2021)191 2021

  22. [22]

    Generalized symmetries and 2-groups via electromagnetic duality in AdS/CFT

    Oliver DeWolfe and Kenneth Higginbotham. Generalized symmetries and 2-groups via electromagnetic duality in AdS/CFT. Phys. Rev. D, 103(2):026011, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.026011. URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103. 026011

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.026011 2021

  23. [23]

    Nambu-Goldstone modes in non-equilibrium systems from AdS/CFT correspondence

    Shuta Ishigaki and Masataka Matsumoto. Nambu-Goldstone modes in non-equilibrium systems from AdS/CFT correspondence. JHEP, 04:040, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2021)040. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2021)040

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2021)040 2021

  24. [24]

    Kabat, Gilad Lifschytz, and David A

    Seiji Terashima. Bulk locality in the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys. Rev. D, 104(8):086014, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD. 104.086014. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.086014

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd 2021

  25. [25]

    Chiral magnetic effect and three-point function from AdS/CFT correspondence.JHEP, 09:117, 2021

    Lin Yin, Defu Hou, and Hai-cang Ren. Chiral magnetic effect and three-point function from AdS/CFT correspondence.JHEP, 09:117, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP09(2021)117. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2021)117

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep09(2021)117 2021

  26. [26]

    Aaron K. Mes, R. W. Moerman, Jonathan P. Shock, and W. A. Horowitz. Strongly coupled heavy and light quark thermal motion from AdS/CFT.Annals Phys., 436:168675, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.aop.2021.168675. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/ j.aop.2021.168675

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2021.168675 2022

  27. [27]

    The Tortoise and the Hare: A Causality Puzzle in AdS/CFT.Class

    David Berenstein and David Grabovsky. The Tortoise and the Hare: A Causality Puzzle in AdS/CFT.Class. Quant. Grav., 38(10):105008, 2021. doi: 10.1088/1361-6382/abf1c7. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/abf1c7

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/abf1c7 2021

  28. [28]

    Berman, Tristan C

    Robert J. Berman, Tristan C. Collins, and Daniel Persson. Emergent Sasaki-Einstein geometry and AdS/CFT.Nature Commun., 13(1):365, 2022. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-27951-9. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27951-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27951-9 2022

  29. [29]

    Gubser, Juan Martin Maldacena, Hirosi Ooguri, and Yaron Oz

    Ofer Aharony, Steven S. Gubser, Juan Martin Maldacena, Hirosi Ooguri, and Yaron Oz. Large N field theories, string theory and gravity.Phys. Rept., 323:183–386, 2000. doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(99)00083-6. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/ S0370-1573(99)00083-6

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(99)00083-6 2000

  30. [30]

    Freedman

    Eric D’Hoker and Daniel Z. Freedman. Supersymmetric gauge theories and the AdS/CFT correspondence. pages 3–158, 2002

    2002

  31. [31]

    Hartnoll

    Sean A. Hartnoll. Lectures on holographic methods for condensed matter physics.Class. Quant. Grav., 26:224002, 2009. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/26/22/224002. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/26/22/224002

    work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/26/22/224002 2009

  32. [32]

    Holographic duality with a view toward many-body physics.Adv

    John McGreevy. Holographic duality with a view toward many-body physics.Adv. High Energy Phys., 2010:723105, 2010. doi: 10.1155/2010/723105. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1155/2010/723105

    work page doi:10.1155/2010/723105 2010

  33. [33]

    Holographic QCD: Past, Present, and Future.Prog

    Youngman Kim, Ik Jae Shin, and Takuya Tsukioka. Holographic QCD: Past, Present, and Future.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 68:55–112, 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.09.002. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.09.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.09.002 2013

  34. [34]

    Carr, Thomas Schäfer, Peter Steinberg, and John E

    Allan Adams, Lincoln D. Carr, Thomas Schäfer, Peter Steinberg, and John E. Thomas. Strongly Correlated Quantum Fluids: Ultracold Quantum Gases, Quantum Chromodynamic Plasmas, and Holographic Duality.New J. Phys., 14:115009, 2012. doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/14/11/115009. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/11/115009

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/11/115009 2012

  35. [35]

    The String Landscape and the Swampland

    Cumrun Vafa. The String landscape and the swampland. 2005. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0509212

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  36. [36]

    On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland.Nucl

    Hirosi Ooguri and Cumrun Vafa. On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland.Nucl. Phys. B, 766:21–33,

  37. [37]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.10.033

    doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.10.033. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.10.033

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.10.033 2006

  38. [38]

    The String landscape, black holes and gravity as the weakest force.JHEP, 06:060, 2007

    Nima Arkani-Hamed, Lubos Motl, Alberto Nicolis, and Cumrun Vafa. The String landscape, black holes and gravity as the weakest force.JHEP, 06:060, 2007. doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2007/06/060. URL https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/ 2007/06/060. 26

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/06/060 2007

  39. [39]

    Sadeghi, B

    J. Sadeghi, B. Pourhassan, S. Noori Gashti, and S. Upadhyay. Swampland conjecture and inflation model from brane perspective. Phys. Scripta, 96(12):125317, 2021. doi: 10.1088/1402-4896/ac3a90. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/ac3a90

    work page doi:10.1088/1402-4896/ac3a90 2021

  40. [40]

    Generalized Symmetry Breaking Scales and Weak Gravity Conjectures

    Clay Cordova, Kantaro Ohmori, and Tom Rudelius. Generalized Symmetry Breaking Scales and Weak Gravity Conjectures

  41. [41]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2202.05866

    work page arXiv

  42. [42]

    Bounding Violations of the Weak Gravity Conjecture

    Johan Henriksson, Brian McPeak, Francesco Russo, and Alessandro Vichi. Bounding Violations of the Weak Gravity Conjecture

  43. [43]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2203.09564

    work page arXiv

  44. [44]

    Higher-Group Symmetries and Weak Gravity Conjecture Mixing

    Saliha Kaya and Tom Rudelius. Higher-Group Symmetries and Weak Gravity Conjecture Mixing. 2022. URLhttps: //arxiv.org/abs/2202.04655

    work page arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    E9 symmetry in the Heterotic String onS1 and the Weak Gravity Conjecture

    Veronica Collazuol, Mariana Graña, and Álvaro Herráez. E9 symmetry in the Heterotic String onS1 and the Weak Gravity Conjecture. 2022. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13354

    work page arXiv 2022

  46. [46]

    Odintsov, and Arturo Stabile

    Salvatore Capozziello, Mariafelicia De Laurentis, Sergei D. Odintsov, and Arturo Stabile. Hydrostatic equilibrium and stellar structure in f(R)-gravity.Phys. Rev. D, 83:064004, 2011. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.83.064004. URL https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevD.83.064004

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.83.064004 2011

  47. [47]

    Planar Black Holes as a Route to Understanding the Weak Gravity Conjecture

    Brett McInnes. Planar Black Holes as a Route to Understanding the Weak Gravity Conjecture. 2022. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2201.05257

    work page arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    Clifford Cheung and Grant N. Remmen. Naturalness and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.Phys. Rev. Lett., 113:051601, 2014. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.051601. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.051601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.051601 2014

  49. [49]

    Constraints on Early Dark Energy from the Axion Weak Gravity Conjecture

    Tom Rudelius. Constraints on Early Dark Energy from the Axion Weak Gravity Conjecture. 2022. URLhttps://arxiv. org/abs/2203.05581

    work page arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Weak gravity versus scale separation

    Niccolò Cribiori and Gianguido Dall’Agata. Weak gravity versus scale separation. 2022. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2203. 05559

    2022

  51. [51]

    Quantum corrections in 4d N = 1 infinite distance limits and the weak gravity conjecture.JHEP, 03:252, 2021

    Daniel Klaewer, Seung-Joo Lee, Timo Weigand, and Max Wiesner. Quantum corrections in 4d N = 1 infinite distance limits and the weak gravity conjecture.JHEP, 03:252, 2021. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2021)252. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/ JHEP03(2021)252

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2021)252 2021

  52. [52]

    Sharpening the Weak Gravity Conjecture with Dimensional Reduction

    Ben Heidenreich, Matthew Reece, and Tom Rudelius. Sharpening the Weak Gravity Conjecture with Dimensional Reduction. JHEP, 02:140, 2016. doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2016)140. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2016)140

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep02(2016)140 2016

  53. [53]

    Evidence for a sublattice weak gravity conjecture.JHEP, 08:025, 2017

    Ben Heidenreich, Matthew Reece, and Tom Rudelius. Evidence for a sublattice weak gravity conjecture.JHEP, 08:025, 2017. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2017)025. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2017)025

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2017)025 2017

  54. [54]

    A Tower Weak Gravity Conjecture from Infrared Consistency.Fortsch

    Stefano Andriolo, Daniel Junghans, Toshifumi Noumi, and Gary Shiu. A Tower Weak Gravity Conjecture from Infrared Consistency.Fortsch. Phys., 66(5):1800020, 2018. doi: 10.1002/prop.201800020. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/prop. 201800020

    work page doi:10.1002/prop.201800020 2018

  55. [55]

    Monopoles, duality, and string theory.Int

    Joseph Polchinski. Monopoles, duality, and string theory.Int. J. Mod. Phys. A, 19S1:145–156, 2004. doi: 10.1142/ S0217751X0401866X. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X0401866X

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x0401866x 2004

  56. [56]

    Non-supersymmetric AdS and the Swampland.Adv

    Hirosi Ooguri and Cumrun Vafa. Non-supersymmetric AdS and the Swampland.Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 21:1787–1801,

  57. [57]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.2017.v21.n7.a8

    doi: 10.4310/ATMP.2017.v21.n7.a8. URLhttps://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.2017.v21.n7.a8

    work page doi:10.4310/atmp.2017.v21.n7.a8 2017

  58. [58]

    Ibanez, Victor Martin-Lozano, and Irene Valenzuela

    Luis E. Ibanez, Victor Martin-Lozano, and Irene Valenzuela. Constraining Neutrino Masses, the Cosmological Constant and BSM Physics from the Weak Gravity Conjecture.JHEP, 11:066, 2017. doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2017)066. URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2017)066

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2017)066 2017

  59. [59]

    Weak Gravity Conjecture and extremal black holes.Sci

    Gary Shiu, Pablo Soler, and William Cottrell. Weak Gravity Conjecture and extremal black holes.Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron., 62(11):110412, 2019. doi: 10.1007/s11433-019-9406-2. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-019-9406-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-019-9406-2 2019

  60. [60]

    Zachary Fisher and Cynthia J. Mogni. A Semiclassical, Entropic Proof of a Weak Gravity Conjecture. 2017. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.07957

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  61. [61]

    Clifford Cheung, Junyu Liu, and Grant N. Remmen. Proof of the Weak Gravity Conjecture from Black Hole Entropy.JHEP, 10:004, 2018. doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2018)004. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2018)004. 27

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2018)004 2018

  62. [62]

    Horowitz, and Jorge E

    Toby Crisford, Gary T. Horowitz, and Jorge E. Santos. Testing the Weak Gravity - Cosmic Censorship Connection.Phys. Rev. D, 97(6):066005, 2018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.97.066005. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.066005

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.066005 2018

  63. [63]

    Wormholes, Emergent Gauge Fields, and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.JHEP, 01:122, 2016

    Daniel Harlow. Wormholes, Emergent Gauge Fields, and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.JHEP, 01:122, 2016. doi: 10.1007/ JHEP01(2016)122. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2016)122

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2016)122 2016

  64. [64]

    Weak Gravity Conjecture from Unitarity and Causality.Phys

    Yuta Hamada, Toshifumi Noumi, and Gary Shiu. Weak Gravity Conjecture from Unitarity and Causality.Phys. Rev. Lett., 123(5):051601, 2019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.051601. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.051601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.051601 2019

  65. [65]

    Kinney, Sunny Vagnozzi, and Luca Visinelli

    William H. Kinney, Sunny Vagnozzi, and Luca Visinelli. The zoo plot meets the swampland: mutual (in)consistency of single-field inflation, string conjectures, and cosmological data.Class. Quant. Grav., 36(11):117001, 2019. doi: 10.1088/ 1361-6382/ab1d87. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/ab1d87

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ab1d87 2019

  66. [66]

    The Weak Gravity Conjecture: A Review

    Daniel Harlow, Ben Heidenreich, Matthew Reece, and Tom Rudelius. The Weak Gravity Conjecture: A Review. 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.08387

    work page arXiv 2022

  67. [67]

    Weak gravity conjecture and effective field theory.Phys

    Prashant Saraswat. Weak gravity conjecture and effective field theory.Phys. Rev. D, 95(2):025013, 2017. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.95.025013. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.025013

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.025013 2017

  68. [68]

    Weak gravity conjecture in the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys

    Yu Nakayama and Yasunori Nomura. Weak gravity conjecture in the AdS/CFT correspondence.Phys. Rev. D, 92(12):126006,

  69. [69]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.126006

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.126006. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.126006

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.126006

  70. [70]

    Bachlechner, Cody Long, and Liam McAllister

    Thomas C. Bachlechner, Cody Long, and Liam McAllister. Planckian Axions and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.JHEP, 01: 091, 2016. doi: 10.1007/JHEP01(2016)091. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2016)091

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2016)091 2016

  71. [71]

    Positivity of Amplitudes, Weak Gravity Conjecture, and Modified Gravity.Phys

    Brando Bellazzini, Matthew Lewandowski, and Javi Serra. Positivity of Amplitudes, Weak Gravity Conjecture, and Modified Gravity.Phys. Rev. Lett., 123(25):251103, 2019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.251103. URL https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.123.251103

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.251103 2019

  72. [72]

    Convexity of charged operators in CFTs and the weak gravity conjecture.Phys

    Ofer Aharony and Eran Palti. Convexity of charged operators in CFTs and the weak gravity conjecture.Phys. Rev. D, 104 (12):126005, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.126005. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.126005

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.126005 2021

  73. [73]

    Repulsive Forces and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.JHEP, 10:055,

    Ben Heidenreich, Matthew Reece, and Tom Rudelius. Repulsive Forces and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.JHEP, 10:055,

  74. [74]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2019)055

    doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2019)055. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2019)055

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2019)055 2019

  75. [75]

    U(1) mixing and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.Eur

    Karim Benakli, Carlo Branchina, and Gaetan Lafforgue-Marmet. U(1) mixing and the Weak Gravity Conjecture.Eur. Phys. J. C, 80(12):1118, 2020. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08691-4. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08691-4

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08691-4 2020

  76. [76]

    A Stringy Test of the Scalar Weak Gravity Conjecture.Nucl

    Seung-Joo Lee, Wolfgang Lerche, and Timo Weigand. A Stringy Test of the Scalar Weak Gravity Conjecture.Nucl. Phys. B, 938:321–350, 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2018.11.001. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2018.11.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2018.11.001 2019

  77. [77]

    de Alwis, A

    S. de Alwis, A. Eichhorn, A. Held, J. M. Pawlowski, M. Schiffer, and F. Versteegen. Asymptotic safety, string theory and the weak gravity conjecture.Phys. Lett. B, 798:134991, 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134991. URL https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134991

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134991 2019

  78. [78]

    Duality and axionic weak gravity.Phys

    Stefano Andriolo, Tzu-Chen Huang, Toshifumi Noumi, Hirosi Ooguri, and Gary Shiu. Duality and axionic weak gravity.Phys. Rev. D, 102(4):046008, 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.046008. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.046008

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.046008 2020

  79. [79]

    Sera Cremonini, Callum R. T. Jones, James T. Liu, Brian McPeak, and Yuan Tang. NUT charge weak gravity conjecture from dimensional reduction.Phys. Rev. D, 103(10):106011, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.106011. URL https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.106011

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.106011 2021

  80. [80]

    Ibanez, Miguel Montero, Angel Uranga, and Irene Valenzuela

    Luis E. Ibanez, Miguel Montero, Angel Uranga, and Irene Valenzuela. Relaxion Monodromy and the Weak Gravity Conjecture. JHEP, 04:020, 2016. doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2016)020. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2016)020

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2016)020 2016

Showing first 80 references.