Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 47 references

A Quantum Dominant Energy Condition

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Quantum field theories satisfy a dominant energy condition governed by entanglement entropy — proved rigorously in two spacetime dimensions.

desk verdict The rigorous relative-entropy results are real and worth your time, but the headline QDEC (1) is not proven as stated—the bridge to stress tensors is formal; referees should treat the paper as a strong proposal, not a done deal. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.01814 v1 pith:SA3IMFWT submitted 2026-08-03 gr-qc hep-thmath-phmath.MP

Stefan Hollands , Roberto Longo , Gerardo Morsella This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-thmath-phmath.MP MSC 81T0583C4746L60 PACS 04.62.+v03.70.+k
keywords quantumdominantenergyconditionentanglemententropyrelativehalf-sidedmodularinclusionRindlerwedgeconditionsstaterecoveryalgebraicfieldtheory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Classical general relativity's dominant energy condition (DEC) says that no observer ever sees negative energy-momentum flux; in quantum field theory the pointwise version fails, and this paper proposes a non-local replacement. The quantum DEC (QDEC) states that for any entangling cut, the expected stress-energy flux is bounded below by a term built from the shape variation of the region's entanglement entropy. In two spacetime dimensions the paper proves the inequality rigorously for a dense class of states, in the equivalent form of joint convexity of wedge relative entropy. The proof runs through modular operator theory — half-sided modular inclusions and the 'ant formula' — not through field equations. As corollaries the paper derives a state-recovery bound in which energy prices recoverability, and shows that for coherent states the quantum condition reduces exactly to the classical DEC.

What carries the argument

Half-sided modular inclusions: a pair of von Neumann algebras N ⊂ M with a common cyclic separating vector whose modular flow compresses N into itself for positive times. The structure theorem for such inclusions yields a positive-energy unitary group with generator P, and the 'ant formula' equates the derivative of the relative entropy along the inclusion with 2π times the infimum (or limit) of expectations (u'Φ, P u'Φ) over the commutant. Applied to the algebra of a Rindler wedge and a null-translated sub-wedge, P is the null component of the stress tensor smeared over the horizon; positivity of P yields the convexity inequality (15). The formal identification of P with the null-smeared st

What would settle it

In two spacetime dimensions, compute S(x+r+s)+S(x)−S(x+r)−S(x+s) exactly for a free massive scalar field in a state Φ = M'Ω with a non-trivial commutant operator M'; the QDEC requires this to be non-negative for all x,r,s, and a sign violation would falsify the theorem's claimed range of validity. For d>2, evaluate the regulated shape derivative −∂₋δ₊S on a deformed-wedge cut and check whether the divergent part of the entanglement entropy cancels against the stress-tensor integral (59)–(60); surviving regulator dependence would falsify (1) while leaving the relative-entropy theorems intact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For any entangling cut C with future null vector k orthogonal to it and future causal u orthogonal to C, the QDEC asserts ⟨T^{μν}⟩ k_ν u_μ ≥ (ℏ/2π) n^{μα} n^{νβ} ∇_α (δS_EE[C]/δC^β) k_ν u_μ. In d=2 the paper proves the equivalent statement that for states Φ = M'Ω (M' affiliated to the wedge commutant), the wedge relative entropy S(x) satisfies S(x+r+s)+S(x) ≥ S(x+r)+S(x+s), i.e. r^μ s^ν ∂_μ ∂_ν S(x) ≥ 0. Theorem 3.4 turns this into the recovery bound −log F ≤ 2πR (Φ, P_0 Φ). For coherent states of a free massive scalar, the same second derivative equals 2π times the classical DEC expression, confirming the inequality directly. In d>2 the paper derives a shape-variational form (60) heuristica

Load-bearing premise

The headline inequality (1) reaches the rigorously proven results only through the formal decomposition of wedge relative entropy into a null-smeared stress-tensor integral minus the (divergent) entanglement entropy, together with the identification of the wedge modular generator with the null-smeared stress tensor; if those formal identities fail, the paper proves relative-entropy convexity and the recovery bound, but not the QDEC itself.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In two dimensions the QDEC is a proven theorem for the dense class of states M'Ω, giving the first rigorous instance of an energy–entanglement inequality of the dominant-energy type.
  • A quantitative recovery guarantee follows: the fidelity with which a state can be reconstructed from a null-shifted sub-wedge is at least exp(−2πR⟨P_0⟩), so states with less energy lose less recoverable information.
  • For coherent states of a free massive scalar field, the QDEC reduces exactly to the classical dominant energy condition for the classical solution, making the classical DEC the semiclassical face of the quantum inequality.
  • The shape-variational form (60) contains the quantum null energy condition as the ++ and −− special cases, so the QDEC is a strict strengthening of the QNEC.
  • If the conjectured extension to curved cuts holds, the QDEC would apply to degenerate horizons such as extremal Kerr-Newman-(A)dS, and would fail generically on non-degenerate horizons, giving a sharp geometric criterion for which cuts obey it.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The recovery bound suggests a general information-theoretic pricing principle — the energy of a state pays for how much of its information survives restriction to a subregion — that could be tested directly in lattice models or tensor networks where fidelities and energies are both computable.
  • If the conjectural extension of Theorem 3.3 to all finite-entropy states holds, the QDEC would follow from relative-entropy convexity alone, bypassing the divergent entanglement entropy; the condition would then be a structural property of any QFT with wedge modular covariance, not a dynamical input.
  • The geometric criterion behind Conjecture 5.2 — expansion- and shear-free null sheets with a nearby such sheet — suggests the QDEC holds precisely where the geometry approximates a local Killing flow, which would explain why Rindler and extremal-horizon cuts work while generic cuts may not.
  • Integrating the QDEC against Q-exact operators in topologically twisted supersymmetric theories could yield state-independent bounds on the shape derivative of entanglement entropy; verifying that the entanglement side is also a cohomology invariant is the natural test of that route.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a quantum dominant energy condition (QDEC) that lower-bounds the stress-energy expectation value in any quantum state by the shape derivative of the entanglement entropy of an entangling cut. For two-dimensional Rindler wedges, it proves (Theorem 3.3) that the wedge relative entropy S(x) is jointly convex as a function of the wedge apex, and (Theorem 3.4) a recovery bound relating the fidelity to the energy expectation value. It also computes the second derivative of S(x) for coherent states of a free scalar field and connects it to the classical DEC. For d>2, it formulates a deformed-wedge theorem (Theorem 4.2, Corollary 4.3) and gives a heuristic derivation of the full QDEC (1) through formal identities involving null-smeared stress tensors and a decomposition of relative entropy into energy flux minus entanglement entropy. The authors explicitly label parts of this bridge as formal or heuristic and list open conjectures.

Significance. The rigorous results are significant: Theorem 3.3 gives a new, parameter-free convexity property of wedge relative entropy in any two-dimensional algebraic QFT satisfying standard modular assumptions, and Theorem 3.4 gives a quantitative recovery bound with a clean energy prefactor. The coherent-state calculation of Sec. 3.2 is a concrete and checkable illustration. However, the advertised inequality (1) is not a proven consequence of these results; the connection relies on unproven formal identities. The paper is most valuable when read as establishing relative-entropy inequalities and as a conjecture for a stress-tensor QDEC, not as a proof of (1).

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (49)] The central d>2 inequality (1) depends on identifying the half-sided modular inclusion generators P±(x⊥) with null-smeared stress-tensor components. The paper itself states that (49) is formal and that additional null-infinity contributions may arise for massless degrees of freedom. A rigorous identification is only sketched for the free massive scalar, and the general argument is deferred to a forthcoming work. Since (49) is used in Corollary 4.3 and then in the heuristic derivation of (60)/(1), the advertised QDEC is not established for general QFTs.
  2. [§4.2, Eq. (59); §5.1] The step from the rigorous relative-entropy theorems to the stress-tensor form of the QDEC uses the decomposition S = ∫⟨T++⟩ − S_EE, where S_EE is divergent. The authors state that the divergent part cancels after taking shape derivatives, but Proposition 5.1 verifies this only for the CFT divergence formula (65) under the restrictive conditions θ_k=0=σ_k, G_{μν}=−Λg_{μν}, and λ_1=0. No argument is given that this cancellation occurs for the states in the domain of Theorem 3.3 or for general interacting QFTs. Therefore (60) and hence (1) remain heuristic.
  3. [§3.2] The coherent-state check does not fall under Theorem 3.3, as the paper acknowledges: the coherent state Φ=V(F)Ω is not generally of the form M′Ω with M′ affiliated to A(W(0))′. The computation leading to (28) uses the relative-entropy formula (23) quoted from [17] and the classical DEC for the free scalar. This is a useful illustration and motivates the conjecture, but it does not supply a theorem for the QDEC in the domain of Theorem 3.3, nor does it prove (1) for these states.
  4. [Proof of Theorem 3.3] The extension from states satisfying c^{-1}φ ≤ ω ≤ cφ to the full class Φ=M′Ω, with M′ only affiliated to A(W(0))′, is delegated to 'the same arguments as in proofs of [30, Thm. 6.3]' without presenting those arguments. In particular, the commutation of the limits ϵ→0 and n→∞ with the relative-entropy convergence S_{λ}(x)→S(x) and with the inequality (15) is not shown. Since this domain extension is what gives Theorem 3.3 its stated generality, the proof would be more convincing if these steps were written out or if the theorem were restricted to the explicitly proven case.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.1, Eq. (12)] The text introducing (12) says the two ant formulas are added with weights ẽ_+, ẽ_−, but the relation to r is written twice (near (11) and (12)) in a way that is easy to misread; the sign convention r_−=−ẽ_− should be stated once and kept consistently.
  2. [§3.4, proof of Theorem 3.4] There is a typo 'x=∈W(0)' in the sentence before Eq. (36).
  3. [§5.1, after Eq. (65)] The proof of Proposition 5.1 is said to be 'deferred to the end of this section', but the proof appears after Proposition 5.3 in the following subsection; the cross-reference is slightly confusing.
  4. [§2.2, Eq. (8)] The limiting argument in (8) uses the ergodic property of modular flow, but the statement 'lim_{s→−∞}(u_sΦ, m u_sΦ) = (Ω,mΩ)||Φ||²' would be clearer if the normalization of Φ and the role of the expectation value functional were spelled out; as written the right-hand side contains an extra factor ||Φ||².

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the proven d=2 results are independent relative-entropy theorems; the advertised general QDEC is explicitly labeled formal/heuristic.

full rationale

The paper's rigorous core (Prop. 3.1, Thms. 3.3, 3.4) is derived from Tomita-Takesaki modular theory, the ant formulas (6)-(7) from [29,15], and prior QNEC techniques [30]. These are published, parameter-free results whose assumptions do not include the QDEC; although [29,30,17,20] share authors, they constitute independent established theorems rather than self-citation serving as the sole support. Theorem 3.3 proves convexity of the wedge relative entropy S(x) for Phi=M'Omega, and Theorem 3.4 proves a recovery bound; neither conclusion is inserted as an input. No parameter is fitted to data and then renamed a prediction. The connection between these theorems and the headline inequality (1) passes through Eq. (49), which the paper itself calls formal ('This formula should be considered as formal'), and the decomposition (59), introduced by 'we formally write', followed by a heuristic cancellation and Conjecture 4.6. This means the general QDEC is not rigorously established, but that is an incompleteness/unsupported extrapolation, not a circular derivation. The coherent-state check (Sec. 3.2) derives the second derivative of S from a prior rigorous formula [17] and reduces the QDEC to the classical DEC, again without using QDEC as an input. No equation in the paper is equivalent to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters: the only constants are ℏ, 2π, and the fixed Minkowski metric; the smearing function f in the deformed wedges is a choice of shape, not a number fit to data. No new particles, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities are introduced; the QDEC is a proposed inequality, and the deformed wedge W_f (40) is a geometric construction used in the argument. The axioms list the background structure (Araki-Kastler assumptions, state domain class, cited theorems) and the two formal identifications (49) and (59) that carry the heuristic weight.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption A sufficiently strong version of the Haag-Kastler axioms so that the Bisognano-Wichmann and Borchers theorems hold, and wedge algebras form half-sided modular inclusions with generators P_±.
    Invoked in Secs. 3.1 and 4.1 to apply modular theory and the ant formulas to the spacetime net.
  • domain assumption State class for the rigorous theorems: Φ = M'Ω with M' affiliated to A(W(0))', with Φ ∈ D(P_±) and Connes cocycles in D(P_±).
    Statement of Thm 3.3 and Thm 3.4; the density extension is deferred to [30, Thm. 6.3], and the paper conjectures the result for all states with finite S(x) (Sec. 3.2).
  • standard math Ant formulas (6)-(7) relating relative-entropy derivatives to infima of translation-generator expectations.
    Cited from [29] and [15]; prior published parameter-free theorems used as tools.
  • standard math Coherent-state relative entropy formula (23): S(x) = 2π ∫_Σ (y−x)^μ ε_{μν} T^{νσ} dΣ_σ.
    Rigorous result cited from [17] (Ciolli-Longo-Ruzzi 2019); central input for the coherent-state verification in Sec. 3.2.
  • ad hoc to paper Formal identification P_±(x_⊥) = ∫ T_±±(x) f(x_∥) dx^± dx_∥ (eq. (49)), i.e., HSMI generators equal null-smeared stress tensor components.
    Used to pass from Thm 4.2 to Corollary 4.3 and to the QDEC (60); derived for free massive KG in the paper via (50)-(54) and Lemma A.1, but flagged 'formal' for general theories in Sec. 4.2.
  • ad hoc to paper Decomposition (59): S(Φ||Ω) = ∫[energy flux] − S_EE, with S_EE divergent and the divergent part cancelling after shape derivatives.
    The bridge from relative entropy to entanglement entropy used to state (60) and (1); acknowledged as formal in Secs. 4.2 and 5.1.
  • domain assumption CFT divergent entanglement entropy formula (65) with area, Euler-characteristic, and Wald-type log terms.
    Imported from [14, 40] into Proposition 5.1, which is stated for arbitrary 4-dimensional spacetimes, although the paper itself introduces (65) only for conformally invariant theories.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Quantum Dominant Energy Condition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SA3IMFWT

@misc{pith2026260801814,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Quantum Dominant Energy Condition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SA3IMFWT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.01814}
}
read the original abstract

We propose a quantum dominant energy condition (QDEC) for the stress tensor in the context of quantum field theory in curved spacetimes. A rigorous proof is given for the case of Rindler wedges, and a heuristic discussion about possible generalizations to more general geometric setups, including curved spacetime, is provided. In Minkowski spacetime, we establish a connection with state recovery bounds. We illustrate the QDEC for coherent states of the free scalar field, where it turns out to be related to the ordinary DEC for the stress tensor of the classical solution that defines the coherent state.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.01814 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. [16] The cut C with outgoing null sheet tangent to the vector k = k µ∂µ. n = n µν∂µ ∧ ∂ν is the bi-normal attached to the cut. Our quantum DEC (QDEC) is an information-energy tradeoff relation. It states that if C is an entangling cut, i.e., the boundary of a sufficiently regular domain within a Cauchy slice, if k is the up to normalization unique outgoing, future directed null vector field orthogonal to C, then  ⟨… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Algebras of W(0) (blue) and of W(R/√ 2, R/√ 2) (red) in a Penrose diagram of 2-dimensional Minkowski spacetime. is the state function on A(0). A more explicit form of the right side via a formula for ρR using the null-translation group given by the unitary positive energy representation of the QFT follows from [20, Cor. 2]. The following theorem expresses that the ability to recover φ from φ|A(R) is guaranteed to be… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (Adapted from [31]) The deformed wedge Wf (40) is in blue, the original wedge in red. The edge of the shifted wedge is parameterized by a function f(x∥ ). In this figure, r + ⊥ = 1, r− ⊥ = 0, i.e., the wedge is shifted along the upper horizon. In the general case, the blue wedge can be strictly inside the red wedge. spacetime with vacuum state Ω satisfying a sufficiently strong version of the Araki-Kastler axioms [2… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The pieces of P+(x⊥) associated with the null-infinities in a 2-dimensional Penrose diagram of Minkowski spacetime are represented by the red line segments in I ± . Theorem 4.2. Under the domain assumptions analogous to proposition 3.1 on Φ, we have − h r µ ⊥ δµS(x⊥) −…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [30]

    Hollands, R

    S. Hollands, R. Longo, A New Proof of the QNEC, Commun. Math. Phys. 406, 269 (2025)

    2025

  2. [29]

    Hollands, R

    S. Hollands, R. Longo, Bekenstein Bound for Approximately Local Charged States, Rev. Math. Phys. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129055X24610087

    work page doi:10.1142/s0129055x24610087

  3. [17]

    Ciolli, R

    F. Ciolli, R. Longo and G. Ruzzi, The information in a wave, Commun. Math. Phys. 379, 979-1000 (2019)

    2019

  4. [1]

    Andersson, M

    L. Andersson, M. Mars, and W. Simon, Local existence of dynamical and trapping horizons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 111102 (2005)

    2005

  5. [2]

    Araki , Relative entropy of states of von Neumann algebras , Publ

    H. Araki , Relative entropy of states of von Neumann algebras , Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ. 11, 809--833 (1976)

    1976

  6. [3]

    Araki , Relative entropy of states of von Neumann algebras

    H. Araki , Relative entropy of states of von Neumann algebras. II , Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ. 13, 173--192 (1977)

    1977

  7. [4]

    Araki, T

    H. Araki, T. Masuda , Positive Cones and L _p -Spaces for von Neumann Algebras , Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ. 18, 339-411 (1982)

    1982

  8. [5]

    Araki and L

    H. Araki and L. Zsido , Extension of the structure theorem of Borchers and its application to half-sided modular inclusions, Rev. Math. Phys. 17, 491–543 (2005)

    2005

Show all 47 references
  1. [6]

    H. J. Borchers, The CPT-theorem in two-dimensional theories of local observables, Commun. Math. Phys. 143, 315–332 (1992)

    1992

  2. [7]

    H. J. Borchers, Half-sided modular inclusions and the construction of the Poincaré group, Commun. Math. Phys. 179 , 703–723 (1996)

    1996

  3. [8]

    Bousso, Z

    R. Bousso, Z. Fisher, S. Leichenauer and A. C. Wall, Quantum focusing conjecture, Phys. Rev. D 93, 064044 (2016)

    2016

  4. [9]

    Bousso, Z

    R. Bousso, Z. Fisher, J. Koeller, S. Leichenauer and A. C. Wall, Proof of the Quantum Null Energy Condition, Phys. Rev. D 93, 024017 (2016)

    2016

  5. [10]

    Brunetti, K

    R. Brunetti, K. Fredenhagen and R. Verch, The Generally covariant locality principle: A New paradigm for local quantum field theory, Commun. Math. Phys. 237, 31-68 (2003)

    2003

  6. [11]

    Brunetti, D

    R. Brunetti, D. Guido and R. Longo, Modular localization and Wigner particles, Rev. Math. Phys. 14, 759-786 (2002)

    2002

  7. [12]

    Carrasco and M

    A. Carrasco and M. Mars, Stability operator of marginally outer trapped surfaces and symmetries, Class. Quantum Grav. 29, 145019 (2012)

    2012

  8. [13]

    Casini, E

    H. Casini, E. Teste, G. Torroba Modular Hamiltonians on the null plane and the Markov property of the vacuum state, doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/aa7eaa

    doi

  9. [14]

    Casini, M

    H. Casini, M. Huerta, and R. Myers, Towards a derivation of holographic entanglement entropy, JHEP 1105, 036 (2011)

    2011

  10. [15]

    Ceyhan and T

    F. Ceyhan and T. Faulkner, Recovering the QNEC from the ANEC, Commun. Math. Phys. 377, no.2, 999-1045 (2020)

    2020

  11. [16]

    The corresponding TikZ code was generated with the assistance of ChatGPT (OpenAI) and subsequently refined by the authors

    The figure is based on an original image created by the authors. The corresponding TikZ code was generated with the assistance of ChatGPT (OpenAI) and subsequently refined by the authors

  12. [18]

    Connes, Une classification des facteurs de type III , Ann

    A. Connes, Une classification des facteurs de type III , Ann. Sci. de l'\' Ecole Normale Sup\' erieure, 6. No. 2. (1973)

    1973

  13. [19]

    Epstein, V

    H. Epstein, V. Glaser, and A. Jaffe Nonpositivity of the energy density in quantized field theories. Nuovo Cim 36, 1016–1022 (1965)

    1965

  14. [20]

    Faulkner, S

    T. Faulkner, S. Hollands, B. Swingle and Y. Wang, Approximate Recovery and Relative Entropy I: General von Neumann Subalgebras, Commun. Math. Phys. 389, 349-397 (2022)

    2022

  15. [21]

    Faulkner and A

    T. Faulkner and A. J. Speranza, Gravitational algebras and the generalized second law, JHEP 11, 099 (2024)

    2024

  16. [22]

    Florig, On Borchers' Theorem, Lett

    M. Florig, On Borchers' Theorem, Lett. Math. Phys. 46, 289–293 (1998)

    1998

  17. [23]

    Haag , Local quantum physics: Fields, particles, algebras, Springer (1992)

    R. Haag , Local quantum physics: Fields, particles, algebras, Springer (1992)

    1992

  18. [24]

    S. W. Hawking and G. F. Ellis, The large scale structure of spacetime, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (1995)

    1995

  19. [25]

    Hollands and K

    S. Hollands and K. Sanders, Entanglement measures and their properties in quantum field theory, Springer (2018)

    2018

  20. [26]

    Hollands and R

    S. Hollands and R. M. Wald, Quantum fields in curved spacetime, Phys. Rept. 574, 1-35 (2015)

    2015

  21. [27]

    Hollands and R

    S. Hollands and R. M. Wald, Conservation of the stress tensor in interacting quantum field theory in curved spacetimes, Rev. Math. Phys. 17 , 227-312 (2005)

    2005

  22. [28]

    Hollands and R

    S. Hollands and R. M. Wald, Stability of Black Holes and Black Branes, Commun. Math. Phys. 321, 629-680 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    Hollands, GGI Lectures on Entropy, Operator Algebras and Black Holes, [arXiv:2209.05132 [hep-th]]

    S. Hollands, GGI Lectures on Entropy, Operator Algebras and Black Holes, [arXiv:2209.05132 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    Hollands, G

    S. Hollands, G. Morsella, Half-sided modular inclusions and the stress energy from the viewpoint of generally covariant QFT, work in progress

  25. [33]

    Hollands, \'A

    S. Hollands, \'A . D. Kov \'a cs and H. S. Reall, The second law of black hole mechanics in effective field theory, JHEP 08, 258 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Leyland, J

    P. Leyland, J. E. Roberts, D. Testard , Duality for quantum free fields , unpublished (1978)

    1978

  27. [35]

    Morinelli, Y

    V. Morinelli, Y. Tanimoto and B. Wegener, Modular Operator for Null Plane Algebras in Free Fields, Commun. Math. Phys. 395, 331-363 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Napiokowski, Continuous tensor products of Hilbert spaces and product operators, Studia Math

    K. Napiokowski, Continuous tensor products of Hilbert spaces and product operators, Studia Math. XXXIX (1971)

    1971

  29. [37]

    M. Ohya, D. Petz , Quantum entropy and its use , Texts and Monographs in Physics, Springer (1993)

    1993

  30. [38]

    M. Reed, B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics (Vol. 2) , Academic Press (1975)

    1975

  31. [39]

    J. E. Roberts, Some applications of dilatation invariance to structural questions in the theory of local observables, Commun. Math. Phys. 37, 273 (1974)

    1974

  32. [40]

    S. N. Solodukhin, Entanglement entropy, conformal invariance and extrinsic geometry, Phys. Lett. B 665, 305-309 (2008)

    2008

  33. [41]

    Sussman, Massive Wave Propagation Near Null Infinity, Annals of PDE 12:9 (2026)

    E. Sussman, Massive Wave Propagation Near Null Infinity, Annals of PDE 12:9 (2026)

    2026

  34. [42]

    Uhlmann, Relative entropy and the Wigner-Yanase-Dyson-Lieb concavity in an interpolation theory, Commun

    A. Uhlmann, Relative entropy and the Wigner-Yanase-Dyson-Lieb concavity in an interpolation theory, Commun. Math. Phys. 54, 21-32 (1977)

    1977

  35. [43]

    R. M. Wald, General Relativity, University of Chicago Press (1984)

    1984

  36. [44]

    R. M. Wald, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics, University of Chicago Press (1994)

    1994

  37. [45]

    A. C. Wall, Lower Bound on the Energy Density in Classical and Quantum Field Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 151601 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    Wiesbrock, Half-sided modular inclusions of von Neumann algebras, Commun

    H.-W. Wiesbrock, Half-sided modular inclusions of von Neumann algebras, Commun. Math. Phys. 157, 83–92 (1993) [erratum: Commun. Math. Phys. 184, 683–685 (1997)]

    1993

  39. [47]

    Witten, Topological Quantum Field Theory, Commun

    E. Witten, Topological Quantum Field Theory, Commun. Math. Phys. 117, 353 (1988)

    1988

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.