Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 60 references

Towards Quantizing Null p-branes: Light-Cone Gauge Analysis and Physical Hilbert Space

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that quantizing null p-branes in the light-cone gauge via sandwich constraints yields a physical Hilbert space organized into exactly p+1 completely specified classes.

desk verdict A serious and mostly coherent step toward null p-brane quantization, with a real new classification, but the completeness claim leans on an unproven product-closure axiom that deserves direct scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.12436 v2 pith:ECYY3VPI submitted 2024-12-17 hep-th

S. Dutta , I.M. Rasulian , M.M. Sheikh-Jabbari , H. Yavartanoo This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th MSC 81T30 PACS 11.25.-w
keywords nullp-braneslight-conegaugesandwichquantizationphysicalHilbertspaceBMSsymmetryarea-preservingdiffeomorphismstensionlessbranessuperselectionsectors
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

Null p-branes are extended objects whose worldvolumes are null surfaces, obtained as a tensionless limit of ordinary p-branes. This paper attempts to quantize them in flat Minkowski space in the light-cone gauge, where the remaining gauge freedom consists of p level-matching constraints and area-preserving diffeomorphisms. The central claim is that imposing these constraints through sandwich conditions—requiring the constraints to have vanishing matrix elements between any two physical states—yields a fully solvable problem. All physical states fall into exactly p+1 distinct classes, labelled N=0,...,p, and each class is completely specified. The payoff is a concrete physical Hilbert space, worked out explicitly for a null membrane in four dimensions.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the sandwich quantization scheme applied to the residual constraint algebra. Constraints are imposed as vanishing matrix elements between physical states, $\langle\Phi|L_i|\Psi\rangle=0$ and $\langle\Phi|K^r_{\vec n}|\Psi\rangle=0$, instead of as annihilation conditions, and physical operators are required to be closed under products (condition (A.7)). The level-matching operators $L_i$ are mutually commuting and can be diagonalized; nonzero eigenvalues are handled by standing waves, superpositions of eigenstates with opposite signs of each $|\ell_i|$, which automatically make the $L_i$ sandwich conditions vanish. The algebra $[L_i,K^r_{\vec n}]=-n_i K^r_{\vec n}$ then converts the remaining $K^r_{\vec n}$ constraints into selection rules that, together with product closure, force certain linear combinations of the extra $\ell^A_i$ labels to zero. The counting of how many $L_i$ can have nonzero eigenvalues—0 through $p$—is what produces the $p+1$ classes.

What would settle it

Exhibit a state of the Category II form $|p;q_+(p)\rangle+|-p;q_-(p)\rangle$ from Appendix B, with $q_\pm(p)$ nonlinear in $p$, that satisfies the sandwich conditions (4.1) and violates product closure (A.7); if such a state is shown to be physically admissible under an alternative quantization in which only (A.5) is imposed, the claimed p+1 classification is incomplete.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the physical Hilbert space of a quantized null p-brane in the light-cone gauge is organized into p+1 superselection sectors. Class 0 states are zero-eigenstates of all p level-matching operators $L_i$, while for Class $N$, with $N=1,\ldots,p$, exactly $N$ of the $L_i$ have nonzero eigenvalues and the physical states are standing-wave superpositions of the corresponding eigenstates, written as $|N;\psi(|\ell^\natural|;\ell^\flat)\rangle_S$ in eq. (4.27). The $p-1$ area-preserving diffeomorphism constraints $K^r_{\vec n}$ are satisfied only in the sandwich sense, not by right action on each state; the commutation relations together with the product-closure condition force the auxiliary $\ell^a$ charges to zero and leave $p(D-3)$ integer labels per sector. For $p=2,D=4$ the three sectors are described explicitly: Class 0 states satisfy the zero level-matching conditions, Class 1 states have one of the two level-matching eigenvalues nonzero, and Class 2 states have both nonzero and are further labelled by two integers $\alpha,\gamma$ obeying $\alpha\gamma+1=\beta^2$.

Load-bearing premise

The classification rests on the assumption that the product of two physical operators is again a physical operator; the paper states this as a consistency requirement rather than deriving it from the constraint algebra, and dropping it would allow extra Category II states that the p+1 classification does not include.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The physical Hilbert space of a null p-brane is organized into exactly p+1 superselection sectors, labelled by $N=0,\ldots,p$, and every sector is described by eq. (4.27).
  • Class 0 states are zero eigenstates of the level-matching operators, but the area-preserving diffeomorphism constraints hold only as sandwich conditions, so right-action quantization would discard the physical states found here.
  • For a null membrane in four dimensions, the three classes are realized explicitly: Class 0, Class 1, and Class 2 states are labelled by two integers, with Class 2 additionally distinguished by integer pairs $(\alpha,\gamma)$ satisfying $\alpha\gamma+1=\beta^2$.
  • Mass can be assigned to physical states through the expectation value of $M^2$; for eigenstates of excitation level this gives $M^2_\Psi=\sum_I m_I^2/R_I^2 + (\kappa/2)N_\Psi$, making the zero-momentum vacuum states massless.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves open whether the same p+1 classification persists for non-toroidal worldvolumes; if it does, the sectors would be labelled by the zero modes of the level-matching currents on the chosen surface, and the count of sectors would be a topological invariant of that surface.
  • The product-closure condition (A.7) is the unexamined hinge of the argument: it is what eliminates the Category II states of Appendix B, and if one can construct a constrained system in which the sandwich conditions hold but (A.7) fails, the claimed classification would need revision.
  • A concrete extension would be to count the degeneracy of the explicit $p=2,D=4$ sectors at fixed $M^2_\Psi$ and compare it with stretched-horizon entropy of a Schwarzschild or Kerr black hole; the paper points toward this membrane-paradigm application but does not carry it out.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the quantization of null p-branes in flat space using light-cone gauge and a 'sandwich quantization' scheme in which constraints are imposed by requiring their matrix elements between physical states to vanish. The authors derive the classical null p-brane action, its BMS_{p+2} symmetry, and the residual constraints in the light-cone gauge: p level-matching conditions L_i and p−1 area-preserving diffeomorphism constraints K^r_n. They then quantize canonically and, using the sandwich conditions (4.1), claim that all physical states fall into p+1 classes, Class N (N=0,...,p), each specified by a set of integer labels; they compute a mass formula and work out the example p=2, D=4 in detail, including explicit Class 0, Class 1 and Class 2 states and a classification of super-selection sectors.

Significance. If the main classification theorem is correct and the technical gaps are filled, the paper would provide a concrete framework for quantizing null extended objects, a notoriously difficult problem for p≥2. The explicit construction for p=2, D=4 is a useful demonstration, and the identification of superselection sectors is an interesting structural result. The paper also benefits from a careful classical treatment of the null brane action and its Carrollian symmetry, and it transfers the sandwich-quantization method from the tensionless string literature to higher-dimensional branes. However, the completeness and the mass spectrum of the construction depend on assumptions that are not fully derived, as detailed below; the significance is therefore conditional on those points being resolved.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix A and B, Sections 4.3.1, 5.2.1] The claimed completeness of the p+1 classification relies on the product-closure condition (A.7), which is not derived from the sandwich conditions (4.1) or the constraint algebra (3.23). Appendix B explicitly constructs Category II states of the form |p;q_+(p)> + |-p;q_-(p)> that solve the P-sandwich condition, and discards them solely because they violate (A.7). The same condition is used in Section 4.3.1 to set all fixed ℓ_a labels to zero (Eq. (4.25)) and in Sections 5.2.1/5.2.2 to force ℓ_i=0 or ℓ_1+ℓ_2=0. Since (A.7) is an additional axiom rather than a consequence of the constraint algebra, the abstract's statement that 'solutions to the sandwich conditions are classified into p+1 distinct classes' is not supported. The authors should either prove (A.7) within the sandwich scheme or explicitly qualify the classification as valid under the additional product-closure assumption, with the abstract and Section 4 modified accordingly.
  2. [Section 4.4, Eq. (4.32)] In the derivation of the mass formula, the term -κ/2 Σ_k |k| ⟨Ψ|(X_k + X†_k)|Ψ⟩ is dropped after the statement 'for eigenstates of N_k'. This is not justified: X_k and X†_k do not annihilate eigenstates of N_k; they change the occupation number by ±2. The equality M^2_Ψ = Σ_I m_I^2/R_I^2 + κ/2 N_Ψ requires a separate argument, for instance a proof that the expectation value of X_k + X†_k vanishes in the standing-wave states (4.14) or in the Class N states (4.27). As written, the mass formula (4.32) is not established.
  3. [Sections 3.2 and 4.4, Eq. (3.20)] The normal-ordering constant A = κ/2 Σ_k |k| is divergent and no regularization or normal-ordering prescription is provided. This constant appears in the light-cone mass operator (3.19a) and therefore in the physical mass assignment of Section 4.4. The claim that M^2 commutes with the constraints (3.23a) is algebraic, but the spectrum itself is not defined until A is assigned a finite value. The authors should specify a regularization (e.g., zeta-function or point-splitting) and state the resulting finite part, or explain why A can be consistently absorbed into an ordering convention.
  4. [Sections 4.3.1–4.3.2 and 5.3] For general p, the solution of the K^r_n constraints relies on the existence of matrices (T^a)^i_A with the properties described after Eq. (4.21); these matrices are never explicitly constructed for p>2, and the paper acknowledges this ('we argued for the existence of p−N number of (T^a)^i_A matrices and did not explicitly identify them'). Since the classification is claimed for arbitrary p, an explicit construction or an existence proof is needed. Moreover, in Section 5.3 the p=2, D=4 analysis shows that Class 2 and Class 1 sectors carry additional integer labels (α,γ or a^1_1, a^2_2) beyond the p(D−3) integers stated in Eq. (4.27), so the general labeling statement in Section 4.3.2 appears incomplete as written.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.3 heading] The heading 'Canonical Computation Relations' should read 'Canonical Commutation Relations'.
  2. [Section 2.2] The phrase 'with a kernel vector along ∂τ' is used before the kernel vector V^a is formally introduced; moving the definition of V^a to before (2.4) would improve readability.
  3. [Section 5.1.1] In the sentence 'These states are eigenstates of L_i but not of K⃗_n nor M^2', the word 'There' appears in the preceding sentence; the typo 'There states' should be 'These states'.
  4. [Section 4.1, Eq. (4.6)] The notation H = ⋃_{m^I,w^I_i} H_{m^I,w^I_i} uses a union over a discrete set; since each H_{m^I,w^I_i} is itself a Hilbert space of excited states, the direct sum ⊕ would be more precise, and orthogonality between different sectors (stated below) is then automatic.
  5. [Figure 1] The caption mentions 'the 3 classes of states' but the gray dots representing unphysical states also appear; it would be helpful to state explicitly that the gray dots are not part of H_phys and to indicate whether Class 0 includes only the origin or also the axes shown in red.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; central derivation is self-contained. Self-citations are contextual, and the p+1 classification is conditional on the product-closure axiom A.7.

full rationale

No circular step is exhibited in this paper. The construction starts from the defined canonical algebra (3.15)-(3.17) and solves the sandwich equations (4.1) by explicit standing-wave superpositions (4.14)-(4.27); the K constraints are handled using the commutation relations (4.20)-(4.24), not by assuming the answer. The p+1 classification is derived through a concrete construction rather than fitted or renamed. Citations [27,28,40] are method references from overlapping authors, but the paper supplies the relevant scheme in Appendix A and performs the new K-analysis internally, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. The one genuine caveat is that Appendix B discards Category II states, which do solve the P-sandwich condition, solely via the product-closure axiom (A.7), an extra input from operator-state correspondence rather than a consequence of (4.1). Thus the abstract's wording 'solutions to the sandwich conditions' is stronger than the conditional statement proven with A.7. This is a completeness/scope caveat rather than a case of output being equivalent to input, and it does not lower the circularity score beyond the minor self-citation level.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities are introduced; the superselection sectors are classifications of existing oscillator Fock states.

free parameters (1)
  • Normal-ordering constant A = infinite, regulator-dependent
    Appears in M^2 in eq. (3.19a) as A = κ/2 Σ_k |k|; no regularization scheme is given, but section 4.4 uses M^2 to assign masses to physical states, so the spectrum depends on an unspecified subtraction.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Sandwich quantization: physical states need only satisfy ⟨Φ|C|Ψ⟩=0 for all pairs of physical states, rather than C|Ψ⟩=0.
    Framework adopted from null string literature [27,28,40]; used throughout Sections 4 and 5 and in Appendix A. It is a postulate about how constraints act on the physical Hilbert space.
  • ad hoc to paper Product-closure condition (A.7): if O1 and O2 are physical operators, then O1O2 is also physical.
    Introduced in Appendix A and used in Appendix B to discard Category II states and to force ℓ_a = 0 in Class N states. Without it, the p+1 classification may be incomplete.
  • domain assumption Standard Fock vacuum |0;m^I,w^I_i⟩ annihilated by all C^I_n, with definite integer winding and momentum labels.
    Defined in Section 4.1, eq. (4.2). Section 6 notes alternative vacuum choices could produce different physical Hilbert spaces, so the classification is vacuum-dependent.
  • domain assumption The reduced constraint algebra (3.23) closes without central extension.
    Assumed in Section 3.3; the paper cites SDiff(T^2) algebras with central extensions [7,51,52] but does not prove the central term vanishes here.
  • domain assumption Toroidal mode expansion (3.1) and light-cone gauge ansatz X^+ = x^+ + p^+ τ, A^+_n = B^+_n = 0.
    Section 3.1 restricts the analysis to toroidal null p-branes on orthogonal torus compactification; the physical Hilbert space is derived only for this class of configurations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards Quantizing Null p-branes: Light-Cone Gauge Analysis and Physical Hilbert Space." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ECYY3VPI

@misc{pith2026241212436,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards Quantizing Null p-branes: Light-Cone Gauge Analysis and Physical Hilbert Space},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ECYY3VPI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12436}
}
abstract

We study null $p$-branes, $p$-branes with a Carrollian $p+1$-dimensional worldvolume embedded in a generic $D$-dimensional flat Minkowski target space. This theory has a generalized BMS$_{p+1}$ gauge symmetry. By fixing the light-cone gauge, the BMS symmetry is partly fixed, leaving $p$ ``momentum constraints'' alongside $p$-dimensional area-preserving diffeomorphisms. We quantize the theory in the light-cone gauge via canonical quantization and construct the physical Hilbert space by imposing the remaining constraints using sandwich conditions: the constraints must vanish when sandwiched between any two physical states. We show that solutions to the sandwich conditions are classified into $p+1$ distinct classes, which we completely specify. In addition, we discuss special and interesting case of membranes in four dimensions and examine the physical implications of the quantized null $p$-brane and its associated physical Hilbert space.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.12436 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The 3 classes of states for a 4d membrane in the (ℓ1, ℓ2) plane. The blue dot at the origin represents Class 0 corresponding to the physical Hilbert space with ℓi = 0. Class 1 states are the red dots which are either in ℓ1 > 0, ℓ2 = 0 and ℓ2 > 0, ℓ1 = 0 cases. Class 2 states, represented by black dots, correspond to ℓ1, ℓ2 > 0. The gray dots belong to unphysical part of Hilbert space H, which are eliminated by the s… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    String solitons,

    M. J. Duff, R. R. Khuri, and J. X. Lu, “String solitons,” Phys. Rept. 259 (1995) 213–326, hep-th/9412184

    arXiv 1995

  2. [2]

    Semiclassical quantisation of the Supermembrane,

    M. J. Duff, T. Inami, C. N. Pope, E. Sezgin, and K. S. Stelle, “Semiclassical quantisation of the Supermembrane,” Nucl. Phys. B 297 (1988) 515–538

    work page 1988

  3. [3]

    P-Brane Democracy,

    P. K. Townsend, “P-Brane Democracy,” hep-th/9507048

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    Polchinski, String theory

    J. Polchinski, String theory . Cambridge University Press, 1998. Vol. 1: An Introduction to the Bosonic String

    work page 1998

  5. [5]

    M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz, and E. Witten, Superstring Theory. Cambridge University Press,

    work page

  6. [6]

    The Supermembrane Is Unstable,

    B. de Wit, M. Luscher, and H. Nicolai, “The Supermembrane Is Unstable,” Nucl. Phys. B 320 (1989) 135–159

    work page 1989

  7. [7]

    Area Preserving D iffeomorphisms and Supermem- brane Lorentz Invariance,

    B. de Wit, U. Marquard, and H. Nicolai, “Area Preserving D iffeomorphisms and Supermem- brane Lorentz Invariance,” Commun. Math. Phys. 128 (1990) 39

    work page 1990

  8. [8]

    Meinardus’ t heorem and the asymptotic form of quantum p-brane state density,

    A. A. Bytsenko, K. Kirsten, and S. Zerbini, “Meinardus’ t heorem and the asymptotic form of quantum p-brane state density,” Phys. Lett. B 304 (1993) 235–238

    work page 1993

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Superp-Brane theories and n ew space-time superalgebras,

    E. Bergshoeff and E. Sezgin, “Superp-Brane theories and n ew space-time superalgebras,” Phys. Lett. B 354 (1995) 256–263, hep-th/9504140

    1995 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Waves, boosted branes an d BPS states in m theory,

    J. G. Russo and A. A. Tseytlin, “Waves, boosted branes an d BPS states in m theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 490 (1997) 121–144, hep-th/9611047

    1997 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Stability of the quantum supermembrane in a manifold with boundary,

    J. G. Russo, “Stability of the quantum supermembrane in a manifold with boundary,” Phys. Lett. B 392 (1997) 49–54, hep-th/9609043

    1997 arXiv

  4. [12]

    The Dirac Nambu-Goto p-branes as particula r solutions to a generalised, uncon- strained theory,

    M. Pavsic, “The Dirac Nambu-Goto p-branes as particula r solutions to a generalised, uncon- strained theory,” Nuovo Cim. A 110 (1997) 369–396, hep-th/9704154

    1997 arXiv

  5. [13]

    First and second quantisation theories of open p-brane and their spectra,

    C.-X. Yu, C. Huang, P. Zhang, and Y.-C. Huang, “First and second quantisation theories of open p-brane and their spectra,” Phys. Lett. B 697 (2011) 378–384. 36

    2011

  6. [14]

    A New Approach to the Classical and Quantum D ynamics of Branes,

    M. Pavšič, “A New Approach to the Classical and Quantum D ynamics of Branes,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 31 (2016), no. 20n21, 1650115, 1603.01405

    2016 arXiv

  7. [15]

    On the Quantum Mecha nics of Supermembranes,

    B. de Wit, J. Hoppe, and H. Nicolai, “On the Quantum Mecha nics of Supermembranes,” Nucl. Phys. B 305 (1988) 545

    1988

  8. [16]

    Diffeomorphism Groups, quantisation and SU( infinity),

    J. Hoppe, “Diffeomorphism Groups, quantisation and SU( infinity),” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 4 (1989) 5235

    1989

  9. [17]

    M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory,

    W. Taylor, “M(atrix) Theory: Matrix Quantum Mechanics as a Fundamental Theory,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 73 (2001) 419–462, hep-th/0101126

    2001 arXiv

  10. [18]

    generalised Hamiltonian dynamics,

    Y. Nambu, “generalised Hamiltonian dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973) 2405–2412

    1973

  11. [19]

    On the quantisa tion of Nambu brackets,

    H. Awata, M. Li, D. Minic, and T. Yoneya, “On the quantisa tion of Nambu brackets,” JHEP 02 (2001) 013, hep-th/9906248

    2001 arXiv

  12. [20]

    On M algebras, the quantisation of Nambu mech anics, and volume preserving diffeomorphisms,

    J. Hoppe, “On M algebras, the quantisation of Nambu mech anics, and volume preserving diffeomorphisms,” Helv. Phys. Acta 70 (1997) 302–317, hep-th/9602020

    1997 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Classical and quantum Na mbu mechanics,

    T. Curtright and C. K. Zachos, “Classical and quantum Na mbu mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 085001, hep-th/0212267

    2003 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Tiny graviton matrix theory: DL CQ of IIB plane-wave string theory, a conjecture,

    M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Tiny graviton matrix theory: DL CQ of IIB plane-wave string theory, a conjecture,” JHEP 09 (2004) 017, hep-th/0406214

    2004 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Classical and quantised tension- less strings,

    J. Isberg, U. Lindstrom, B. Sundborg, and G. Theodoridi s, “Classical and quantised tension- less strings,” Nucl. Phys. B 411 (1994) 122–156, hep-th/9307108

    1994 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Classically equivalent actions for tensionless p-branes,

    S. Hassani, U. Lindstrom, and R. von Unge, “Classically equivalent actions for tensionless p-branes,” Class. Quant. Grav. 11 (1994) L79–L85

    1994

  17. [25]

    Tensionles s Strings from Worldsheet Symme- tries,

    A. Bagchi, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, “Tensionles s Strings from Worldsheet Symme- tries,” JHEP 01 (2016) 158, 1507.04361

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Tensionles s Superstrings: View from the World- sheet,

    A. Bagchi, S. Chakrabortty, and P. Parekh, “Tensionles s Superstrings: View from the World- sheet,” JHEP 10 (2016) 113, 1606.09628

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    A tale of three — tensionless strings and vacuum structure,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, S. Chakrabortty, S. Dutta, and P . Parekh, “A tale of three — tensionless strings and vacuum structure,” JHEP 04 (2020) 061, 2001.00354

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Tensionless tale s: vacua and critical dimensions,

    A. Bagchi, M. Mandlik, and P. Sharma, “Tensionless tale s: vacua and critical dimensions,” JHEP 08 (2021) 054, 2105.09682

    2021 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Tensionless Pat h from Closed to Open Strings,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, and P. Parekh, “Tensionless Pat h from Closed to Open Strings,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019), no. 11, 111601, 1905.11732

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Rindler P hysics on the String Worldsheet,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, and S. Chakrabortty, “Rindler P hysics on the String Worldsheet,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 3, 031601, 2009.01408

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Hor izon strings as 3D black hole mi- crostates,

    A. Bagchi, D. Grumiller, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Hor izon strings as 3D black hole mi- crostates,” SciPost Phys. 15 (2023), no. 5, 210, 2210.10794. 37

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Strings near black holes are Carrollian,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, J. Hartong, E. Have, K. S. Koleka r, and M. Mandlik, “Strings near black holes are Carrollian,” Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 8, 086009, 2312.14240

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Strings near black holes are Carrollian. Part II,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, J. Hartong, E. Have, and K. S. Kol ekar, “Strings near black holes are Carrollian. Part II,” JHEP 11 (2024) 024, 2407.12911

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Boundary Carrollian CFTs and Open Null Strings,

    A. Bagchi, P. Chakraborty, S. Chakrabortty, S. Fredenh agen, D. Grumiller, and P. Pandit, “Boundary Carrollian CFTs and Open Null Strings,” 2409.01094

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    The High-Energy Behavior of String Scattering Amplitudes,

    D. J. Gross and P. F. Mende, “The High-Energy Behavior of String Scattering Amplitudes,” Phys. Lett. B 197 (1987) 129–134

    1987

  28. [36]

    String Theory Beyond the Pla nck Scale,

    D. J. Gross and P. F. Mende, “String Theory Beyond the Pla nck Scale,” Nucl. Phys. B 303 (1988) 407–454

    1988

  29. [37]

    Strings at Finite Temper ature and Deconfinement,

    R. D. Pisarski and O. Alvarez, “Strings at Finite Temper ature and Deconfinement,” Phys. Rev. D 26 (1982) 3735

    1982

  30. [38]

    Strings, Tachyons and Deconfinement,

    P. Olesen, “Strings, Tachyons and Deconfinement,” Phys. Lett. B 160 (1985) 408–410

    1985

  31. [39]

    A Rindler road to Carrollian worldsheets,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, S. Chakrabortty, and R. Chatter jee, “A Rindler road to Carrollian worldsheets,” JHEP 04 (2022) 082, 2111.01172

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Strings, Virasoro Sand- wiches and Worldsheet Horizons,

    A. Bagchi, A. Banerjee, I. M. Rasulian, and M. M. Sheikh- Jabbari, “Strings, Virasoro Sand- wiches and Worldsheet Horizons,” 2409.16152

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    Geometry of Zero Signature Space-times,

    M. Henneaux, “Geometry of Zero Signature Space-times, ” Bull. Soc. Math. Belg. 31 (1979) 47–63

    1979

  34. [42]

    Carroll contra ctions of Lorentz-invariant theories,

    M. Henneaux and P. Salgado-Rebolledo, “Carroll contra ctions of Lorentz-invariant theories,” JHEP 11 (2021) 180, 2109.06708

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Carrollian hydrodynamic s from symmetries,

    L. Freidel and P. Jai-akson, “Carrollian hydrodynamic s from symmetries,” Class. Quant. Grav. 40 (2023), no. 5, 055009, 2209.03328

    2023 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Carrollian structure of the null boundary solution space,

    H. Adami, A. Parvizi, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, V. Taghiloo , and H. Yavartanoo, “Carrollian structure of the null boundary solution space,” JHEP 02 (2024) 073, 2311.03515

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Spacetime structure near generic horizons and soft hair,

    D. Grumiller, A. Pérez, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, R. Troncos o, and C. Zwikel, “Spacetime structure near generic horizons and soft hair,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), no. 4, 041601, 1908.09833

    2020 arXiv

  38. [46]

    T-Witts from the horizon,

    H. Adami, D. Grumiller, S. Sadeghian, M. Sheikh-Jabbar i, and C. Zwikel, “T-Witts from the horizon,” JHEP 04 (2020) 128, 2002.08346

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Null boundary phase space: slicings, news & memory,

    H. Adami, D. Grumiller, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, V. Taghil oo, H. Yavartanoo, and C. Zwikel, “Null boundary phase space: slicings, news & memory,” JHEP 11 (2021) 155, 2110.04218

    2021 arXiv

  40. [48]

    The Weyl BMS group and Einstein’s equations,

    L. Freidel, R. Oliveri, D. Pranzetti, and S. Speziale, “ The Weyl BMS group and Einstein’s equations,” JHEP 07 (2021) 170, 2104.05793

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    New symmetries for the Grav itational S-matrix,

    M. Campiglia and A. Laddha, “New symmetries for the Grav itational S-matrix,” JHEP 04 (2015) 076, 1502.02318. 38

    2015 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Tensionless Strings and Galilean Conforma l Algebra,

    A. Bagchi, “Tensionless Strings and Galilean Conforma l Algebra,” JHEP 1305 (2013) 141, 1303.0291

    2013 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Massless Spectrum an d Critical Dimension of the Su- permembrane,

    I. Bars, C. N. Pope, and E. Sezgin, “Massless Spectrum an d Critical Dimension of the Su- permembrane,” Phys. Lett. B 198 (1987) 455–460

    1987

  44. [52]

    Central Extensions o f Area Preserving Membrane Alge- bras,

    I. Bars, C. N. Pope, and E. Sezgin, “Central Extensions o f Area Preserving Membrane Alge- bras,” Phys. Lett. B 210 (1988) 85–91

    1988

  45. [53]

    P. A. M. Dirac, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics . Belfer Graduate School of Science, Yeshiva University, New York, 1996

    1996

  46. [54]

    K. S. Thorne, R. Price, and D. Macdonald, Black Holes: The Membrane Paradigm . Yale University Press, 1986

    1986

  47. [55]

    Membrane Viewpoint on Blac k Holes: Properties and Evolu- tion of the Stretched Horizon,

    R. H. Price and K. S. Thorne, “Membrane Viewpoint on Blac k Holes: Properties and Evolu- tion of the Stretched Horizon,” Phys. Rev. D33 (1986) 915–941

    1986

  48. [56]

    Membrane Parad igm from Near Horizon Soft Hair,

    D. Grumiller and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Membrane Parad igm from Near Horizon Soft Hair,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D27 (2018) 1847006, 1805.11099

    2018 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Grumiller and M

    D. Grumiller and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Black Hole Physics: From Collapse to Evaporation . Grad.Texts Math. Springer, 11, 2022

    2022

  50. [58]

    generalised hamiltonian dynamics,

    P. A. M. Dirac, “generalised hamiltonian dynamics,” Canadian Journal of Mathematics 2 (1950) 129-148

    1950

  51. [59]

    Henneaux and C

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, quantisation of Gauge Systems . Princeton University Press, 8, 1994. 39

    1994

  52. [1987]

    1: Introduction

    Vol. 1: Introduction

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.