Horizon Thermodynamics on Nice Slices of the Causal Diamond

Ian Nagle

REVIEW 6 major objections 4 minor 16 references

Horizon Thermodynamics on Nice Slices of the Causal Diamond

T0 review · 6 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For a causal diamond in a maximally symmetric spacetime, the gravitational Hamiltonian varies on any nice slice as $\delta H_{\mathrm{grav}} = \kappa\delta A + [\kappa + O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})]\eta\delta V$, giving a first law to leading order…

desk verdict A promising but incomplete extension of causal-diamond thermodynamics to nonsymmetric slices; the new bulk flux term deserves a referee, but the claimed first law rests on unproven approximations. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.20621 v1 pith:D3ISIDV7 submitted 2025-04-29 hep-th gr-qc

Ian Nagle This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qc MSC 83C4083C5783C30

keywords causaldiamondhorizonthermodynamicsconformalKillingvectorsurfacegravityAbbott-Deser-Tekinchargescovariantphasespacenicesliceszerothlaw

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

The paper argues that for a causal diamond in a maximally symmetric spacetime, a gravitational first law holds on any slice, not just the special symmetry slice where the past and future horizons meet. The central result is that the variation of the gravitational Hamiltonian takes the form $\delta H = \kappa\delta A + [\kappa + O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})]\eta\delta V$ (Eq. 34), so the area term is exact and the volume term picks up exponentially suppressed corrections away from the symmetry surface. The derivation introduces a conformally invariant surface gravity formula and a new bulk vector contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charges that appears only for conformal symmetries. A reader should care because this shows how robust the link between gravity and entanglement entropy is under dynamical changes, and where the first law can fail.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the conformal Killing vector (CKV) $\chi$ of the causal diamond, which reduces to an exact Killing vector on the null boundaries of the diamond and foliates the entire spacetime (unlike a generic black hole horizon, where the Frobenius condition holds only on the horizon). The argument runs on three pieces: (1) the conformally invariant surface gravity identity $(\kappa+\alpha)^2 = -\frac{1}{2}[(\nabla_a\chi_b)(\nabla^a\chi^b) - \alpha^2 n]$ and its redshifted-acceleration counterpart $\kappa+\alpha = aV$; (2) the Abbott-Deser-Tekin superpotential decomposition $\delta E^{ab} = \nabla_c\nabla_d K^{acbd} + Y^{ab}$, which lets the linearized equations of motion be split into an exact surface piece and a bulk flux; and (3) the covariant phase space construction of the Hamiltonian as the integral of both the surface charge $k_\chi$ and the new vector flux $l_\chi$ over a Cauchy slice. The flux term, proportional to gradients of the conformal factor $\alpha$, is the new ingredient: it is exactly the term that produces the $\eta\delta V$ volume correction in the first law.

What would settle it

Compute $n_c \nabla^c \alpha$ for the causal diamond's conformal Killing field along a natural direction $n_c$ (e.g., the unit normal to the constant-$(u+v)/2$ surfaces) on a slice with $u+v \neq 0$, and verify that the difference $n_c \nabla^c \alpha - \kappa$ is $O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})$; if the error fails this bound or the identity fails for all natural choices of $n_c$, the central result (34) is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that the gravitational Hamiltonian of a causal diamond in a maximally symmetric spacetime varies on any 'nice slice' as $\delta H_{\mathrm{grav}} = \kappa\delta A + [\kappa + O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})]\eta\delta V$, meaning the first law $T(\delta S - \eta\delta V) + \delta H_{\mathrm{matter}} = 0$ holds to leading order at every slice, with deviations that decay exponentially away from the moment-of-time symmetry slice. It derives a general, purely geometric formula for the surface gravity of a conformal Killing horizon, $(\kappa+\alpha)^2 = -\frac{1}{2}[(\nabla_a\chi_b)(\nabla^a\chi^b) - \alpha^2 n]$, together with the identity $\kappa+\alpha = aV$ relating surface gravity, conformal factor, acceleration, and redshift. It further discovers a new bulk vector contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charges that is unique to conformal symmetries: the flux $l_\chi = \epsilon_a (g_{cb}\nabla_d\alpha + g_{bd}\nabla_c\alpha - g_{cd}\nabla_b\alpha) K^{acbd}$, which is what produces the $\eta\delta V$ volume term in the first law. Finally, it uses the fact that the conformal Killing field foliates the whole spacetime to show that a zeroth law holds on every foliation, with redshifted acceleration constant along time translations and non-redshifted acceleration constant along orbits of the conformal field.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument leans on an unstated 'suitable direction' along which the gradient of the conformal factor matches the surface gravity; if that matching is wrong or uncontrolled, the first-law form in Eq. (34) does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

On any nice slice of the causal diamond, the first law holds to leading order, with corrections that fall off exponentially with distance from the moment-of-time symmetry slice.
The zeroth law holds on every foliation of the causal diamond: the redshifted acceleration is constant along time translations, and the non-redshifted acceleration is constant along orbits of the conformal Killing field.
A new bulk vector contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charges appears for conformal symmetries and vanishes for exact Killing symmetries, which is what produces the volume term in the first law.
The surface gravity identity and the acceleration relation $\kappa+\alpha = aV$ are purely geometric, so they apply also to higher-curvature gravity.
The approximate nature of the first law away from the symmetry slice leaves open the possibility that the derivation of gravity from CFT entanglement receives corrections in dynamical settings.

Reading between the lines

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

The exponential suppression of the volume-term deviation suggests that in large causal diamonds ($R/L \gg 1$) the first law is effectively exact for almost all slices, so entanglement-equilibrium arguments might extend well beyond the moment-of-time symmetry surface.
One can test the factorization $n_c \nabla^c \alpha \approx \kappa$ by computing the derivative of the conformal factor along a natural direction, such as the unit normal to the constant-$(u+v)/2$ surfaces, and checking that the error is $O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})$, which would make the 'suitable direction' precise.
The same bulk-flux construction should transfer directly to other spacetimes with conformal Killing fields, such as planar de Sitter horizons, giving a general template for volume-corrected first laws.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague,

Here's my read of Nagle's "Horizon Thermodynamics on Nice Slices of the Causal Diamond." The paper is a short, exploratory letter that does one genuinely new thing: it extracts a bulk (volume) contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charge for conformal Killing symmetries, and it tries to write a first law for causal diamonds on non-symmetric "nice slices." The bulk flux term in Eqs. (26)-(27) is not in the papers I know, and the idea of asking how the zeroth/first law behaves off the t=0 slice is a reasonable question for the entanglement-equilibrium program. The paper is also honest: it calls the investigation preliminary, and it cites the relevant background (Jacobson-Kang for conformal invariance of surface gravity, ADT charges, covariant phase space).

But the central claim, Eq. (34), is not actually derived. The stress-test note is right. Three steps in Section 4.2 are asserted rather than shown. (i) Eq. (12) for surface gravity of a conformal Killing horizon is stated without derivation; it may be correct, but the paper doesn't show it. (ii) The bulk flux integral (31) is never evaluated. The paper just writes the conformal factor schematically as 2α = γ sinh((u+v)/2L), with γ undefined, and then jumps to κδA + [κ + O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})]ηδV. How the integral gives that volume term is the entire point, and it's missing. (iii) The replacement ∇_c α = -∇_c κ on surfaces of constant acceleration/temperature and the subsequent approximation n_c∇^c κ ≈ κ use a direction n_c that is never specified. Without controlling that approximation, the first law form is not established. These are gaps in support rather than contradictions, so a conditional verdict is appropriate, but they are load-bearing gaps.

What about the rest? The zeroth-law statements (15)-(16) are quick, and the relation κ + α = aV is plausible and connects to known results. The ADT surface charge part is more solid—the superpotential manipulation is standard, and the new bulk flux term is worth a careful check. The paper's own limitation statement is consistent: it reports preliminary results.

Would I send it to a referee? Yes. The question is well-posed, the framework is standard, and one new term in the charge construction is potentially useful. A referee should ask for the derivation of (12), an explicit evaluation of (31) with a controlled definition of n_c, and a statement of how γ is fixed. If those are supplied, this could be a real contribution. As it stands, it is a promising sketch, not a completed result. I would not cite it yet, but I would keep it on the radar.

Referee Report

6 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the covariant gravitational phase space of linearized gravity on a causal diamond in maximally symmetric spacetimes, using the conformal Killing symmetry of the diamond. It claims to derive a general formula for the surface gravity of a conformal Killing horizon, to establish a zeroth law on every slice, to identify a new bulk vector contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charges, and to obtain an approximate first law δH = κδA + [κ + O(e^{-(u+v)/2L})]ηδV away from the t = 0 slice. The main technical steps are a new relation between surface gravity and acceleration for conformal Killing horizons, a decomposition of the linearized Einstein operator into surface charge and bulk flux using an ADT superpotential, and a factorization of the bulk flux into a term proportional to surface gravity.

Significance. If the derivation were completed, the main result would be a concrete, falsifiable statement about the leading-order thermodynamics of causal diamonds on arbitrary slices, with exponentially small corrections at late times. The paper's use of the ADT superpotential to separate surface and bulk contributions is promising, and the zeroth-law statements (15)-(16) are geometrically natural. The paper honestly labels the numerical investigation preliminary, but the central claim is not currently supported by the calculation: the key identities are asserted rather than proved, and the bulk flux integral is never evaluated. As it stands, Eq. (34) is a conjecture, not a derivation.

major comments (6)

[Section 3.1, Eq. (12)] Equation (12), the general surface-gravity formula for a conformal Killing horizon, is stated without derivation or citation. This formula is load-bearing because it underlies the relation κ+α=aV and the later identification of temperature. Please provide a derivation or a precise reference; as written, the statement 'With conformal Killing symmetry we find' is not sufficient.
[Section 3.1, Eqs. (13)-(14)] The text claims that contracting the Frobenius condition with itself 'tells us' that κ+α=aV, but the displayed object χ[a∇bχc]χ[a∇bχc] vanishes identically by Eq. (11), so no information can be extracted from it. The relation to acceleration needs an explicit derivation, otherwise the zeroth-law discussion and the factorization of the bulk flux rest on an unproved identification.
[Section 4.2, after Eq. (31)] The condition ∇cα = -∇cκ on surfaces where a or aV is constant is asserted without proof. This is not a standard identity for conformal Killing vectors, and it is precisely the step that converts the bulk flux into surface-gravity terms. Please specify the surfaces on which this is supposed to hold and prove the identity, or replace it with a controlled estimate.
[Section 4.2, Eq. (32)] The approximation nc∇cα ≈ γ(sinh((u+v)/2L)+e^{-(u+v)/2L}) is uncontrolled: the direction nc is never defined, the constant γ is never fixed, and the identification with surface gravity is not demonstrated. Since the O(e^{-(u+v)/2L}) term is the entire quantitative deviation from the t=0 slice, this approximation requires a rigorous justification.
[Section 4.2, Eqs. (33)-(34)] The bulk flux integral ∫Σ lχ is never evaluated, so the passage from Eq. (31) to Eq. (34) is not a derivation. Moreover, Eq. (33) appears to contain a domain typo: Eq. (30) has kχ integrated over ∂Σ and lχ over Σ, while Eq. (33) reverses these. The first-law form (34) requires an explicit evaluation, or at least a controlled bound, of the bulk integral.
[Section 4.1, Eqs. (26)-(27)] The claimed new bulk contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charges is not tied to a conserved charge. The ADT construction gives surface charges; the term in Eq. (27) is a bulk flux, and the paper does not show that it is gauge-invariant, conserved, or related to the Noether-Wald entropy. Please define lχ explicitly and explain its status in the covariant phase-space formalism.

minor comments (4)

[Section 2, Eq. (2)-(3)] The notation in Eq. (2) is unclear: δL = ∫√g(R-2Λ) is not a standard way to write the action variation, and the coordinates in the line element (3) are not defined. Please state which coordinates u,v,r are being used and the ranges of R and L.
[Throughout] Several typographical errors should be corrected: 'bifurication' should be 'bifurcation', and 'physical interpretion' should be 'physical interpretation' in Section 3.1.
[Section 4, Eq. (28)] The quantities B and the contraction notation in ω = -χ·ε Eab hab + δSχ + dB are not explained. Please define B and the dot product, and specify how this formula is derived from Noether's second theorem.
[Section 4.2, Eq. (34)] The variations δA and δV in the first law are not defined. Please specify with respect to which deformation h_ab these variations are taken, and how they relate to the geometric quantities A and V introduced earlier.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The approximate first law Eq. (34) is obtained by identifying the bulk flux with κ through an unspecified direction n_c, so the volume term is an input rather than a derived result.

self definitional [Section 4.2, Eqs. (31)–(34)]
"Thus, one can factor the surface gravity (as opposed to the Unruh temperature), when nc∇cκ ≈ κ, along some suitable direction nc. For the causal diamond the conformal factor takes the schematic form 2α = γ sinh u+v 2L . Thus nc∇cα ≈ γ ( sinh u + v 2L + e− (u+v)/ 2L ) . So one can identify this approximately with the surface gravity. Collecting terms, this gives an approximate first law ... = κδA + [κ + O(e− (u+v)/ 2L)]ηδV."

The volume term [κ + O(e^{−(u+v)/2L})]ηδV is not computed from the flux integral (31). It is produced by three free choices: (i) the unproved relation ∇cα = −∇cκ, (ii) an unspecified 'suitable direction' nc obeying nc∇cκ ≈ κ, and (iii) a 'schematic' conformal factor 2α = γ sinh((u+v)/2L) with γ and the mode of approximation left undefined. Since nc and γ can be adjusted to make nc∇cα equal almost any desired function, the identification 'one can identify this approximately with the surface gravity' is the target result written as an assumption. The final first-law form is therefore equivalent to the chosen identification, not a consequence of evaluating the bulk flux.

full rationale

The paper does contain a genuine, non-circular derivation of the surface-charge/bulk-flux split in Section 4.1: the superpotential expression (26)–(27) follows from contracting the linearized equations with a conformal Killing vector, and that part is independent of the later first-law claim. The circularity is localized in Section 4.2, where the first law on nice slices is assembled. The bulk flux ∫Σ lχ is never explicitly evaluated; instead, the text asserts ∇cα = −∇cκ on surfaces of constant acceleration, introduces an unspecified direction nc with nc∇cκ ≈ κ, and then 'identifies' nc∇cα with the surface gravity. Each of these steps injects the desired coefficient κ into the volume term rather than deriving it from the integral in Eq. (31). The O(e^{−(u+v)/2L}) correction is likewise asserted from the schematic form 2α = γ sinh((u+v)/2L), with γ unspecified, so the claimed degree of deviation from the t=0 slice is not a computed result. This is a partial circularity: the central advertised output, Eq. (34), reduces by construction to the identification n_c∇^cκ≈κ, while the rest of the paper's geometric and superpotential analysis retains independent content. A score of 6 reflects that one of the paper's main predictions is effectively assumed through an uncontrolled identification, even though no self-citation chain is involved.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on standard GR and phase-space tools, plus a set of domain assumptions specific to the causal diamond. The most fragile entries are the ad hoc approximation linking ∇α to κ and the schematic form of α with an undefined γ, both of which are load-bearing for the claimed first law.

free parameters (1)

γ (conformal factor coefficient) = not specified
In Section 4.2, the conformal factor is written schematically as 2α = γ sinh((u+v)/2L), but γ is never defined or computed from the CKV (9). The approximate first law depends on this form.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Einstein-Hilbert action with cosmological constant (Eq. 2)
The analysis is restricted to pure gravity with cosmological constant; matter is neglected.
domain assumption Causal diamond region and CKV (Eq. 9)
The specific spacetime is a maximally symmetric spacetime with line element (3), and the CKV given in (9) is the symmetry used throughout.
domain assumption Frobenius condition χ_[a∇_bχ_c]=0 holds globally (Eq. 11)
This ensures the CKV foliates the entire spacetime so that surface gravity κ can be defined via (10) everywhere.
standard math Noether's second theorem and covariant phase space formalism
Used to derive surface charges and bulk flux; standard in the literature (refs [14,15,16]).
standard math Abbott-Deser-Tekin superpotential expansion (Eq. 24)
The decomposition of the linearized Einstein equations into a superpotential and a term vanishing on-shell is adopted from refs [6,10,11].
ad hoc to paper Condition ∇c α = -∇c κ on slices of constant acceleration/temperature
Stated in Section 4.2 to factor the surface gravity from the bulk flux; it follows from (14) only if a or aV is constant, but which surfaces satisfy this is not analyzed.
ad hoc to paper Approximation n_c ∇^c α ≈ κ (Eq. 32)
The key step that turns the bulk flux into a term proportional to the surface gravity; the direction n_c is not specified and the approximation is not controlled.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Horizon Thermodynamics on Nice Slices of the Causal Diamond." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D3ISIDV7

@misc{pith2026250420621,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Horizon Thermodynamics on Nice Slices of the Causal Diamond},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D3ISIDV7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.20621}
}

read the original abstract

There is a deep link between gravity and thermodynamics; in a precise way gravity can be derived from entanglement entropy in conformal field theories. However, this depends crucially on properties of horizons, and asymptotic symmetries of phase space. To explore how this relation behaves under dynamical processes, we consider covariant gravitational phase space enhanced with bulk conformal symmetry. As is well known, the Noether-Wald entropy has an explicit form in terms of the Abbott-Deser-Tekin conserved surface charges of gauge theories. We find a new vector contribution to the Abbott-Deser-Tekin charges that arises for conformal symmetries. In applying this to the causal diamond, we derive a general relation for surface gravity, based on the conformal invariance of horizons, that allows us to find slices where the zeroth law holds, as well as the degree to which a first law arises on the phase space.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

[1]

The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field The- ories and Supergravity

J. Maldacena “The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field The- ories and Supergravity”, Adv.Theor.Math.Phys.2:231-252 , (1998), https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961

doi:10.1023/a:1026654312961 1998
[2]

Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs

T. Faulkner, M. Guica, T. Hartman, R. C. Myers, M. Van Raamsdo nk “Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs”, JHEP 03 051 (2014), http://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2014)051

doi:10.1007/jhep03(2014)051 2014
[3]

Entanglement Equilibrium and the Einstein Equation

T. Jacobson “Entanglement Equilibrium and the Einstein Equation”, Phys. Rev. Lett. /emdash.cyr 2016. /emdash.cyr V. 116, Iss. 20

work page 2016
[4]

Gravitational Thermodynamics of Causal Diamonds in (A)dS

T. Jacobson, M. Visser “Gravitational Thermodynamics of Causal Diamonds in (A)dS”, Sci. Post. Phys. /emdash.cyr 2019. /emdash.cyr V. 7, no. 6. /emdash.cyr arXiv:1812.01596 [hep-th]

arXiv 2019
[5]

Black Holes and Entropy

J. D. Bekenstein “Black Holes and Entropy”, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333 (1973), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

doi:10.1103/physrevd.7.2333 1973
[6]

Stability of Gravity with a Cosmological Con- stant

A. Abbott, S. Deser “Stability of Gravity with a Cosmological Con- stant”, Nucl.Phys.B 195 (1982) 76-96, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90049-9 inspirehep.net/167737

doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90049-9 1982
[7]

Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges

G. Barnich, F. Brandt “Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges”, Nucl.Phys.B 633 (2 002) 3-82, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)00251-1 arXiv:0111246

doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(02)00251-1
[8]

Conformal Invariance of Black Hole Temperature

T. Jacobson, G. Kang “Conformal Invariance of Black Hole Temperature”, Class. Quant. Grav. 1993. /emdash.cyr V. 10, no. 11 /emdash.cyr arXiv:9307002v1 [hep-th]

work page 1993

Show all 16 references

[9]

General Relativity

R. M. Wald “General Relativity”. /emdash.cyr University of Chicago Press, 1984

1984
[10]

Energy in Generic Higher Curvature Gravity Theo- ries

S. Deser, B. Tekin “Energy in Generic Higher Curvature Gravity Theo- ries”, Phys.Rev.D67:084009, (2003), arXiv:hep-th/0212292

2003 arXiv
[11]

A Tribute to S. Deser: Conserved Quantities in Generic Grav - ity Theories

B. Tekin “A Tribute to S. Deser: Conserved Quantities in Generic Grav - ity Theories”, arXiv:2307.12758v2 9

arXiv
[12]

The four laws of black hole mechanics

J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, S. W. Hawking “The four laws of black hole mechanics”, Comm. Math. Phys. 31(2): 161-170 (19 73), doi:10.1007/BF01645742

doi
[13]

Notes on black-hole evaporation

W. G. Unruh “Notes on black-hole evaporation”, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976), doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.14.870

1976 doi
[14]

Some properties of Noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy

V. Iyer, R. Wald “Some properties of Noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy”, Phys. Rev. D. 50 (1994) 846-864, 1994. /emdash.cyr V. 50, Iss. 2 /emdash.cyrarXiv:9403028-[gr-qc]

1994
[15]

Advanced Lectures in General Relativ- ity

G. Compere, A. Fiorucci “Advanced Lectures in General Relativ- ity”, Springer Cham, 978-3-030-04259-2Published: 01 Febr uary (2019), arXiv:1801.07064 springer.com

2019 arXiv
[16]

Covariant Phase Space with Boundaries

D. Harlow, J-Q. Wu “Covariant Phase Space with Boundaries”, JHEP 10 (2020) 146, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)146 arXiv:1906.08616

2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field The- ories and Supergravity

J. Maldacena “The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field The- ories and Supergravity”, Adv.Theor.Math.Phys.2:231-252 , (1998), https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961

doi:10.1023/a:1026654312961 1998

[2] [2]

Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs

T. Faulkner, M. Guica, T. Hartman, R. C. Myers, M. Van Raamsdo nk “Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs”, JHEP 03 051 (2014), http://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2014)051

doi:10.1007/jhep03(2014)051 2014

[3] [3]

Entanglement Equilibrium and the Einstein Equation

T. Jacobson “Entanglement Equilibrium and the Einstein Equation”, Phys. Rev. Lett. /emdash.cyr 2016. /emdash.cyr V. 116, Iss. 20

work page 2016

[4] [4]

Gravitational Thermodynamics of Causal Diamonds in (A)dS

T. Jacobson, M. Visser “Gravitational Thermodynamics of Causal Diamonds in (A)dS”, Sci. Post. Phys. /emdash.cyr 2019. /emdash.cyr V. 7, no. 6. /emdash.cyr arXiv:1812.01596 [hep-th]

arXiv 2019

[5] [5]

Black Holes and Entropy

J. D. Bekenstein “Black Holes and Entropy”, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333 (1973), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

doi:10.1103/physrevd.7.2333 1973

[6] [6]

Stability of Gravity with a Cosmological Con- stant

A. Abbott, S. Deser “Stability of Gravity with a Cosmological Con- stant”, Nucl.Phys.B 195 (1982) 76-96, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90049-9 inspirehep.net/167737

doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90049-9 1982

[7] [7]

Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges

G. Barnich, F. Brandt “Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges”, Nucl.Phys.B 633 (2 002) 3-82, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)00251-1 arXiv:0111246

doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(02)00251-1

[8] [8]

Conformal Invariance of Black Hole Temperature

T. Jacobson, G. Kang “Conformal Invariance of Black Hole Temperature”, Class. Quant. Grav. 1993. /emdash.cyr V. 10, no. 11 /emdash.cyr arXiv:9307002v1 [hep-th]

work page 1993