• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,064 questions , 2,215 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,743 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Decoupling limit in AdS/CFT

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

In the heart of the original derivation of the AdS/CFT is the decoupling limit. From the Supergravity point of view (\(g_s N \gg 1\)), say for D3 branes, this amounts to taking the near horizon limit \(r/R \ll 1 \) with \(R\) the AdS radius.  (See the well known review)

  • Is there any paper that discusses different ways of taking a decoupling limit? (I am aware of the non-conformal case of other D-branes with running dilatons) ex: http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9802042.pdf
  • For example, if one considers more elaborate constructions of D-brane configurations -ex compact say spherical or toroidal (Say we put a stack of N spherical D-branes together) one can in principle form a lot of dimensionless ratios that one can tune, is the obstacle finding SUGRA solutions with these geometric properties - or are in general these solutions  unstable?
asked May 12, 2014 in Theoretical Physics by Apeiros (10 points) [ revision history ]
edited May 28, 2014 by dimension10

This is not really an answer, but here is what Lumo said when I asked him about this questions.

1 Answer

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Well, i totally agree that i did not give a very well posed problem, but I was just curious if other people had specific examples...(I have not yet tried to work out this problem myself)

Anyway, what I get from Lubos answer is that in principle one might be able to do this but of course he needs to choose a specific configuration that is stable and then discuss if this is interesting...

Personally, my original motivation (these are my thoughts so they might be totally wrong..) was that when one takes the decoupling limit the radius of AdS and of the sphere are the same and one cannot tune their ratio.... Thus we need an extra parameter to do this and I was wondering whether it can come from other brane configurations...

For me as far as I understand AdS/CFT  branes are non perturbative objects but their effects scale like $ e^{\frac{1}{g_s}} $ , so gravitationally they are not "enough" to create bh as single objects...

So we put a lot of them N and when we both take N and g to be large then they collapse and form the black hole.

Apparently, since we want a stable configuration etc we take an extremal bh and the near horizon limit is the well known $ AdS_5 \times S^5 $.

Now if one could cook up a stable configuration having an extra parameter (this is what I do not know how to do and what role do different configurations play in their near horizon geometry) I believe that in principle one can get a near horizon limit with a small sphere compared to ads.......(so this parameter to tune the relative size of the two)

answered May 28, 2014 by anonymous [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights