Talk:Conformal field theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Physics (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject Mathematics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
Start Class
Mid Importance
 Field: Mathematical physics

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject importance rating[edit]

How on earth is conformal field theory of low importance? It's one of the active research areas of quantum field theory, because it's needed to state the AdS/CFT correspondence, which, in the words of the article, is "the most highly cited article in the field of high energy physics."

Warning: Once this gets a higher importance, I'll start griping about it's class rating! Adam1729 (talk) 02:32, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually this article is High importance in my opinion - adjusted, and is in dire need of rewriting since it's a total mess.PhysicsAboveAll (talk) 12:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

See also[edit]

There was a reference to "Critical point (mathematics)" at the end of the article. Seems a bit too elementary, maybe the editor meant "Critical point (physics)" which is much more relevant? Applying changes, please revert if you think necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.203.179.241 (talk) 00:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)