Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

There is a standard procedure to show that for CFT's in dimension $d\geq 2$, the trace of stress tensor vanishes. I think I can't apply those steps when I only have one dimension, say time, because if we could then we can show that stress tensor trace $T_{tt}$ (which is basically it) also vanishes which may not be true always. Things are definitely different in 1D (I think metric can just be $g_{tt}$ and conformal transformation just a $t\rightarrow \lambda t$ transformation. Please correct me if I am wrong.) So, where do basically things go wrong in such derivation?

share|cite|improve this question
Every 1D metric is flat (not just conformally flat as in 2D) because we can always reparametrize the only metric function smoothly to a constant. Therefore in 1D it makes no sense to talk about conformal transformations. – Marek Aug 11 '11 at 10:54
That's true. Its kind of trivial. But still non-trivial work goes on when people talk about $AdS_2/CFT_1$. – user1349 Aug 11 '11 at 14:06

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.