A Do we need stochasticity in a discrete spacetime?

Ali Lavasani
Messages
54
Reaction score
1
Suppose that the spacetime is discrete, with only certain positions being possible for any particle. In this case, the probability distributions of particles have nonzero values at the points on which the wavefunction is defined. Do we need randomness in the transitions of particles in such a spacetime?

My reasoning is, in a discrete space-time there is no continuous function that would allow to transport the distribution of P into the distribution P'. Basically if any point of the space has a deterministic trajectory and is mapped to another certain point, the distribution cannot change. We don't have this problem in a continuum, but what about a discrete space?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ali Lavasani said:
Suppose that the spacetime is discrete, with only certain positions being possible for any particle. In this case, the probability distributions of particles have nonzero values at the points on which the wavefunction is defined. Do we need randomness in the transitions of particles in such a spacetime?

This question can't be answered because nobody has an actual theory in which spacetime is discrete. All of our theories are based on spacetime as a continuum.

What we do know is that, in a discrete model, concepts like "probability distribution" are not well-defined; a distribution needs a continuous space. In fact even the concept of a "trajectory" doesn't make sense, since it implies a continuous curve. So even your framing of the question makes implicit assumptions that don't apply to the scenario you are proposing.
 
Ali Lavasani said:
in a discrete space-time there is no continuous function

Of course not. (Note that the phrase quoted is true without any other qualifications; you could have just left out the rest of the sentence.) A continuous function requires a continuous domain and range. But this doesn't make your reasoning correct; it makes it inapplicable.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top