Is Doubly Special Relativity Connected to Variable Light Speed?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on "Doubly Special Relativity" (DSR), as introduced by Kowalski-Glikman in the 2004 paper "Introduction to Doubly Special Relativity" (arXiv:hep-th/0405273). Participants debate the implications of DSR, particularly the concepts of invariant Planck energy and Planck length, and their relationship to Lorentz invariance. The discussion highlights the confusion surrounding the terminology and the need for clarity when discussing fundamental constants like the gravitational constant (G) and their behavior across different reference frames.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of special relativity principles
  • Familiarity with fundamental physical constants (e.g., speed of light, Planck constant)
  • Knowledge of Lorentz transformations
  • Basic grasp of theoretical physics terminology
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the paper "Introduction to Doubly Special Relativity" by Kowalski-Glikman (2004)
  • Explore the concept of pseudo-differential operators in the context of relativity
  • Investigate the implications of invariant Planck energy and Planck length in DSR
  • Read Rindler’s book “Relativity - Special, General and Cosmological” for insights on coordinate transformations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, researchers in relativity, and students seeking to deepen their understanding of advanced concepts in special relativity and its modifications.

jjzeidner
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello. This is my first post on this site.

anyone here familiar with "Doubly Special Relativity"? an ARXIV paper was linked in the OP. Some follow up links or other advice would be appreciated.


thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
why was this moved here and given an incorrect title?
 
jjzeidner said:
why was this moved here and given an incorrect title?
Because this is the proper forum for the topic. I have fixed the title.
 
the link I posted was FROM at page!
 
I know - my post was intended as a note to people who might read your post and be confused about what OP it was referencing, since your post is now an OP in its own thread and no longer a reply to the FAQ thread.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
I'm struggling with what this thread is trying to do. Is it a complaint that things were moved? Is it a request that somebody summarize the paper and explain DSR? Is there some specific question?
]

People seem to be upset, but the parth to making them un-upset does not seem clear to me.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Tommy White, timmdeeg and topsquark
I think doubly SR is a thing from the past. There was a flurry of interest. It basically says that besides an invariant speed of light there is an invariant Planck-energy or Planck-length. Is the Planck length Lorentz-invariant?

The speed of light and the Planck constant are the same in every reference frame. Is G too?
 
A "yes" for a change ;).

All (fundamental) physical constants are 'invariant' as in observer independent. But the Planck’s constant or Boltzmann’s constant are not called 'Lorentz invariants'.

(In GR, of course G=c=1 so it would be really weird if it wasn't.)
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Thelamon said:
A "yes" for a change ;).

All (fundamental) physical constants are 'invariant' as in observer independent. But the Planck’s constant or Boltzmann’s constant are not called 'Lorentz invariants'.

(In GR, of course G=c=1 so it would be really weird if it wasn't.)
But is G the same if measured in different frames?
 
  • #11
Thelamon said:
A "yes" for a change ;).

All (fundamental) physical constants are 'invariant' as in observer independent. But the Planck’s constant or Boltzmann’s constant are not called 'Lorentz invariants'.

(In GR, of course G=c=1 so it would be really weird if it wasn't.)
We can read:

"Doubly special relativity[1][2] (DSR) – also called deformed special relativity or, by some[who?], extra-special relativity – is a modified theory of special relativity in which there is not only an observer-independent maximum velocity (the speed of light), but also, an observer-independent maximum energy scale (the Planck energy) and/or a minimum length scale (the Planck length)."

Why say there is a minimum length scale, the Planck length, if it's Lorentz invariant already? Well the length itself changes for different observers. It goes to zero like all lengths. But DSR says this won't happen. Which is strange.
 
  • #12
BoraxZ said:
The speed of light and the Planck constant are the same in every reference frame. Is G too?
It's a little bit weird imo saying "the speed of light" (without c) and "the Planck constant" (without h) and then just G, so a little advice it's better to be complete and clear, specially if you're going to write an article once upon a time .. so Gravitational constant, G.
BoraxZ said:
But is G the same if measured in different frames?
Yes, measurements made which are not, are observer- or frame dependent.
BoraxZ said:
We can read
Yes, at least everyone reading this or anything else.
 
  • #13
BoraxZ said:
Why say there is a minimum length scale, the Planck length, if it's Lorentz invariant already? Well the length itself changes for different observers. It goes to zero like all lengths. But DSR says this won't happen. Which is strange.
The length constant doesn't shrink in that theory -- just as the value of ##c## doesn't change if you perform a Lorentz boost to a different velocity.

To understand this properly, one must look at the actual coordinate transformations proposed in the theory. Wikipedia quotes de Sitter Relativity as an example of DSR. Its length constant is indeed invariant.
 
  • #14
Doubly special relativity is related to pseudo-differential operators. This is why the speed of light is variable. The best place to learn about pseudo-differential operators is Rindler’s book ‘Relativity - special, general and cosmological’
 
  • #15
dx said:
Doubly special relativity is related to pseudo-differential operators. This is why the speed of light is variable. The best place to learn about pseudo-differential operators is Rindler’s book ‘Relativity - special, general and cosmological’
Please give a more specific reference. I cannot find the term "pseudo-differential" anywhere in that Rindler book. (I have the 2nd edition.)
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K