Emergence of Special and Doubly Special Relativity: A Statistical Perspective

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter qsa
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sr
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the emergence of Special and Doubly Special Relativity from a statistical perspective, as presented in a paper by Petr Jizba and Fabio Scardigli. Participants explore the implications of this work, particularly in relation to relativistic effects and the statistical origins of these frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference a paper suggesting that Special Relativity emerges from a statistical average over non-relativistic paths, indicating that it is not a primitive concept but rather a result of coarse graining over distances related to the Compton wavelength.
  • One participant mentions their model, QSA (quantum statistical automata), which provides relativistic corrections without explicit reliance on Special Relativity.
  • Another participant challenges the validity of arbitrary random simulations in deriving physical laws, arguing that significant results must come from coherent models rather than random processes.
  • A later reply clarifies that the intention was to highlight the importance of the referenced paper rather than to claim personal discoveries, emphasizing the statistical nature of the effects discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance and coherence of models that yield relativistic effects. There is no consensus on the validity of the approaches discussed, and the conversation remains contested.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of coherent modeling in deriving physical constants and effects, suggesting that random simulations may not provide meaningful insights without proper constraints.

qsa
Messages
353
Reaction score
1
a nice catch by atty ,what do you think.

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1105/1105.3930v1.pdf

The emergence of Special and Doubly Special Relativity
Authors: Petr Jizba, Fabio Scardigli
(Submitted on 19 May 2011)
Abstract: In a previous paper [Phys.Rev.D82, 085016(2010)] we introduced a method for obtaining the exact Feynman propagator of a relativistic particle (for both Klein-Gordon and Dirac case) from a superstatistical average over non-relativistic single-particle paths. We suggested that this method could offer new insights into the currently much debated issue of emergent relativity. In this paper we proceed further, showing that a Brownian motion on a short scale originates a relativistic motion on scales larger than particle's Compton wavelength. Viewed in this way, special relativity is not a primitive concept, but rather it statistically emerges when a coarse graining average over distances of order, or longer than the Compton wavelength is taken. We also present the modifications necessary to accommodate in our scheme the doubly special relativistic dynamics. In this way, an unsuspected, common statistical origin of the two frameworks is brought to light. Salient issues such as generalized canonical commutation relations, connection with Feynman chessboard model, and Hausforff dimensions of corresponding path-integral trajectories are also discussed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
This might be interesting for unusualname since we were discussing relativistic effective potential few days ago in regard to my model QSA(quantum statistical automata) . I get relativistic correction without explicit SR.

posts #7,#11

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=499317

unusualname, you were correct it was driving me crazy, not anymore.
 
Good for you, post your model and its predictions in some coherent manner, otherwise stop posting nonsense about your recent "discoveries".

I have already explained to you that arbitrary random simulations may recover 1/r, 1/r^2 laws or whatever. You may get alpha but you may get pi by a buffon needle experiment, it is not significant or remotely interesting unless you get it from some coherently constrained model.

The fine structure constant is probably due to a complex statistical model of "virtual photon" interactions, so what?, have you modeled those interactions in a physically coherent manner, or have you just modeled something akin to buffons needle which throws out alpha because alpha has some mathematical relations to pi. (web search shows amazing numerology relations)

You are a crazy guy imho.
 
unusualname said:
Good for you, post your model and its predictions in some coherent manner, otherwise stop posting nonsense about your recent "discoveries".

I am sorry you have misunderstood me, I did not mean to boost about any discoveries or to offend you in any way. My purpose was to highlight the importance of the above mentioned paper. I only mentioned my experience with getting SR like effects (statistically) as an interesting little story. But their work is important not mine imho. And I thank you for all the constructive critisims and suggestions.
 

Similar threads

Graduate In search for a holistic perspective on the physical reality
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
Undergrad What Key Issues Should Cosmologists Address in the ΛCDM Model?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K