Search FQXi

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Jayakar Joseph: on 11/17/12 at 16:15pm UTC, wrote Dear Michele Arzano, Local fluctuations of the fields in quantum field...

Donatello Dolce: on 10/5/12 at 13:59pm UTC, wrote Ciao Michele, nice essay, I am using a similar formalism to generalize my...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 5:27am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Benjamin Dribus: on 10/1/12 at 19:58pm UTC, wrote Dear Michele, I like this idea. I wonder what it would look like from a...

Olaf Dreyer: on 9/27/12 at 12:56pm UTC, wrote Dear Michele: Great essay. I like your "humble" attitude towards quantum...

Hoang Hai: on 9/19/12 at 15:09pm UTC, wrote Dear Very interesting to see your essay. Perhaps all of us are convinced...

M. Arzano: on 9/5/12 at 14:34pm UTC, wrote Hi Alan and Jonathan, Thanks for appreciating the message I try to convey...

Jonathan Dickau: on 9/4/12 at 19:49pm UTC, wrote I meant to say; When gravity enters the picture, we can no longer assume a...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Chima Ugochukwu: "Notice there am no difference between the black surface area surrounding..." in Black Hole Photographed...

Anthony Aguirre: "Hi Stefan, Yes, I would say that the de Sitter region is locally..." in Cosmological Koans

Georgina Woodward: "The word 'energy' can refer to a measurable. That can be represented by a..." in Cosmological Koans

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Reality Fans, The real VISIBLE Universe never “started out.”..." in First Things First: The...

isabell ella: "If you are facing Cash app related problems and want to get support..." in Cosmic Dawn, Parallel...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Michael Hussey: "https://www.google.com" in New Nuclear "Magic...

RECENT ARTICLES

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

FQXi FORUM
July 20, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Weaving Commutators: Beyond Fock Space by Michele Arzano [refresh]

Author Michele Arzano wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 13:45 GMT
Essay Abstract

The symmetrization postulate and the associated Bose/Fermi (anti)-commutators for field mode operators are among the pillars on which local quantum field theory lays its foundations. They ultimately determine the structure of Fock space and are closely connected with the local properties of the fields and with the action of symmetry generators on observables and states. We here show that the quantum field theory describing a relativistic particle coupled to three dimensional Einstein gravity as a topological defect must be constructed using a deformed algebra of creation and annihilation operators. This reflects a non-trivial group manifold structure of the classical momentum space and a modification of the Leibniz rule for the action of symmetry generators governed by Newton's constant. We outline various arguments suggesting that, at least at the qualitative level, these three-dimensional results could also apply to real four-dimensional world thus forcing us to re-think the ordinary multiparticle structure of quantum field theory and many of the fundamental aspects connected to it.

Author Bio

Dr. Arzano is a researcher in theoretical physics at the "Sapienza" University of Rome in Italy. He obtained his PhD from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and has worked as a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada and as a Marie Curie Fellow at Institute for Theoretical Physics at Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Part of his current research revolves around the question of which of the fundamental pillars of our current description of high energy physics can or must be rethought when (quantum) gravity enters the picture.

Alan Hutchinson wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 21:17 GMT
This is serious stuff.

Arzano does not question the basic structure of QFT or GR.

If they are sound, and if his approach also works for 3 space dimemsions and 1 time dimension, then it suggests that QFT must be much more subtle than hitherto thought.

report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 19:46 GMT
Yes indeed,

I agree that this is serious and interesting. It hovers near the limits of my Math comprehension, so is not easy reading for the Math challenged, but it kept my interest by continually coming back to comprehensible ideas.

I believe you effectively demonstrate that a deformed algebra is necessary, Michele, and it appears that your construction does the job nicely. I will need to re-read for details before I know for sure, but I find the derivation of a non-commutative rule to be a satisfying result.

all the best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 19:49 GMT
I meant to say;

When gravity enters the picture, we can no longer assume a 'level playing field' in terms of equal weighting, so it only makes sense that something like Dr. Arzano's prescription would be needed.

Regards,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

M. Arzano wrote on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 14:34 GMT
Hi Alan and Jonathan,

Thanks for appreciating the message I try to convey in the essay. Your comments go exactly to the point: gravity and backreaction in certain specific regimes (might) require a simple yet non-trivial "deformation" of the very basic structures of ordinary local QFT. If we were able to identify a similar mechanism in 3+1 dimensions (as we are trying to) this would give much food for thought for everyone dealing with the puzzles of quantum field theory in curved spaces.

Best regards,

Michele

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 15:09 GMT
Dear

Very interesting to see your essay.

Perhaps all of us are convinced that: the choice of yourself is right!That of course is reasonable.

So may be we should work together to let's the consider clearly defined for the basis foundations theoretical as the most challenging with intellectual of all of us.

Why we do not try to start with a real challenge is very close and are the focus of interest of the human science: it is a matter of mass and grain Higg boson of the standard model.

Knowledge and belief reasoning of you will to express an opinion on this matter:

You have think that: the Mass is the expression of the impact force to material - so no impact force, we do not feel the Higg boson - similar to the case of no weight outside the Earth's atmosphere.

Does there need to be a particle with mass for everything have volume? If so, then why the mass of everything change when moving from the Earth to the Moon? Higg boson is lighter by the Moon's gravity is weaker than of Earth?

The LHC particle accelerator used to "Smashed" until "Ejected" Higg boson, but why only when the "Smashed" can see it,and when off then not see it ?

Can be "locked" Higg particles? so when "released" if we do not force to it by any the Force, how to know that it is "out" or not?

You are should be boldly to give a definition of weight that you think is right for us to enjoy, or oppose my opinion.

Because in the process of research, the value of "failure" or "success" is the similar with science. The purpose of a correct theory be must is without any a wrong point ?

Glad to see from you comments soon,because still have too many of the same problems.

Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

August 23, 2012 - 11:51 GMT on this essay contest.

report post as inappropriate

Member Olaf Dreyer wrote on Sep. 27, 2012 @ 12:56 GMT
Dear Michele:

Great essay. I like your "humble" attitude towards quantum gravity: Don't ask for the whole theory but look instead at the traces the theory might leave in our better known physics (local quantum field theory in this case).

The interesting question of course is whether the structure that you have described in 2+1 dimensions has a counterpart in 3+1 dimensions. In 2+1 dimensions particles appear in this very peculiar way as conical singularities. What is the situation in higher dimensions? Is it absolutely necessary to have this topological structure?

All the best.

Olaf

report post as inappropriate

Member Benjamin F. Dribus wrote on Oct. 1, 2012 @ 19:58 GMT
Dear Michele,

I like this idea. I wonder what it would look like from a path-integral perspective? The modeling of particles as slight topological defects with simple properties seems like it might serve as a halfway house to a suitable “sum over geometries.” Take care,

Ben Dribus

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 05:27 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
$R_1$
and
$N_1$
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
$S_1=R_1 N_1$
of points. After it anyone give you
$dS$
of points so you have
$S_2=S_1+ dS$
of points and
$N_2=N_1+1$
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
$S_2=R_2 N_2$
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
$S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1$
or
$(S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1$
or
$dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1$
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
$dS$
then the participant`s rating
$R_1$
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Donatello Dolce wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 13:59 GMT
Ciao Michele,

nice essay, I am using a similar formalism to generalize my theory to fermionic fields, by means of the analogies with twistors and zitterbewegung. See my essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1503 .

Best regards,

Donatello

report post as inappropriate

Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Nov. 17, 2012 @ 16:15 GMT
Dear Michele Arzano,

Local fluctuations of the fields in quantum field theory expressional with degrees of freedom, is indicative of the elasticity of a string-segment described in Coherently-cyclic cluster-matter paradigm of universe.

The Fock space that describes the quantum states of a variable or unknown number of particles from a single particle Hilbert space is indicative of the probability of existence of string-segment of matter representational with multiple points in that segment in that quantization is expressional only with its dynamics as eigen-rotation that represents tetrahedral-brane. This implies that, ‘raison d'être’ of universe is the collective dynamics of string-matter continuum rather than space-time continuum, in that time and space emerges with the eigen-rotations of string-segments. As eigen-rotational phases of a cycle is not commutative, anticommutativity is applicable with this string-matter continuum scenario, in that negation of eigen-rotational chirality is descriptive in accordance with matter-antimatter asymmetry and thus the ‘Weaving Commutators’ postulate is applicable with this paradigm also.

With best wishes

Jayakar

report post as inappropriate