Various papers which I may not yet have read, but want to take a look at:
Geodesic stability, Lyapunov exponents and quasinormal modes by Vitor Cardoso, Alex S. Miranda, Emanuele Berti, Helvi Witek, and Vilson T. Zanchin.
Categorical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics and String Theory by A. Nicolaidis.
A Finite Electroweak Model Without a Higgs Particle by J. W. Moffat and V. T. Toth.
A list of astrophysical paradoxes, and on the idea of “paradox” in general:Astrophysical Paradoxes by Dragoljub A. Cucic.
A particularly interesting paper for me:
Infinite Statistics, Symmetry Breaking and Combinatorial Hierarchy by V.Shevchenko:
The physics of symmetry breaking in theories with strongly interacting quanta obeying infinite (quantum Boltzmann) statistics known as quons is discussed. The picture of Bose/Fermi particles as low energy excitations over nontrivial quon condensate is advocated. Using induced gravity arguments it is demonstrated that the Planck mass in such low energy effective theory can be factorially (in number of degrees of freedom) larger than its true ultraviolet cutoff. Thus, the assumption that statistics of relevant high energy excitations is neither Bose nor Fermi but infinite can remove the hierarchy problem without necessity to introduce any artificially large numbers. Quantum mechanical model illustrating this scenario is presented.
More than the usual number of interesting articles at arXiv caught my eye this week. I’m thinking about making this a weekly habit.
Denis Kochan’s new arXiv article: Does path integral really need a Lagrangian/Hamiltonian?, 0812.0678
Path integral formulation of quantum mechanics is strongly dependent on a given Lagrangian and/or Hamiltonian function. In the paper a simple rearrangement of the path integral to a surface functional integral is proposed. It is shown that the surface integral formulation of a transition probability amplitude is free of any particular choices and requires just the underlying classical equations of motion. A simple example examining functionality of the proposed method is considered.
December 1st was the last day to submit an essay on The Nature of Time to FQXi. The contest was open for essays way back on August 4th. I submitted an essay titled Density Operators and Time, back on September 2nd. As of today, there are 127 essays so far. There could be more. There are 48 entries dated December 1st or, interestingly, 2nd. Three of my favorite theoreticians (uh, other than myself) have submitted papers:
Marni Sheppeard wrote Measurement processes and cosmological emergence. This is the only essay that manages to get a mention in for mutually unbiased bases.
Louise Riofrio writes on The Riddle of Time: R = t. This is a revisit of her stuff on R=ct, but with c suppressed, I suppose, so that it doesn’t count as previously published.
David Hestenes writes on the electron Zitterbewegung, Electron time, mass and zitter. This is basically an abbreviation and rewrite of his arXiv article, which, somewhat hilariously, got classified by Cornell as “general physics”: 0802.3227.
Riofrio and Sheppeard got their papers in just before the deadline and may have been a bit rushed. Nevertheless, since these things basically amount to popularity contests, I’ve voted for them. Hopefully, having at least one restricted vote will distinguish them enough that people will read them.
The leading entry for restricted votes is that of Carlo Rovelli, “Forget time” . He argues that we should look for quantum gravity in a form where time plays no role at all.