1: \documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{article}
2:
3: \textwidth 126mm
4: \textheight 199mm
5: %\oddsidemargin 22.5mm
6: %\topmargin 6mm
7: %\footskip 20mm
8:
9: \usepackage{graphics}
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16: \begin{document}
17:
18:
19:
20: \flushbottom
21: \itemsep 0pt
22: \parsep 0pt
23: \baselineskip 12pt
24: \parindent 7mm
25: \vspace*{36pt}
26:
27: \noindent {\bf A REALISTIC INTERPRETATION OF LATTICE GAUGE \\ THEORIES}
28:
29: \vskip 36pt
30: \hskip 1cm{ \bf Miguel Lorente}
31:
32: \vskip 12pt
33:
34: \hskip 1cm {\it Departamento de F\'{\i}sica, Facultad de Ciencias}
35:
36: \hskip 1cm {\it Universidad de Oviedo}
37:
38: \hskip 1cm {\it E-33007, Oviedo, Spain}
39:
40: \vskip 24pt
41:
42: \baselineskip 13pt
43: \noindent
44: Following recent assumptions to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity, the
45: structure of spacetime is suppose to be a consequence of the relations among some
46: fundamental objects, and its concept can be formulated without the reference to the intuition. As physical consequences
47: the continuous laws should be translated in to difference equations and the lattice
48: field theories should be interpreted as a realistic model.
49:
50: \vskip 13pt
51:
52: \noindent {Key words:} spacetime, real lattice, process, relations.
53:
54: \vskip 26pt
55:
56: \noindent \parbox[t]{7mm}{\bf 1.} \parbox[t]{119mm}{\bf RECENT ASSUMPTIONS TO UNIFY
57: QUANTUM MECHANICS AND THE STRUCTURE OF SPACETIME}
58:
59: \vskip 13pt
60:
61: \indent
62: One of the most difficult problems to unify the postulates of QM and general relativity
63: is the different conceptions of spacetime. In QM the spacetime is a container where
64: the fields are distinguished by their position and interactions, in the theory of
65: relativity the gravitational field is identified with the metrical properties of spacetime.
66: Recently several authors have tried to overcome this difficulty by deriving the structure of
67: spacetime from the properties of fundamental processes described by QM.
68:
69: According to Joseph M. Jauch, the set of propositions of a physical system in QM replaces
70: the phase space [1]. In classical mechanics the underlying spacetime is necessary to
71: impose the initial conditions that determined the solution of equations of motion.
72: In QM the equation of motions are substituted by the set of propositions based on the
73: superposition of the simplest yes-no experiments. The axiomatic form of this
74: structure gives rise to the calculus of propositions, that do not presuppose the space
75: time. The physical state is the result of a series of physical manipulations on the set of
76: propositions.
77:
78: \baselineskip 13pt
79:
80: Karl F. von Weizsaecker gives a more explicit connections between quantum theory and the
81: concept of time and space [2]. All the quantum processes can be reduced to binary
82: alternatives (equivalent to yes-no experiments). The interaction among these fundamental
83: entities, which he calls ``urs'', gives rise to physical system and the structure of
84: spacetime is the set of relations among the binary alternatives.
85:
86: There are two important postulates: (i) the number of actual alternatives that
87: determine a physical is finite, because they represent real properties; (ii) the number
88: of possible alternatives is infinite due to the indeterministic nature of the quantum
89: processes. As a consequence, the description of facts is given by discrete variables,
90: but the physical laws are given in terms of continuous functions.
91:
92: Roger Penrose does not pressupose an underlying spacetime for the physical processes [3].
93: The starting point is the total angular momentum of some fundamental units, the interactions
94: of which produce a discrete network. ``My model, says Penrose, works with objects and
95: interactions between objects. An object is thus located either directionally or positionally
96: in terms of its relations with other objects. One does not really need a space to begin with.
97: The notion of space comes out as a convenience at the end.''
98:
99: According to David Finkelstein the world is a network of quantum processes, which he calls
100: ``monads''[4]. Every process in nature is a finite assembly of elementary processes, namely,
101: of creation and destruction, and the structure of Spacetime is the set of all elementary
102: processes and their relations.
103:
104: \vskip 26pt
105:
106: \noindent \parbox[t]{7mm}{\bf 2.} \parbox[t]{119mm}{\bf EPISTEMOLOGY OF THESE MODELS}
107:
108: \vskip 13pt
109:
110: \indent
111: In order to understand better these models it would be useful to consider three levels
112: of human knowledge in the comprehension of the physical world[5]:
113:
114: \vskip 13pt
115:
116: {\noindent {\it Level 1}: Physical magnitudes, such as distances, intervals, force, mass,
117: charge, that are given by our sensation and perceptions.}
118:
119: {\noindent {\it Level 2}: Mathematical structures, that are the result of metrical properties given
120: by measurements and numerical relations among them.}
121:
122: {\noindent {\it Level 3}: Fundamental concepts, representing the ontological properties of
123: physical world given by our intelligence in an attempt to know the reality. This level
124: of knowledge is not accepted by some philosophical positions like logical positivismus,
125: conventionalismus, neokantismus.}
126:
127: \vskip 13pt
128:
129: There must be some connections between the three levels. In QM the theoretical models
130: of microphysics in level 2 are related to observable magnitudes in level 1 by correspondence
131: laws. If we accept level 3 it should be connected to level 2 and to level 1 (through level
132: 2). In fact, the rules governing the constructions of theoretical models in level 2 must be
133: grounded in some fundamental (ontological) properties of the physical world.
134:
135: We can now raise the following question: in theoretical models of level 2 there are
136: primitive and derived concepts, the last ones are obtained from the first ones by
137: mathematical formulas. Are space and time primitive or derived concepts?
138: If the second answer is given the description of the world in level 2 should not include as
139: primitives the geometrical objects such as lines, planes, surfaces.
140:
141: \vskip 26pt
142:
143: \noindent \parbox[t]{7mm}{\bf 3.} \parbox[t]{119mm}{\bf MODERN THEORIES ON THE STRUCTURE OF
144: SPACETIME}
145:
146: \vskip 13pt
147:
148: \indent
149: In order to answer the last question it is convenient to recall the different
150: interpretations of the concepts of space and time [6]. They are usually divided in
151: three classes.
152:
153: \begin{enumerate}
154: \item[(a)]{\it Dualistic theories}: Space is a container where the particles and waves are
155: moving. Time is also a separated entity with respect to which the motion takes place.
156: Therefore space and time are absolute and can be thinked of in the absence of
157: particles (Newton).
158: \item[(b)]{\it Monistic theories}: Spacetime is identified with some properties of matter
159: and can not be concevible without the existence of the later. The field of forces and also
160: the sources are nothing more that geometrical deformations of the Spacetime (Einstein,
161: Kaluza-Klein, Wheeler).
162: \item[(c)] {\it Relational theories}: Spacetime consists of the set of relations among some
163: fundamental objects: monads (Leibniz), units (Penrose), processes (Weisaecker, Finkelstein),
164: preparticles (Bunge, Garc\'{\i}a Sucre), objects (Hilbert).
165: \end{enumerate}
166:
167: In Sec. 1 we have mentioned some of these authors. We expand in some detail
168: Leibniz's and Hilbert's conception. According to Leibniz [7] ``time is the order of points
169: (monads) non existing simultaneously and one is the ratio of the other. Space is the
170: order of points that exist simultaneously and are connected by mutual interactions.
171: Space is nothing more that the set of all points and their relations. One point is here if
172: it has relations with some particular points around it. A point changes its position if it
173: changes its relations from some points to different ones. Motion is the change of
174: different positions in time''.
175:
176: In his {\it Foundation of Geometry}, Hilbert has proposed an axiomatic approach to
177: Euclidean geometry[8], according to which the concept of space is constructed with the
178: help of some logical properties. He distinguishes two types of axiomatization: i)
179: material, by which the concept of space is taken from observation and intuition and ii)
180: formal, in which the concept of space is derived from some formal properties of
181: axioms and inferences without the recourse to the intuition or the observation (his
182: famous expression, ``We could say always instead of points, lines and planes, chairs,
183: tables and glasses of beer,'' confirms his position in favor of the formal axiomatization)
184: The concepts of point, straight line, and plane can be reduced to pure logical relations.
185:
186: \vskip 26pt
187:
188: \noindent \parbox[t]{7mm}{\bf 4.} \parbox[t]{119mm}{\bf A RELATIONAL THEORY OF SPACETIME}
189:
190: \vskip 13pt
191:
192: \indent
193: Following the assumption of the last section now we give an explicit construction of a formal
194: structure of Spacetime, without the recourse to intuition. We can think of a set of
195: fundamental objects acting among themselves, giving rise to a network of relations. These
196: relations do not pressupose some space. The objects are nowhere if we consider them as
197: elements of the physical world in level 2. In order to be specific we take as a naive network
198: a three-dimensional cubic lattice. Obviously the network can be taken with different
199: structure, such as, triangular, quasiperiodic or random lattices. In order to make connection
200: with the euclidean geometry we take, for simplicity, a infinite set of interacting points in
201: the relation 1 to 4. The set of all relations form a two-dimensional lattice, in which we can
202: define:
203:
204: \vskip 13pt
205:
206: A {\it path} is the connection between two different points, say, A and B, through
207: points that are pairwise neighbours.
208:
209: The {\it length} of a path is the numbers of points contained in the path, including the
210: first and the last one.
211:
212: A {\it minimal path} is a path with minimal length (in the picture the two paths
213: between A and B are minimal). Between two point there can be different minimal
214: paths.
215:
216:
217: \bigskip
218: \begin{center}
219: \includegraphics{Oviedo-1.eps}
220: \end{center}
221: \medskip
222:
223:
224: A {\it principal straight line} is a indefinite set of points in the lattice, such that each
225: of them is contiguous to other two, and the minimal path between two arbitrary
226: points of this line is always unique.
227:
228: \vskip 13pt
229:
230: {\noindent {\bf Theorem 1}. Through a point of a 2-dimensional square lattice pass only two
231: different principal straight lines (they are called {\it orthogonal straight lines}).}
232:
233: \vskip 13pt
234:
235: {\noindent {\bf Theorem 2}. Two principal straight lines that are not orthogonal have all the
236: points either in common or separated (in the last case they are called {\it paralell straight
237: lines})}.
238:
239: \vskip 13pt
240:
241: From these two theorem we can define Cartesian (discrete) coordinates and an
242: Euclidean space where the postulates of Hilbert can be applied (with the exception of
243: the axioms of continuity). This structure of 2-dimensional space can be easily generalized to
244: 3-dimensional cubic lattice. As we mentioned, those assumptions for the structure of space are
245: given in level 2, but it corresponds to the properties of physical space described in level 1
246: by our sensations.
247:
248: In order to introduce the relation that correspond to time we
249: start with only two fundamental objects acting among themselves:
250:
251:
252: \bigskip
253: \begin{center}
254: \includegraphics{Oviedo-2.eps}
255: \end{center}
256: \medskip
257: \vskip 13pt
258:
259: In (a), 1 is acting on 2, and in (b) 2 is acting on 1. But the action of 1 on 2 is supposed
260: to be a necessary condition for the action of 2 on 1, and similarly the action of 2 on 1
261: is supposed to be a necessary condition for a new action of 1 on 2. Thus we can think
262: of a chain of mutual interactions arranged in a series of necessary conditions.
263: This picture has to be enlarged for the whole lattice. We take a set of interacting
264: objects in the relations 1 to 2.
265:
266:
267: \bigskip
268: \begin{center}
269: \includegraphics{Oviedo-3.eps}
270: \end{center}
271: \medskip
272:
273: \vskip 13pt
274:
275: In (a), 1 is acting on 2, 3 is acting on 2 and 4, 5 is acting on 4 and 6, 7 is acting on 6.
276: In (b), 2 is acting or 1 and 3, 4 is acting on 3 and 5, 6 is acting on 5 an 7.
277:
278: We postulate that the actions of (a) are necessary conditions for the actions of (b) and
279: the actions of (b) are necessary conditions for a further action of type (a) an so on.
280:
281: Now take a network of objects acting in the relation 1 to 4.
282:
283:
284: \bigskip
285: \begin{center}
286: \includegraphics{Oviedo-4.eps}
287: \end{center}
288: \medskip
289:
290: \vskip 13pt
291:
292: In (a), 2 is acting on 1, 3, 5; 4 is acting on 1, 5, 7; 6 is acting on 3, 5, 9; 8 is acting on
293: 5,7,9. In (b), 1 is acting on 2 and 4; 3 is acting on 2 and 6; 5 is acting on 2, 4, 6, 8; 7 is
294: acting on 4 and 8; 9 is acting on 6 and 8. As before we postulate that the actions of (a) be
295: necessary conditions for the actions of (b) and so on. These logical properties of
296: interactions belong to level 2 and do not pressupose the concept of time, but they can be put
297: in correspondence with the physical properties of time given in level 1.
298:
299: In level 3 there must be some ontological properties corresponding to the objects and
300: interactions described in level 2.
301:
302: In our model the most essential character of material entities is not the extension but
303: their capacity to produce effects in other object (external causality). There is a causal
304: relation between cause and effect and the logical necessity that was introduced in the
305: last paragragh for the interpretation of time has its ontological ground in the principle
306: of causality by wich the effect cannot be produced without its cause.
307:
308: \vskip 26pt
309:
310: \noindent \parbox[t]{7mm}{\bf 5.} \parbox[t]{119mm}{\bf PHYSICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE MODEL}
311:
312: \vskip 13pt
313:
314:
315: \indent
316: The assumption of relational theory of Spacetime with a particular structure of cubic
317: lattice, implies some physical consequences for the classical as well for the quantum
318: physics:
319: \begin{enumerate}
320: \item[(i)] The Spacetime is discrete, therefore the physical laws are written in the language
321: of finite differences. The solutions have to be described by continuous function of
322: discrete variables [10].
323: \item[(ii)] Lattice gauge theories are not only a mathematical tool but a realistic theory,
324: because they correspond to the underlying discrete structure of Spacetime. Some
325: correspondence law must be given to make connection with the experimental world [11].
326: \item[(iii)] The symmetry of the model is still Poincar\'e transformation, although one has to
327: select those integral transformations that keep the lattice invariant [12].
328: \item[(iv)] Some experimental test.Although there are infinite number of integral Lorentz
329: transformations, and the continuous Lorentz transformations is a dense set, there are only 24
330: pure rotations that keep the lattice invariant. Therefore there is a broken SO (3)
331: symmetry that leads to non-isotropy of the world. This means that one could fine in principle
332: some preferred direction either in the microphysical world or in the large scale of the
333: universe. An other physical application of the model could be detected in the discrete
334: mass spectrum as a natural consequence of the elementary time interval an
335: estimation of wich by actual calculations gives about $10^{-36}$ sec.
336: \end{enumerate}
337:
338:
339:
340: In order to prove this we summarized some mathematical results of lattice field
341: theories [13].
342:
343: We introduce the method of finite differences for the Klein-Gordon scalar
344: field. An explicit scheme for the wave equation consistent with the continuous
345: case (the truncation error is of second orden with respect to space and time
346: variables) can be constructed as follows:
347: \begin{equation}
348: \left( {{1 \over {\tau}^{2}}{\nabla}_{n} {\Delta
349: }_{n} {\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} -{1 \over
350: {\varepsilon}^{2}}{\nabla}_{j} {\Delta}_{j}
351: {\tilde{\nabla}}_{n} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{n} +{M}^{
352: 2}{\tilde{\nabla}}_{n} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{n} {\tilde{\nabla
353: }}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j}}\right) {\phi}_{j}^{n}
354: =0 \; ;
355: \label{3.1}
356: \end{equation}
357:
358: \noindent
359: here in the field is defined in the grid points of the $(1+1)$-dimensional
360: lattice $ \phi_j^n \equiv \phi \left(j\varepsilon,n\tau\right),\;\varepsilon
361: , \tau $ being the space and time fundamental intervals, $j, n$ integer
362: numbers, and ${\Delta}_{j} \left({{\nabla}_{j}}\right)$ are the
363: forward (backward) differences with respect to the space index, ${\tilde{
364: \Delta}}_{j} \left({{\tilde{\nabla}}_{j}}\right)$ the forward
365: (backward) averages, and similarly for the time index.
366:
367: Using the method of separation of variables, it can easily be proved that the
368: following functions of discrete variables are solutions of the wave equation
369: (\ref{3.1}):
370: \begin{equation}
371: {f}_{j}^{n} \left({k , \omega}\right)
372: ={\left({{1+{1 \over 2} i \varepsilon k \over 1-{1
373: \over 2} i \varepsilon k}}\right)}^{j}
374: {\left({{1-{1 \over 2} i \tau \omega \over 1+{1 \over
375: 2} i \tau \omega}}\right)}^{n} \; ,
376: \label{3.2}
377: \end{equation}
378: provided the ``dispersion relation'' is satisfied:
379: \begin{equation}
380: {\omega}^{2}-{k}^{2}={M}^{2}
381: \label{3.3}
382: \end{equation}
383: M, being the mass of the particle.
384:
385: In the limit, $j\rightarrow \infty,\quad n \rightarrow \infty,\quad
386: j\varepsilon \rightarrow x,\quad n\tau \rightarrow t $, the functions (\ref{3.2})
387: become plane wave solutions
388: \begin{equation}
389: {f}_{j}^{n} \left({k , \omega}\right) \rightarrow
390: \exp i\left({kx - \omega t}\right)\; .
391: \label{3.5}
392: \end{equation}
393:
394: Imposing boundary conditions on the space indices,
395: \begin{equation}
396: {f}_{o}^{n} \left({k , \omega}\right) ={f}_{
397: N}^{n} \left({k , \omega}\right)
398: \label{3.6}
399: \end{equation}
400: we get
401:
402: \begin{equation}
403: k_m ={2 \over\varepsilon} \tan {\pi m \over N} \; ,\qquad m=0,1,\ldots ,N-1 \; ,
404: \label{3.7}
405: \end{equation}
406: therefore
407: \begin{equation}
408: {\omega =\pm \left({{k}_{m}^{2}+{M}^{2}}\right)}^{1/2}\; .
409: \label{3.8}
410: \end{equation}
411: For the positive energy solutions we define
412: \begin{equation}
413: {\omega_m = + \left({{k}_{m}^{2}+{M}^{2}}\right)}^{1/2} \; .
414: \label{3.9}
415: \end{equation}
416:
417: Starting from the wave equation (\ref{3.1}), we can construct a current vector.
418: Multiplying (\ref{3.1}) by ${\tilde{\nabla}}_{n} {\tilde{\Delta
419: }}_{n} {\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j}
420: {\phi}_{j}^{* n}$ from the left, and multiplying the complex
421: conjugate of the wave equation by ${\tilde{\nabla}}_{n}
422: {\tilde{\Delta}}_{n} {\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta
423: }}_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{n}$ from the right, substracting both results,
424: we obtain the ``conservation law''
425: \begin{equation}
426: {1 \over \varepsilon} {\nabla}_{j} {j}_{1}-
427: i {1 \over \tau} {\nabla}_{n} {j}_{4}=0 \; ,
428: \label{3.10}
429: \end{equation}
430: where
431:
432: \begin{eqnarray}
433: j_1&\equiv & i \left[{1 \over \varepsilon} \Delta_j \left(\tilde{\nabla}_n
434: \tilde{\Delta}_n \phi_j^{* n}\right) \tilde{\Delta}_j \left(\tilde{\nabla}_n
435: \tilde{\Delta}_n \phi_j^{n}\right) \right. \nonumber\\
436: & &- \left. \tilde{\Delta}_j \left(\tilde{\nabla}_n \tilde{\Delta}_n \phi_j^{*n}\right)
437: {1\over \varepsilon} \Delta_j \left(\tilde{\nabla}_n \tilde{\Delta}_n
438: \phi_j^n\right)\right] \; , \label{3.11}\\
439: j_4&\equiv & i \rho \equiv \left[{1 \over \tau}
440: {\Delta}_{n} \left(\tilde{\nabla}_{j} \tilde{\Delta}_j \phi_j^{* n}\right)
441: \tilde{\Delta }_n \left(\tilde{\nabla}_j \tilde{\Delta}_j {\phi}_{j}^{n}\right) \right.
442: \nonumber\\
443: & &- \left. \tilde{\Delta}_{n}
444: \left({{\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi
445: }_{j}^{* n}}\right) {1 \over \tau} {\Delta}_{n}
446: \left({{\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi
447: }_{j}^{n}}\right)\right]
448: \label{3.12}
449: \end{eqnarray}
450: are the spatial and time component, respectively, of the charge vector current
451: on the lattice.
452:
453: The charge density $\rho$ suggest that we can substitute the scalar field
454: $\phi \left({x , t}\right)$ by the smeared field ${\tilde{\nabla}}_{ j}
455: {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{n}$ and $\phi^*\left({x,t}\right)$ by
456: ${\tilde{\nabla}}_{ j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{*n}$.
457:
458: A suitable Hamiltonian for the real field $\phi_j^n$ and its conjugate momentum $\pi_j^n$ can
459: be defined as follows:
460: \begin{eqnarray}
461: H_n &= &\varepsilon \sum\nolimits\limits_{j =0}^{N
462: -1} {1 \over 2}\left\{\left(\tilde{\nabla}_j \tilde{\Delta}_j \pi_j^n\right)^2-{1
463: \over {\varepsilon }^2}\left(\nabla_j \Delta_j \phi_j^n \right)
464: \left(\tilde{\nabla}_{j} \tilde{\Delta }_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{n}\right) \right. \nonumber \\
465: & & \left. +{M}^{2}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{j} \tilde{\Delta}_{j}
466: {\phi}_{j}^{n}\right)^{2}\right\}\equiv \varepsilon \sum\nolimits\limits_{j =0}^{N -1}
467: {\cal H}_{j}^{ n} \; . \label{3.14}
468: \end{eqnarray}
469:
470: As in the continuous case, we can derived the Hamilton equations of motions,
471: varying the Hamiltonian density ${\cal H}_j^n$ first with respect to the
472: promediate momentum and secondly with respect to scalar field:
473:
474: \begin{eqnarray}
475: {1 \over \tau} {\Delta}_{n} \left({{\tilde{\nabla
476: }}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{n}}\right) &=&
477: {\partial {\cal H}_{j}^{ n} \over \partial \left({{\tilde{\nabla
478: }}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\pi}_{j}^{n}}\right)}
479: ={\tilde{\Delta}}_{n} \left({{\tilde{\nabla}}_{j}
480: {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\pi}_{j}^{n}}\right) \; , \\
481: {1 \over \tau} {\Delta}_{n} \left({{\tilde{\nabla
482: }}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\pi}_{j}^{n}}\right) &=&
483: {}-{\partial {\cal H}_{j}^{ n} \over \partial \left({{\tilde{\nabla
484: }}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{n}}\right)} \nonumber \\
485: &=& {\tilde{\Delta}}_{n} \left({{1 \over {\varepsilon}^{
486: 2}}{\nabla}_{j} {\Delta}_{j} {\phi}_{j}^{n} -{
487: M}^{2}{\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {
488: \phi}_{j}^{n}}\right) \; .
489: \end{eqnarray}
490:
491: Applying the difference operator ${1 \over \tau} {\nabla}_{
492: n}$ on both sides of (13) and substituting (14) in the result, we
493: recover the wave equation (\ref{3.1}).
494:
495: Using (13) and (14), it can easily be proved that the Hamiltonian
496: (12) is independent of the time index $n$, namely:
497: \begin{equation}
498: {\nabla}_{n} {H}_{n} ={\Delta}_{n} {
499: H}_{n} =0 \; .
500: \label{3.17}
501: \end{equation}
502:
503: Since the plane wave solutions ${f}_{j}^{n} \left({{k}_{m}
504: ,{\omega}_{m}}\right) \left({m =0,1, \ldots , N
505: -1}\right)$ form a complete set of orthogonal functions, we
506: can expand the smeared field and its conjugate momentum as
507: \begin{eqnarray*}
508: {\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\phi
509: }_{j}^{n} &=&{1 \over \sqrt {N\varepsilon}}
510: \sum\nolimits\limits_{m =- N/ 2}^{N/ 2-1} {1 \over \sqrt
511: {2{\omega}_{m}}} \left({{a}_{m} {f}_{j}^{n}
512: \left({{k}_{m} ,{\omega}_{m}}\right) +{a}_{m}^{
513: *}{f}_{j}^{* n} \left({{k}_{m} ,{\omega
514: }_{m}}\right)}\right) \; , \\
515: {\tilde{\nabla}}_{j} {\tilde{\Delta}}_{j} {\pi
516: }_{j}^{n} &=&{- i \over \sqrt {N\varepsilon}}
517: \sum\nolimits\limits_{m =- N/ 2}^{N/ 2-1} \sqrt {{{
518: \omega}_{m} \over 2}}\left({{a}_{m} {f}_{j}^{n}
519: \left({{k}_{m} ,{\omega}_{m}}\right) -{a}_{m}^{
520: *}{f}_{j}^{* n} \left({{k}_{m} ,{\omega
521: }_{m}}\right)}\right) \; .
522: \end{eqnarray*}
523:
524: In order to make connection of our scheme with the Einstein-de Broglie
525: relations $E=\hbar \omega, \quad p=\hbar k$, we take, for the period $T$ and
526: wavelength $\lambda$ of the discrete plane waves functions (\ref{3.2}) and
527: (\ref{3.6}),
528: $$T=N\tau, \qquad \qquad \lambda = N\varepsilon $$
529: and, for the phase velocity,
530: $${v}_{p} ={\lambda \over T} ={\varepsilon \over \tau}\; .$$
531: \indent We have defined the wave number and the angular frequency of the wave functions
532: as:
533: $${k}_{m} ={2 \over \varepsilon} \tan{\pi m \over N},
534: \qquad \qquad {\omega}_{m} ={2 \over \tau} \tan{\pi m \over N}
535: ,\qquad \qquad m =0,1,\ldots , N -1 \; .$$
536: \indent Substituting the Einstein-de Broglie relations in the relativistic expresion
537: $E^2-p^2=M^2$ (we use natural units $\hbar=c=1$), we obtain
538:
539: $${\omega}_{m}^{2}-{k}_{m}^{2}={\omega}_{m}^{
540: 2}\left({1-{{\tau}^{2} \over {\varepsilon}^{
541: 2}}}\right)={\omega}_{m}^{2}\left({1-{1 \over {v}_{p}^{
542: 2}}}\right)={M}^{2} \; . $$
543:
544: Since the phase velocity and group velocity satisfy $v_pv_g=1$, we have finally
545: $${\omega}_{m}^{2}={{M}^{2} \over 1-{v}_{g}^{2}} \; ,$$
546: hence $M$ has $m$-dependent discrete spectrum.
547:
548: \vskip 2mm
549:
550: \begin{thebibliography}{00}
551:
552: \bibitem{} J. Jauch, {\it Foundations of Quantum Mechanics} (Addison-Wesley, Reading,1968).
553:
554: \bibitem{}C.F. Weizsaecker, ``Reconstruction of quantum mechanics,'' in {\it Quantum Theory
555: and the Structure of Time and Space}, L. Castell and C. Weizsaecker, eds. (Hanser,
556: Munich, 1986).
557:
558: \bibitem{}R. Penrose, ``Angular momentum: an approach to combinatorial analysis'' in {\it
559: Quantum Theory and Beyond}, T. Bastin, ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971).
560:
561: \bibitem{}D. Finkelstein, ``Spacetime code,'' {\it Phys. Rev. }{\bf 184} (1968) 1261.
562:
563: \bibitem{}M. Lorente, ``A causal interpretation of the structure of space and time,'' {\it
564: Foundations of Physics}, P. Weingartner and G. Dorn, eds. (H\"older,Pichler \& Tempsky, Viena 1986).
565:
566: \bibitem{}M. Lorente, ``Modernas Teor\'{\i}as sobre la estructura del espacio-tiempo,'' {\it
567: Reuni\'on Matem\'atica en honor de A. Dou} (Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 1989).
568:
569: \bibitem{}M. Jammer, {\it Concepts of Space} (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1969).
570: According to this author, Leibniz's {\it Monadology} was inspired by Maimonides, who, in his
571: {\it Guide for the Perplexed}, chap. 73, describes the theory of a discrete space and time.
572:
573: \bibitem{}D. Hilbert, {\it Grundlage der Geometrie} (Teubner, Leipzig, 1899). Spanish
574: translation:
575: {\it Fundamentos de la Geometr\'{\i}a} (C.S.I.C., Madrid, 1991).
576:
577: \bibitem{}See Ref. 5.
578:
579: \bibitem{}M. Lorente, {\it Int. J. Theor. Phys.} {\bf 4} (1974) 213; {\bf 12} (1976) 927; {\bf
580: 25} (1986) 55.
581:
582: \bibitem{}M. Lorente, {\it J. Group Theory in Phys.}{\bf 1} (1993) 105.
583:
584: \bibitem{}M. Lorente, ``A relativistic invariant scheme for the Klein-Gordon and Dirac fields
585: on the lattice,'' {\it XIX Int. Coll. on Group Theor. Meth. in Phys.} (Editorial Ciemat,
586: Madrid, 1992), p. 395--398.
587:
588: \bibitem{}M. Lorente, ``Representations of the classical groups on the lattice'' in {\it
589: Symmetries in Science VI}, B. Gruber, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1993), pp. 437-454.
590:
591: \end{thebibliography}
592:
593:
594:
595:
596:
597:
598:
599:
600:
601:
602:
603: \end{document}
604:
605: