Relativistic Cellular Automata - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net 2013-05-19T06:21:08Z http://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/46212 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46212/relativistic-cellular-automata Relativistic Cellular Automata Hans Stricker 2010-11-16T08:42:14Z 2010-11-18T01:26:39Z <p>Cellular automata provide interesting models of physics: Google Scholar gives more than 25,000 results when searching for <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22cellular+automata%22+physics&amp;hl=en&amp;btnG=Search&amp;as_sdt=2001&amp;as_sdtp=on" rel="nofollow">"cellular automata" physics</a>.</p> <p>Google Scholar still gives more than 2,000 results when searching for <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&amp;q=%22quantum+cellular+automata%22&amp;btnG=Search&amp;as_sdt=2000&amp;as_ylo=&amp;as_vis=0" rel="nofollow">"quantum cellular automata"</a>.</p> <p>But it gives only <a href="http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&amp;lr=&amp;id=sab-9fGPCEcC&amp;oi=fnd&amp;pg=PA1&amp;dq=%22relativistic+cellular+automata%22&amp;ots=rG9eoNgPYh&amp;sig=ZNQpI-0B-0S2358zX9To-h4NtdI#v=onepage&amp;q=%22relativistic%20cellular%20automata%22&amp;f=false" rel="nofollow">1</a> (one!) result when searching for <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&amp;q=%22relativistic+cellular+automata%22&amp;btnG=Search&amp;as_sdt=2000&amp;as_ylo=&amp;as_vis=0" rel="nofollow">"relativistic cellular automata"</a>, i.e. cellular automata with a (discrete) Minkoswki space-time instead of an Euclidean one.</p> <blockquote> <p>How can this be understood? </p> <p>Why does the concept of QCA seem more promising than that of RCA?</p> <p>Are there conceptual or technical barriers for a thorough treatment of RCA?</p> </blockquote> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46212/relativistic-cellular-automata/46227#46227 Answer by Willie Wong for Relativistic Cellular Automata Willie Wong 2010-11-16T12:10:45Z 2010-11-17T00:37:06Z <p>One of the reasons that it may be difficult to model Minkowski space based on cellular automata is that <a href="http://jmp.aip.org/resource/1/jmapaq/v21/i2/p234_s1" rel="nofollow">there are no "non-trivial" finite sub-groups of $O(3,1)$</a>, where non-trivial means that it doesn't just reduce to just a finite sub group of $O(3)$ via conjugation. So while cellular automata can be manifestly be homogeneous and isotropic (so admits a discrete $O(3)$ symmetry), it becomes conceptually difficult to imagine some cellular automata capturing Lorentz symmetry. </p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46212/relativistic-cellular-automata/46341#46341 Answer by Hans Stricker for Relativistic Cellular Automata Hans Stricker 2010-11-17T09:57:30Z 2010-11-17T09:57:30Z <p>I asked this very same question at physics.stackexchange, too (do the policies of MO have anything against this?), and got an interesting hint, which I leave to your attention:</p> <p><a href="http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/887/relativistic-cellular-automata/896#896" rel="nofollow">Cellular automata methods in mathematical physics</a></p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46212/relativistic-cellular-automata/46370#46370 Answer by Peter Shor for Relativistic Cellular Automata Peter Shor 2010-11-17T15:32:43Z 2010-11-18T01:26:39Z <p>What Willie's answer shows is that, for some non-trivial Lorentz-translatable cellular automaton, every cell would need an infinite number of neighbors, a contradiction. There's a way of getting around this, though. You could make each cell correspond to a point in space-time and also a boost (a boost is essentially a velocity in the Lorentz group). Then, cells would interact with cells both close to them in space-time and also close in boost. I don't know whether anybody has considered cellular automata like this.</p> <p>In order for this to have a correspondence to realistic quantum field theories, it would have to be the case that when two particles interact at a high boost, the interaction strength goes to 0 as the boost goes to infinity. I don't know whether this is true, although the thought experiment of considering particles falling into a black hole through a sea of Hawking radiation makes it seem like it might be. </p>