• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,047 questions , 2,200 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,709 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
816 active unimported users
More ...

  Very Special Relativity

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

I just attended a talk where I learnt about a rather recent idea.

"Very Special relativity"

Andrew G. Cohen and Sheldon L. Glashow

I take all new ideas with intense skepticism. From the little that I understood it seems to be the case that it invokes the concept of a preferred direction that is fundamental to the theory.

I have not yet looked at every detail, but it seems to me as sufficient to debunk such an idea (maybe just on aesthetic grounds). But maybe I have not understood some essential aspects of it.

Given that a lot of attention (165 citations on march 25th) is currently being given to this idea, it would be nice to review it, and maybe even independently post a review on the reviews section.

asked Mar 25, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by Prathyush (705 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 3, 2015 by Arnold Neumaier

Lubos has made a few comments on the issue on TRF such as [1] and [2]. I am completely new to this idea, and initially confused it with the "doubly special relativity" which I was about to write an answer for.

I agree with Lubos when he says "it is a much much more well-defined and meaningful set of questions than e.g. doubly special relativity."

Some how I don't like the idea of having a prefered direction until confirmed by experimental evidence, for that reason I would place my bets somewhere else.

But certainly naive guesses have been shown to be wrong again and again, So I was hoping there would be some strong theoretical grounds to say otherwise.

It is not completely meaningless to study theories where Poincare invariance is violated, since such theories point to things that can be tested experimentally for possible violations. 

For a 2005 Living Review of tests for Lorentz covariance see Modern Tests of Lorentz Invariance by D. Mattingly. The resumee there is ''Currently, we have no experimental evidence that Lorentz symmetry is not an exact symmetry in nature.''

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights