[552.1.1]The induced transformations and
were defined
for discrete time, and it is of interest to remove the discretization
to obtain the induced dynamics in continuous time.
[552.1.2]The conventional view on discrete vs. continuous time
in ergodic theory assumes
for the discretization time step, and holds that
“there is no essential difference between
discrete-time and continuous-time systems”[24],page 51.
1 (This is a footnote:) 1
It is argued that one
can always write
as
where
is small and
is the largest
integer not larger than
. As long as
the continuous long time limit
corresponds
to the discrete long time limit
.
[552.1.3]Obviously, this equivalence between discrete and
continuous time breaks down for induced dynamics
because the continuous flow of time within
is
interrupted by time periods of fluctuating length
during which the trajectory wanders outside
.
[552.1.4]These interruptions produce a discontinuous
(fluctuating) flow of time.
[552.2.1]There are three possibilities for removing the discretization
using a long time limit. [552.2.2]Only one of these employs the
conventional assumption (or
). [552.2.3]The two
other alternatives are
and
. [552.2.4]The first alternative considers the limit
in which the discretization
step becomes small. [552.2.5]This possibility may be called the
short-long-time limit or continuous time limit,
and it was discussed in [21]. [552.2.6]The second alternative
is to consider the limit
in which the discretization step diverges
. [552.2.7]This
will be considered in this paper, and it is called the
long-long-time limit or the ultralong-time limit. [552.2.8]These limits are analogous to the ensemble limit
[18, 19, 20, 21].
[552.3.1]According to its definition (8) the induced time
transformation acts as a convolution operator in time
![]() |
(9) |
[552.3.2]Applying the transformation times yields
![]() |
(10) |
[page 553, §0] where the last equation defines the -fold convolution
. [553.0.1]If
exists this defines also
in the
long time limit.
[553.1.1]To determine whether a limiting density exists, note that
the
-fold convolution
gives the probability
density
Prob
of the random variable
representing the sum of
independent and identically
distributed random recurrence times
with common
lattice distribution
. [553.1.2]A necessary and
sufficient condition for the existence of a limiting
density
for suitably renormalized recurrence
times is that the discrete lattice probability density
belongs to the domain of attraction of a stable
density [25, 26]. [553.1.3]Then, because
is defined as
the maximal value such that all the
are concentrated
on the arithmetic progression
, it follows that for a
suitable choice of renormalization constants
![]() |
(11) |
where is a limiting stable density
whose parameters obey
,
,
, and
[25, 26, 27]. [553.1.4]If
then the
limiting distribution is degenerate,
for all values of
.
[553.2.1]The positivity of the recurrence times for all
implies that the renormalized recurrence times
are bounded below, and this gives rise to the constraint
for
on the possible limiting distributions. [553.2.2]The limiting stable
distributions compatible with this constraint are given by
those with parameters
and
. [553.2.3]For
the limiting densities may be abbreviated as
![]() |
(12) |
which expresses the well known scaling relations for stable
distributions [25, 26, 18, 20]. [553.2.4]The scaling function can be expressed explicitly as
![]() |
(13) |
in terms of general -functions whose definition may be found
in [28] or [18, 20]. [553.2.5]For
one finds
![]() |
(14) |
the Dirac distribution concentrated at as the limiting
density. [553.2.6]If the limit exists and is nondegenerate,
i.e
, the renormalization constants
must have the form
![]() |
(15) |
where is a slowly varying function [26], defined by
the condition that
![]() |
(16) |
for all .
[553.3.1]Using equations (11) and (12) one has for
![]() |
(17) |
[page 554, §0] where the centering constants have been chosen conveniently as . [554.0.1]From this it is clear that the traditional long time limit
keeping
finite produces
for
finite, and thus
,
unless
. [554.0.2]Therefore the conventional long time limit produces
a degenerate limiting distribution if it exists. [554.0.3]The ultralong
time limit on the other hand allows
to become infinite. [554.0.4]If
diverges such that
![]() |
(18) |
exists, then this defines a renormalized ultralong continuous time,
. [554.0.5]In this case
contrary to the conventional limit. [554.0.6]It follows that
and thus from eq. (10) that
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
(19) | |
![]() |
![]() |
where the ultralong time parameter was identified as
![]() |
(20) |
[554.0.7]The identification of is justified for two reasons. [554.0.8]On the one hand
for all
, where
is the expectation
with respect to the limiting distribution, and
are two independent random recurrence times. [554.0.9]This shows that
has dimensions of time. [554.0.10]Secondly for
it
follows from (14) that
![]() |
(21) |
which again identifies as an ultralong time
parameter. [554.0.11]Note that the results (19) and (21)
imply macroscopic (=ultralong time) irreversibility by virtue
of (20) even if the underlying time evolution
resp. [554.0.12]
was reversible. [554.0.13]Perhaps this could provide
new insight into the longstanding irreversibility paradox. [554.0.14]The fundamental convolution semigroup (19) was first
obtained in [18, 19] and [21].