Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T21:57:31.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Renormalization Group Explanation of Universality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Alexander Franklin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is commonly claimed that the universality of critical phenomena is explained through particular applications of the renormalization group (RG). This article has three aims: to clarify the structure of the explanation of universality, to discuss the physics of such RG explanations, and to examine the extent to which universality is thus explained. The derivation of critical exponents proceeds via a real-space or a field-theoretic approach to the RG. Building on work by Mainwood, this article argues that these approaches ought to be distinguished: while the field-theoretic approach explains universality, the real-space approach fails to provide an adequate explanation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 85 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 225 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†.

I would like to thank Bob Batterman, Jeremy Butterfield, James Fraser, Roman Frigg, Eleanor Knox, Mauricio Suárez, and anonymous referees, as well as audiences at the Oxford University Graduate Seminar, BSPS Annual Conference 2015, and the Fourth Irvine-Pittsburgh-Princeton Conference for thought-provoking comments and feedback. This work was supported by an LAHP Research Council Studentship.

References

Batterman, Robert. 2000. “Multiple Realizability and Universality.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51 (1): 115–45..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batterman, Robert 2017a. “Autonomy of Theories: An Explanatory Problem.” Noûs, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batterman, Robert 2017b. “Philosophical Implications of Kadanoff’s Work on the Renormalization Group.” Journal of Statistical Physics 167 (3–4): 559–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batterman, Robert, and Rice, Collin. 2014. “Minimal Model Explanations.” Philosophy of Science 81 (3): 349–76..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binney, J. J., et al. 1992. The Theory of Critical Phenomena: An Introduction to the Renormalization Group. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bueno, Otávio, and French, Steven. 2011. “How Theories Represent.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 62:857–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterfield, Jeremy. 2014. “Reduction, Emergence, and Renormalization.” Journal of Philosophy 111 (1): 5–49..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterfield, Jeremy, and Bouatta, Nazim. 2011. “Emergence and Reduction Combined in Phase Transitions.” arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/1104.1371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callender, Craig, and Menon, Tarun. 2013. “Turn and Face the Strange … Ch-ch-changes: Philosophical Questions Raised by Phase Transitions.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Physics, ed. Batterman, Robert, 189–223. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cardy, John. 1996. Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, Anson. 2011. “Phase Transitions and Collective Phenomena.” Lecture notes, Cambridge University.Google Scholar
Fisher, Michael. 1974. “The Renormalization Group in the Theory of Critical Behavior.” Reviews of Modern Physics 46 (4): 597–616..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Michael 1998. “Renormalization Group Theory: Its Basis and Formulation in Statistical Physics.” Reviews of Modern Physics 70 (2): 653–81..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldenfeld, Nigel. 1992. Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renormalization Group. Vol. 5. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Jansson, Lina, and Saatsi, Juha. 2017. “Explanatory Abstractions.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Kadanoff, Leo. 1971. “Critical Behavior: Universality and Scaling.” In Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi” Course LI, ed. Green, M. S., 100–117. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Green, M. S. 2013. “Theories of Matter: Infinities and Renormalization.” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Physics, ed. Batterman, Robert, 141–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, Bill, Gould, Harvey, and Tobochnik, Jan. 2012. “Kinetics of Phase Transitions.” Clark University. http://stp.clarku.edu/kleinnotes/.Google Scholar
Lee, Tsung-Dao, and Yang, Chen-Ning. 1952. “Statistical Theory of Equations of State and Phase Transitions.” Pt. 2, “Lattice Gas and Ising Model.” Physical Review 87 (3): 410–19..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwood, Paul. 2006. “Is More Different? Emergent Properties in Physics.” PhD diss., University of Oxford.Google Scholar
Niss, Martin. 2005. “History of the Lenz-Ising Model, 1920–1950: From Ferromagnetic to Cooperative Phenomena.” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 59 (3): 267–318..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onsager, Lars. 1944. “Crystal Statistics.” Pt. 1, “A Two-Dimensional Model with an Order-Disorder Transition.” Physical Review 65:117–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelissetto, Andrea, and Vicari, Ettore. 2002. “Critical Phenomena and Renormalization Group Theory.” Physics Reports 368 (6): 549–727..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reutlinger, Alexander. 2014. “Why Is There Universal Macrobehavior? Renormalization Group Explanation as Noncausal Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 81 (5): 1157–70..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sengers, Jan, and Shanks, Joseph. 2009. “Experimental Critical-Exponent Values for Fluids.” Journal of Statistical Physics 137 (5–6): 857–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, Eugene. 1999. “Scaling, Universality, and Renormalization: Three Pillars of Modern Critical Phenomena.” Reviews of Modern Physics 71 (2): S358–S366..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vause, C., and Sak, J.. 1980. “Non-Ising-Like Effects in the Liquid-Vapor Transition: Equations of State.” Physical Review A 21 (6): 2099–2114..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, James. 2003. Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar