Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The rise of classical field theory
- Part I The geometrical programme for fundamental interactions
- Part II The quantum field programme for fundamental interactions
- Part III The gauge field programme for fundamental interactions
- Appendices
- Bibliography
- Name index
- Subject index
2 - The rise of classical field theory
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 January 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The rise of classical field theory
- Part I The geometrical programme for fundamental interactions
- Part II The quantum field programme for fundamental interactions
- Part III The gauge field programme for fundamental interactions
- Appendices
- Bibliography
- Name index
- Subject index
Summary
Although the developments that I plan to explore began with Einstein's general theory of relativity (GTR), without a proper historical perspective, it would be very difficult to grasp the internal dynamics of GTR and subsequent developments as further stages of a field programme. Such a perspective can be suitably furnished with an adequate account of the rise of the field programme itself. The purpose of this chapter is to provide such an account, in which major motivations and underlying assumptions of the developments that led to the rise of the field programme are briefly outlined.
Physical actions in a mechanical framework
As we mentioned in chapter 1, two intellectual trends, the mechanization and mathematization of the world that occurred in the early modern period, effectively changed people's conceptions of reality and causality. According to mechanical philosophers, such as Descartes and Boyle, the physical world was nothing but matter in motion. According to the Neoplatonists, such as Kepler and Henry More, the physical world was mathematical in its structure. As a synthesis of the two, the inner reality of the physical world appeared as merely material bodies with their motions governed by mathematical laws. Here, matter can take either the form of plenum, as in the case of Descartes, or the form of corpuscles, as in the case of Gassendi, Boyle, and Newton. The difference between the two mechanical systems led to different understandings of physical action, as we shall see in a moment.
The mechanization of the world also implied that the true nature of phenomena, the essence and cause of all changes and effects, can be found in the motion of material bodies in space.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Conceptual Developments of 20th Century Field Theories , pp. 24 - 44Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1997