Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:37:28.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Fundamentality of Symmetries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Kerry McKenzie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The view that it is symmetries, not particles, that are fundamental to nature is frequently expressed by physicists. But comparatively little has been written either on what this claim means or whether it should be regarded as true. After placing the claim into a general fundamentality framework, I consider whether the priority of symmetries over particles can be defended. The conclusions drawn are largely negative.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 81 , Issue 5 , December 2014 , pp. 1090 - 1102
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 my cosymposiasts Elena Castellani, Antigone Nounou, and Christian Wüthrich, as well as Steven French, for illuminating discussion and helpful criticism.

References

Castellani, Elena. 1998. “Galilean Particles: An Example of Constitution of Objects.” In Interpreting Bodies: Classical and Quantum Objects in Modern Physics, ed. Castellani, Elena, 181–94. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
French, Steven, and Ladyman, James. 2003. “The Dissolution of Objects: Between Platonism and Phenomenalism.” Synthese 136:73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heisenberg, Werner. 1975. “Development of Concepts in the History of Quantum Theory.” American Journal of Physics 43:389–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henri-Couannier, Frederic. 2005. “Discrete Symmetries and General Relativity: The Case of Quantum Gravity.” International Journal of Modern Physics A 20:2341–45. doi:10.1142/S0217751X05024602.Google Scholar
Ladyman, James, and Ross, Don. 2007. Every Thing Must Go. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Christopher. 2003. “On Continuous Symmetries and the Foundations of Modern Physics.” In Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections, ed. Brading, K. and Castellani, E., 29–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ne’eman, Yuval, and Sternberg, Shlomo. 1991. “Internal Supersymmetry and Superconnections.” In Symplectic Geometry and Mathematical Physics, ed. Donato, P., Duval, C., Elhadad, J., and Tuynman, G. M., 326–54. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Salam, Abdus. 1989. “Gauge Unification of Fundamental Forces.” Nobel lecture presented on December 8, 1979. In Ideals and Realities: Selected Essays of Abdus Salam, ed. Lai, C. H. and Kidwai, Azim 3rd ed., 375–90. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Weinberg, Steven. 1993. Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist’s Search for the Ultimate Laws of Nature. New York: Vintage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, Steven, and Feynman, Richard. 1987. Elementary Particles and the Laws of Physics: The 1986 Dirac Memorial Lectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wolff, Johanna. 2011. “Do Objects Depend on Structures?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (3): 607–25.Google Scholar