Philosophy of Particle Physics

This Element offers an introduction to selected philosophical issues that arise in contemporary particle physics, aimed at philosophers who have limited prior exposure to quantum field theory. One the one hand, it critically surveys philosophical work on the representation of particles in quantum field theory, the formal machinery and conceptual implications of renormalization and renormalization group methods, and ontological and methodological questions raised by the use of effective field theory techniques in particle physics. On the other, it identifies topics in particle physics that have not yet received philosophical attention and sketches avenues for philosophical analysis of those topics. The primary aim of the Element is to provide philosophers of physics with an entry point into the literature on the philosophy of particle physics and identify interesting directions for future research for students and researchers alike.

[1]  Alison S. Fernandes,et al.  The Temporal Asymmetry of Causation , 2023 .

[2]  E. Shech.  Idealizations in Physics , 2023 .

[3]  Patricia Palacios.  Emergence and Reduction in Physics , 2022 .

[4]  Lu Chen.  Can we "effectivize" spacetime? , 2022, Studies in history and philosophy of science.

[5]  J. Saatsi.  (In)effective realism? , 2022, European Journal for Philosophy of Science.

[6]  C. Sebens.  The fundamentality of fields , 2022, Synthese.

[7]  N. Dewar.  Structure and Equivalence , 2022 .

[8]  N. M. Boyd.  Epistemology of Experimental Physics , 2021 .

[9]  Armond Duwell.  Physics and Computation , 2021 .

[10]  R. Batterman.  A Middle Way , 2021 .

[11]  Alastair Wilson.  Counterpossible Reasoning in Physics , 2021, Philosophy of Science.

[12]  Emily Adlam,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 2021 .

[13]  J. Manchak.  Global Spacetime Structure , 2020 .

[14]  Marco Forgione.  Path Integrals and Holism , 2020, Foundations of Physics.

[15]  Thomas Blanchard.  Explanatory Abstraction and the Goldilocks Problem: Interventionism Gets Things Just Right , 2020, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[16]  M. Neubert,et al.  Effective Field Theory in Particle Physics and Cosmology , 2020 .

[17]  Sébastien Rivat,et al.  Philosophical foundations of effective field theories , 2020, The European Physical Journal A.

[18]  E. Castellani,et al.  The Practice of Naturalness: A Historical-Philosophical Perspective , 2019, Foundations of Physics.

[19]  Peter Tan.  Counterpossible Non-vacuity in Scientific Practice , 2019, The Journal of Philosophy.

[20]  Porter Williams,et al.  Scientific Realism Made Effective , 2019, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[21]  R. Batterman.  Universality and RG Explanations , 2019, Perspectives on Science.

[22]  Porter Williams,et al.  Two Notions of Naturalness , 2018, Foundations of Physics.

[23]  R. Batterman.  Autonomy of Theories: An Explanatory Problem , 2018 .

[24]  James D. Fraser,et al.  Renormalization and the Formulation of Scientific Realism , 2018, Philosophy of Science.

[25]  Laura Ruetsche.  Renormalization Group Realism: The Ascent of Pessimism , 2018, Philosophy of Science.

[26]  J. Woodward.  Explanatory autonomy: the role of proportionality, stability, and conditional irrelevance , 2018, Synthese.

[27]  R. Harlander,et al.  Naturalness, Wilsonian renormalization, and “fundamental parameters” in quantum field theory , 2018, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics.

[28]  I. Brivio,et al.  The standard model as an effective field theory , 2017, Physics Reports.

[29]  Noel Swanson.  A philosopher's guide to the foundations of quantum field theory , 2017 .

[30]  A. Blum.  The state is not abolished, it withers away: How quantum field theory became a theory of scattering , 2017, 2011.05908.

[31]  Michael E. Miller.  Haag’s Theorem, Apparent Inconsistency, and the Empirical Adequacy of Quantum Field Theory , 2016, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[32]  D. J. Baker,et al.  The Philosophy of Quantum Field Theory , 2016 .

[33]  L. Franklin-Hall.  High-Level Explanation and the Interventionist’s ‘Variables Problem’ , 2016, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[34]  Porter Williams,et al.  Naturalness, the autonomy of scales, and the 125 GeV Higgs , 2015 .

[35]  Jeremy Butterfield,et al.  Reduction, Emergence and Renormalization , 2014, 1406.4354.

[36]  A. Petrov,et al.  Effective Field Theories , 2014 .

[37]  G. Giudice.  Lessons from LHC8 , 2013 .

[38]  J. Wells.  The Utility of Naturalness, and how its Application to Quantum Electrodynamics envisages the Standard Model and Higgs Boson , 2013, 1305.3434.

[39]  F. Strocchi.  An Introduction to Non-Perturbative Foundations of Quantum Field Theory , 2013 .

[40]  A. Duncan,et al.  The Conceptual Framework of Quantum Field Theory , 2012 .

[41]  Laura Ruetsche,et al.  Interpreting Quantum Theories , 2011 .

[42]  Jeremy Butterfield,et al.  Less is Different: Emergence and Reduction Reconciled , 2011, 1106.0702.

[43]  Doreen Fraser,et al.  How to take particle physics seriously: A further defence of axiomatic quantum field theory , 2011 .

[44]  J. Earman.  The Unruh effect for philosophers , 2011 .

[45]  Bryan W. Roberts,et al.  Group Structural Realism , 2011, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[46]  M. Kuhlmann.  Why Conceptual Rigour Matters to Philosophy: on the Ontological Significance of Algebraic Quantum Field Theory , 2010 .

[47]  Doreen Fraser.  Quantum Field Theory: Underdetermination, Inconsistency, and Idealization* , 2009, Philosophy of Science.

[48]  D. J. Baker,et al.  Against Field Interpretations of Quantum Field Theory , 2009, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[49]  M. Esfeld.  The Modal Nature of Structures in Ontic Structural Realism , 2009 .

[50]  Doreen Fraser.  The fate of 'particles' in quantum field theories with interactions , 2008 .

[51]  M. Bradie.  :Re-Engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings: Piecewise Approximations to Reality , 2008 .

[52]  J. Earman,et al.  Haag’s Theorem and its Implications for the Foundations of Quantum Field Theory , 2006 .

[53]  J. Earman,et al.  Fulling Non‐uniqueness and the Unruh Effect: A Primer on Some Aspects of Quantum Field Theory , 2003, Philosophy of Science.

[54]  Rob Clifton,et al.  No Place for Particles in Relativistic Quantum Theories? , 2002, Philosophy of Science.

[55]  Robert W. Batterman,et al.  The devil in the details : asymptotic reasoning in explanation, reduction, and emergence , 2001 .

[56]  Hans Halvorson.  Reeh-Schlieder Defeats Newton-Wigner: On Alternative Localization Schemes in Relativistic Quantum Field Theory , 2000, Philosophy of Science.

[57]  Robert W. Batterman,et al.  Multiple Realizability and Universality , 2000, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[58]  Joseph Polchinski,et al.  Renormalization and effective lagrangians , 1984 .

[59]  L. Laudan.  A Confutation of Convergent Realism , 1981, Philosophy of Science.

[60]  K. Wilson,et al.  The Renormalization group and the epsilon expansion , 1973 .

[61]  Sébastien Rivat.  Renormalization scrutinized , 2019, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics.

[62]  Mandy Eberhart,et al.  The Scientific Image , 2016 .

[63]  James Ladymanand,et al.  Every Thing Must Go , 2009 .

[64]  Henry P. Stapp,et al.  Mental Causation , 2007 .

[65]  J. Woodward.  Causation With a Human Face , 2007 .

[66]  J. Worrall.  Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?* , 1989 .

[67]  M. Peskin.  The Renormalization Group , 2018 .

[68]  S. Schweber.  QED and the Men Who Made It , 1994 .

[69]  Howard Georgi,et al.  Effective Field Theory , 1993 .

[70]  R. Haag,et al.  Local quantum physics , 1992 .