Abstract
According to structural realism, in mature science there is structural continuity along theoretical change. A major counterexample to this thesis is the transition from the Eightfold Way to the Standard Model in particle physics. Nevertheless, the notion of structure is significantly important in comprehending the theoretical picture of particle physics, where particles change and undergo transmutations, while the only thing which remains unchanged is the basic structure, i.e. the symmetry group which controls the transmutations. This kind of view agrees with the paradigmatic case where the structure is an internal symmetry and the instantiations are the elementary particles. The metaphysical view which reflects this situation is a version of ontic structuralism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Private communication with Yuval Ne’eman.
“Unitary symmetry” and “unitaty spin” were employed as alternative names to the Eightfold Way.
By the term “rotations” I mean transformations of the group in internal space, e.g. one which carries every proton to a neutron and vice versa; it has nothing to do with rotations in ordinary space-time and with ordinary observers in relativity theory.
SU(2) has one Casimir operator so that each of it representations is characterized by one number, whereas SU(3) has two such operators so that each of its representations is characterized by two numbers.
After the failure in detecting the proton decay, SU(5) has been somewhat discredited, but since there are many alternatives to it, none of which is considered to be perfect, I still use this group as an illustration.
WOS differs considerably from “moderate structural realism” advocated by Esfeld and Lam. According to the latter view “objects and relations (structure) are on the same ontological footing, with the objects being characterized only by the relations in which they stand” (Esfeld and Lam 2008).
References
Armstrong, D. M. (1983). What is a law of nature?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Armstrong, D. M. (1993). The identification problem and the inference problem. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53, 421–422.
Brown, J. R. (1994). Smoke and mirrors: How science reflects reality. London and New York: Routledge.
Busch, J. (2003). What structures could not be. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17, 211–223.
Cao, T. (2003). Structural realism and the interpretation of quantum field theory. Synthese, 136, 3–24.
Dretske, F. (1977). Laws of nature. Philosophy of Science, 44, 248–268.
Earman, J. (2002). Laws, symmetry, and symmetry breaking; invariance, conservation principles, and objectivity. 18 Biennial Mtg, PSA 2002 Symposia.
Esfeld, M., & Lam, V. (2008). Moderate structural realism about space-time. Synthese, 160, 27–46.
French, S. (1999). Models and mathematics in physics: The role of group theory. In J. Butterfield & C. Pagonis (Eds.), From physics to philosophy (pp. 187–207). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
French, S., & Ladyman, J. (2003). Remodelling structural realism: Quantum physics and the metaphysics of structure. Synthese, 136, 31–56.
Kantorovich, A. (1993). Scientific discovery: Logic and tinkering. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kantorovich, A. (2003). The priority of internal symmetries in particle physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 34, 651–675.
Kosso, P. (2000). Fundamental and accidental symmetries. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 14, 109–121.
Ladyman, J. (1998). What is structural realism? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 29, 409–424.
Ladyman, J. (2007). “Structural realism” entry in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP). Internet.
Ladyman, J., & Ross, D. (2007). Every thing must go: Metaphysics naturalised. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lyre, H. (2004). Holism and structuralism in U(1) gauge theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 35, 643–670.
Roberts, B. (2009). Group structural realism. Blog: SoulPhysics.org.
Stachel, J. (2005). Structures, individuality and quantum gravity. In D. P. Rickles, et al. (Eds.), Structural foundations of quantum gravity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tooley, M. (1977). The nature of laws. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 7, 667–698.
Worrall, J. (1989). Structural realism: The best of both worlds? Dialectica, 43, 99–124.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kantorovich, A. Ontic Structuralism and the Symmetries of Particle Physics. J Gen Philos Sci 40, 73–84 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-009-9084-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-009-9084-2