The effectiveness of mathematics in physics of the unknown
If physics is a science that unveils the fundamental laws of nature, then the appearance of mathematical concepts in its language can be surprising or even mysterious. This was Eugene Wigner’s argument in 1960. I show that another approach to physical theory accommodates mathematics in a perfectly reasonable way. To explore unknown processes or phenomena, one builds a theory from fundamental principles, employing them as constraints within a general mathematical framework. The rise of such theories of the unknown, which I call blackbox models, drives home the unsurprising effectiveness of mathematics. I illustrate it on the examples of Einstein’s principle theories, the S-matrix approach in quantum field theory, effective field theories, and device-independent approaches in quantum information.
KeywordsMathematics Physics Wigner Principle theory S-matrix Effective field theory Device-independence Unknown
Many thanks to Bryan Roberts for helpful remarks.
- Aharon, N., Massar, S., Pironio, S., & Silman, J. (2016). Device-independent bit commitment based on the CHSH inequality. New Journal of Physics, 18, 025014. arXiv:1511.06283.
- Bancal, J.-D. (2013). On the device-independent approach to quantum physics: Advances in quantum nonlocality and multipartite entanglement detection. Geneva: Springer.Google Scholar
- Baumeler, Ä., & Wolf, S. (2014). Perfect signaling among three parties violating predefined causal order. In Proceedings of 2014 IEEE international symposium on information theory (ISIT) (pp. 526–530). Red Hook, NY: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).Google Scholar
- Bell, J. (1964). On the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox. Physica, 1, 195–200.Google Scholar
- Bilaniuk, O. M. P, & Sudarshan, E. C. G. (1969). Particles beyond the light barrier. Physics Today, 22, 43–51. This is the first known reference in press. Attribution to Gell-Mann is however indisputable.Google Scholar
- Brown, H., & Timpson, C. (2006). Why special relativity should not be a template for a fundamental reformulation of quantum mechanics. In W. Demopoulous, & I. Pitowsky (Eds.), Physical theory and its interpretation (pp. 29–42). Amsterdam: Springer. arXiv:quant-ph/0601182.
- Colbeck, R. (2006). Quantum and relativistic protocols for secure multi-party computation. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Einstein, A. (1949). Autobiographical notes. In P. Schlipp (Ed.), Albert Einstein: Philosopher–scientist (Vol. 7, pp. 1–94)., The library of living philosophers IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
- Einstein, A. (1982). What is the theory of relativity? London Times, 1919. Reprinted in: A. Einstein, Ideas and opinions, Crown Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
- Einstein, A. (1987). Letter to Maurice Solovine, May 7, 1952. In Letters to Solovine (pp. 121–125). New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
- Einstein, A. (2004). Address to a scientific meeting in Zurich, 1911. Cited in: P. Galison, Einstein’s Clocks, Poincaré’s Maps. Empires of Time (p. 268). London: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar
- Fock, V. (1959). The theory of space, time and gravitation. Gostekhizdat, Moscow, 1955. English edition: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
- Fock, V. (1971). The principle of relativity with respect to observation in modern physics. Vestnik AN SSSR, 4, 8–12.Google Scholar
- Friedman, M. (2001). Dynamics of reason. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
- Giddings, S. B. (2013). The gravitational \(S\)-matrix. In 48th course of the Erice International School of Subnuclear Physics, volume 48 of Subnuclear Ser. (pp. 93–147). arXiv:1105.2036.
- Heisenberg, W. (1942). Die “beobachbaren Grössen” in der Theorie der Elementarteilchen. Zeit. f. Phys., 120, 513–539. English translation in [38, pp. 1030–1031].Google Scholar
- Mayers, D. & Yao, A. (1998).Quantum cryptography with imperfect apparatus. In FOCS 1998: Proceedings of the 39th annual symposium on foundations of computer science (pp. 503–509). Los Alamitos, CA, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
- Mehra, J., & Rechenberg, H. (2001). The conceptual completion and the extensions of quantum mechanics 1932–1941. Epilogue: Aspects of the Further Development of Quantum Theory 1942–1999, volume 6 of The Historical Development of Quantum Theory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Noyes, H. P. (ed.) (1954). Proceedings of the fourth annual Rochester conference on high energy nuclear physics. The University of Rochester and The National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
- Pauli, W. (1946). Letter to W. Heisenberg, 9 September 1946. Cited in Rechenberg (1989, p. 566).Google Scholar
- Pauli, W. (1948). Letter to W. Heisenberg, 20 October 1948. Cited in Rechenberg (1989, p. 568).Google Scholar
- Pich, A. (1999). Effective field theory. In R. Gupta, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Les Houches summer school of theoretical physics ‘Probing the Standard Model of Particle Interactions’ (vol. II, p. 949). Amsterdam: Elsevier. arXiv:hep-ph/9806303.
- Popescu, S., & Rohrlich, D. (1994). Nonlocality as an axiom for quantum theory. Foundations of Physics, 24, 379. arXiv:quant-ph/9508009.
- Shankar, R. (1999). Effective field theory in condensed matter physics. In T. Y. Cao (Ed.), Conceptual foundations of quantum field theory (pp. 47–55). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Weinberg, S. (1996). Sokal’s hoax. The New York Review of Books, XLII, I(13), 11–15.Google Scholar