Symmetries and the Identity of Physical States

Conference paper
Part of the European Studies in Philosophy of Science book series (ESPS, volume 5)

Abstract

The paper proposes a combined account of identity for physical states and direct empirical significance for symmetries according to which symmetry-related state variables designate distinct physical states if and only if the symmetry that relates them has direct empirical significance. Strengthening an earlier result, I show that, given this combined account, the local gauge symmetries in our leading contemporary theories of particle physics do not have any direct empirical significance.

Keywords

Symmetries Identity Empirical significance Gauge theories 

References

  1. Baker, David John. 2011. Broken symmetry and spacetime. Philosophy of Science 78: 128–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belot, Gordon. 2011. Symmetry and equivalence. In 22nd Biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association, Montréal  >  PSA 2010 contributed papers.Google Scholar
  3. Brading, Katherine, and Harvey R. Brown. 2004. Are gauge symmetry transformations observable? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55: 645–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brading, Katherine, and Elena Castellani, eds. 2003. Symmetries in physics: Philosophical reflections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, Harvey R., and Roland Sypel. 1995. On the meaning of the relativity principle and other symmetries. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 9: 235–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Earman, John. 2003. Tracking down gauge: An ode to the constrained Hamiltonian formalism. In Brading and Castellani (2003), 140–162.Google Scholar
  7. Friederich, Simon. 2015. Symmetry, empirical equivalence, and identity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 66: 537–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Galileo. 1953. Dialogue concerning the two chief world systems. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Greaves, Hilary, and David Wallace. 2014. Empirical consequences of symmetries. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65: 59–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Healey, Richard. 2009. Perfect symmetries. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60: 697–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Leifer, Matthew Saul. 2014. Is the quantum state real? An extended review of ψ-ontology theorems. Quanta 3: 67–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lyre, Holger. 2004. Holism and structuralism in U(1) gauge theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35: 643–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kosso, Peter. 2000. The empirical status of symmetries in physics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51: 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Redhead, Michael L.G. 2002. The interpretation of gauge symmetry. In Ontological aspects of quantum field theory, ed. Meinard Kuhlmann, Holger Lyre, and Andrew Wayne, 303–312. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  15. Strocchi, Franco. 2015. Symmetries, symmetry breaking, gauge symmetries. http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.06540. Accessed 26 Feb 2016.Google Scholar
  16. Teh, Nicholas Joshua. 2015. Galileo’s gauge: Understanding the empirical significance of gauge symmetry. Philosophy of Science 83: 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.University College GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Faculty of PhilosophyUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations