Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T14:50:18.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Huggett and Weingard's Review of An Interpretive Introduction to Quantum Field Theory: Continuing the Discussion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Paul Teller*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of California, Davis

Abstract

Huggett and Weingard's critical review provides an opportunity to continue the interpretive examination of quantum field theory in terms of some specific issues as well as comparison of alternative approaches to the subject. This note recasts their example of inequivalent Fock spaces in an effort to further clarify what it illustrates. Questions are addressed about the role of analogy in developing quantum field theory and about the conflict between formal vs. concrete methods in both physics and its interpretation, continuing the well-known historical debate between Pierre Duhem and Clark Maxwell. Huggett and Weingard's examination very usefully occasions clarification on some points of exposition which, it is hoped, will make An Interpretive Introduction to Quantum Field Theory a more useful resource for understanding this subject.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1998

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

Send Reprint requests to the author, Department of Philosophy, University of California, Davis, CA 95616.

References

Dirac, P.A.M. (1947), The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Third Edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre (1954), The Aim and Sructure of Physical Theory. Translated by Philip P. Weiner. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, Steven, and Redhead, M. (1988), “Quantum Physics and the Identity of Indiscernibles”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39: 233246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haag, Rudolf (1993), Local Quantum Physics: Fields, Particles, Algebras. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Huggett, Nick, and Weingard, R. (1994), “On the Field Aspect of Quantum Fields”, Erkenntnis 40: 293301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huggett, Nick, and Weingard, R. (1994a), “Interpretations of Quantum Field Theory”, Philosophy of Science 61: 370388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huggett, Nick, and Weingard, R. (1995), “The Renormalization Group and Effective Field Theories”, Synthese 102.: 171194.Google Scholar
Huggett, Nick, and Weingard, R. (1996), “Critical Review: Paul Teller's Interpretive Introduction to Quantum Field Theory”, Philosophy of Science 63: 302314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, James Clerk (1890), The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell. Nivers, W. (ed.). New York: Dover Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Redhead, Michael and Teller, P. (1991), “Particles, Particle Labels, and Quanta: The Toll of Unacknowledged Metaphysics”, Foundations of Physics 21: 4362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redhead, Michael and Teller, P. (1992), “Particle Labels and the Theory of Indistinguishable Particles in Quantum Mechanics”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43: 201218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiff, Leonard I. (1968), Quantum Mechanics. Third Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Teller, Paul (1995), An Interpretive Introduction to Quantum Field Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Teller, Paul (To appear, a) “Haecceities and Quantum Mechanics”, to appear in Elena Castellani (ed.), Interpreting Bodies: Classical and Quantum Objects in Modern Physics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Teller, Paul (To appear, b), “The Ins and Out's Of Counterfactual Switching”.Google Scholar
Umezawa, Hiroomi (1993), Advanced Field Theory: Micro, Macro, and Thermal Physics. New York: American Institute of Physics.Google Scholar
Wayne, Andrew (To appear), “Degrees of Freedom and the Interpretation of Quantum Field Theory”, Erkentniss.Google Scholar