Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T10:12:46.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Independence from Future Theories: A Research Strategy in Quantum Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Alexander Rueger
Alexander Rueger*
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Renormalization in Quantum Field Theory (QFT) has frequently been regarded, by philosophers as well as by scientists, as an exemplary case of bad methodological behavior. The feeling that renormalization was somehow an illegitimate way to extract results, an ad hoc maneuver without an independent rationale, was (and is) common among physicists and philosophers, who wonder, at the same time, about the unprecedented accuracy of the empirical results achieved by the illegitimate method. Teller (1989) has recently tried to dispel the air of illegitimacy around this technique. His lucid presentation, however, leaves one wondering why any sufficiently well-informed person could ever have thought of renormalization as an ad hoc move.

Part of the reason, I think, is that renormalization — or so the common view goes — came to the rescue of a sadly lingering theory, the pre-1947 Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). A theory with such a bad record of solved empirical and conceptual problems could simply not be correct.

Type
Part IV. Quantum Theory
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1990 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1990 , 1990 , pp. 202 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1990

Footnotes

1

I gratefully acknowledge discussions with J. Audretsch and M. Carrier (University of Konstanz).

References

Audretsch, J. (forthcoming), “Vorlaeufige Physik und andere pragmatische Elemente physikalischer Naturerkenntnis”, in Pragmatik. Vol. III, Stachowiak, H. (ed.). Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Bohr, N. (1918), “On the Quantum Theory of Line-Spectra”, in Sources of Quantum Mechanics, van der. Waerden, B.L. (ed.). New York: Dover 1967, pp.95–137.Google Scholar
Cushing, J.T. (1982), “Models and Methodologies in Current Theoretical High Energy Physics”, Synthese 50: 5–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cushing, J.T. (1988), “Foundational Problems in and Methodological Lessons From Quantum Field Theory”, in Philosophical Foundations of Quantum Field Theory, Brown, H. and Harre, R. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford UP, pp.25–39.Google Scholar
Dirac, P.A.M. (1934), “Discussion of the Infinite Distribution of Electrons in the Theory of the Positron”, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 30: 150–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dirac, P.A.M. (1938), “Classical Theory of Radiating Electrons”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 167: 148–69.Google Scholar
Dresden, M. (1987), HA. Kramers. Between Tradition and Revolution. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, F.J. (1949), “The S Matrix in Quantum Electrodynamics”, Physical Review 75: 1736–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furry, W.H. and Oppenheimer, J.R. (1934), “On the Theory of the Electron and Positive”, Physical Review 45: 245–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heisenberg, W. (1943), “Die ‘beobachtbaren Groessen’ in der Theorie der Elementarteilchen”, Zeitschrift fuer Physik 120: 513–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, P. (1936), Anschauliche Quantentheorie. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1970), “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Reasearch Programmes”, in Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge UP, pp. 91–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pais, A. (1986), Inward Bound. Oxford: Oxford UP.Google Scholar
Schweber, S.S. (1984), “Some Chapters for a History of Quantum Field Theory: 1938-1952”, in Relativity, Groups, and Topology II, de Witt, B.S. and Stora, R. (eds.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp.38–220.Google Scholar
Schwinger, J. (1973), “A Report on Quantum Electrodynamics”, in The Physicist’s Conception of Nature, Mehra, J. (ed.). Dordrecht: Reidel, pp.413-26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J.M. (1988), “Inconsistency and Scientific Reasoning”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 19: 429–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teller, P. (1989), “Infinite Renormalization”, Philosophy of Science 56: 238–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomonaga, S.-I. (1962), Quantum Mechanics. Vol.I. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Weinberg, S. (1977), “The Search for Unity”, Daedalus 106: 17–35.Google Scholar
Worrall, J. (1985), “Scientific Discovery and Theory Confirmation”, in Change and Progress in Modern Science, Pitt, J. (ed.). Dordrecht: Reidel, pp.301-31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar