Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userIndeterminism in Physics and Intuitionistic Mathematics
110
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Nicolas Gisin
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Most physics theories are deterministic, with the notable exception of quantum mechanics which, however, comes plagued by the so-called measurement problem. This state of affairs might well be due to the inability of standard mathematics to speak of indeterminism, its inability to present us a worldview in which new information is created as time passes. In such a case, scientific determinism would only be an illusion due to the timeless mathematical language scientists use. To investigate this possibility it is necessary to develop an alternative mathematical language that is both powerful enough to allow scientists to compute predictions and compatible with indeterminism and the passage of time. We argue that intuitionistic mathematics provides such a language and we illustrate it in simple terms.
rate research
Read More
Physics is formulated in terms of timeless classical mathematics. A formulation on the basis of intuitionist mathematics, built on time-evolving processes, would offer a perspective that is closer to our experience of physical reality.
In this paper, we examine the relationship between general relativity and the theory of Einstein algebras. We show that according to a formal criterion for theoretical equivalence recently proposed by Halvorson (2012, 2015) and Weatherall (2015), the two are equivalent theories.
During the First World War, the status of energy conservation in general relativity was one of the most hotly debated questions surrounding Einsteins new theory of gravitation. His approach to this aspect of general relativity differed sharply from another set forth by Hilbert, even though the latter conjectured in 1916 that both theories were probably equivalent. Rather than pursue this question himself, Hilbert chose to charge Emmy Noether with the task of probing the mathematical foundations of these two theories. Indirect references to her results came out two years later when Klein began to examine this question again with Noethers assistance. Over several months, Klein and Einstein pursued these matters in a lengthy correspondence, which culminated with several publications, including Noethers now famous paper Invariante Variationsprobleme. The present account focuses on the earlier discussions from 1916 involving Einstein, Hilbert, and Noether. In these years, a Swiss student named R.J. Humm was studying relativity in Gottingen, during which time he transcribed part of Noethers lost manuscript on Hilberts invariant energy vector. By making use of this 9-page manuscript, it is possible to reconstruct the arguments Noether set forth in response to Hilberts conjecture. Her results turn out to be closely related to the findings Klein published two years later, thereby highlighting, once again, how her work significantly deepened contemporary understanding of the mathematical underpinnings of general relativity.
We consider various curious features of general relativity, and relativistic field theory, in two spacetime dimensions. In particular, we discuss: the vanishing of the Einstein tensor; the failure of an initial-value formulation for vacuum spacetimes; the status of singularity theorems; the non-existence of a Newtonian limit; the status of the cosmological constant; and the character of matter fields, including perfect fluids and electromagnetic fields. We conclude with a discussion of what constrains our understanding of physics in different dimensions.
A classic problem in general relativity, long studied by both physicists and philosophers of physics, concerns whether the geodesic principle may be derived from other principles of the theory, or must be posited independently. In a recent paper [Geroch & Weatherall, The Motion of Small Bodies in Space-Time, Comm. Math. Phys. (forthcoming)], Bob Geroch and I have introduced a new approach to this problem, based on a notion we call tracking. In the present paper, I situate the main results of that paper with respect to two other, related approaches, and then make some preliminary remarks on the interpretational significance of the new approach. My main suggestion is that tracking provides the resources for eliminating point particles---a problematic notion in general relativity---from the geodesic principle altogether.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
