Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T20:39:43.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Broken Symmetry and Spacetime

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

David John Baker
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The phenomenon of broken spacetime symmetry in the quantum theory of infinite systems seems to point toward an unorthodox ontology. The standard conception of the physical meaning of these symmetries, as changes in coordinates, conflicts with the apparent physical inequivalence of symmetry-related states. I argue that this apparent conflict is an artifact of a subtle error in the extant account of physical equivalence due to Halvorson and Clifton.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 78 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 128 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

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

‡

Thanks (as usual) to Gordon Belot, Hans Halvorson, and Laura Ruetsche for many valuable comments and conversations. Thanks also to John Earman, Wayne Myrvold, and David Wallace for illuminating discussions of symmetry breaking as it relates to Wigner's theorem. Finally, I must recognize three excellent referees, one of whom in particular provided multiple pages of incisive comments.

References

Arageorgis, Aristidis. 1995. Fields, Particles and Curvature. PhD diss., University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Arageorgis, Aristidis, Earman, John, and Ruetsche, Laura. 2003. “Fulling Non-uniqueness and the Unruh Effect: A Primer on Some Aspects of Quantum Field Theory.” Philosophy of Science 70:164–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earman, John. 2004. “Curie's Principle and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 18:173–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earman, John, and Norton, John. 1987. “What Price Spacetime Substantivalism? The Hole Story.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38:515–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, Clark. 1971. “Theoretical Realism and Theoretical Equivalence.” In Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science, Vol. 8, ed. Buck, R. and Cohen, R., 275–88. Reidel: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Halvorson, Hans. 2007. “Erratum for ‘Are Rindler Quanta Real?’” http://www.princeton.edu/~hhalvors/papers/rindler-erratum.pdf.Google Scholar
Halvorson, Hans, and Clifton, Rob. 2001. “Are Rindler Quanta Real? Inequivalent Particle Concepts in Quantum Field Theory.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52:417–70.Google Scholar
Hoefer, Carl. 1996. “The Metaphysics of Spacetime Substantivalism.” Journal of Philosophy 93:5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoefer, Carl. 2000. “Kant's Hands and Earman's Pions: Chirality Arguments for Substantival Space.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14:237–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huggett, Nick. 2000. “Reflections on Parity Nonconservation.” Philosophy of Science 67:219–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pooley, Oliver. 2003. “Handedness, Parity Violation, and the Reality of Space.” In Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections, ed. Brading, Katherine and Castellani, Elena, 250–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, John E., and Roepstorff, Gert. 1969. “Some Basic Concepts of Algebraic Quantum Theory.” Communications in Mathematical Physics 11:321–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roepstorff, Gert. 1970. “Coherent Photon States and Spectral Condition.” Communications in Mathematical Physics 19:301–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruetsche, Laura. 2002. “Interpreting Quantum Field Theory.” Philosophy of Science 69:348–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruetsche, Laura. 2003. “A Matter of Degree: Putting Unitary Inequivalence to Work.” Philosophy of Science 70 (Proceedings): 1329–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruetsche, Laura. 2006. “Johnny's So Long at the Ferromagnet.” Philosophy of Science 73 (Proceedings): 473–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strocchi, Franco. 2008. Symmetry Breaking. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teller, Paul. 1991. “Substance, Relations and Arguments about the Nature of Space-Time.” Philosophical Review 100:363–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar