Abstract
Many physicists view the most sublime task of physics in presenting some day a world formula or a simple Theory of Everything (T.O.E.) that accounts for all major physical theories and from which everything follows by pure deduction.1 This striving for universality can look back on a long history, which contains the failed attempts to incorporate electrodynamics into universal mechanics, Einstein’s einheitliche Feldtheorie and Heisenberg’s explicit proposal of an Urgleichung. Those attempts were encouraged by the success of general relativity, which embraced classical mechanics and Newtonian gravity as well defined limits. A decade later quantum mechanics was given its final shape, which allowed the explanation of all atomic phenomena known up to then and contained classical mechanics as its macroscopic limit at least in the stochastic interpretation, i.e. comparing both as theories of measurement. After the success of gauge theories in elementary particle physics, the search for a fundamental simple equation was replaced by the search for a basic symmetry group that described all fundamental interactions apart from gravity. It resulted in the famous gauge group of the Standard Model SU (3) × SU (2) L × U (1), which comprises the strong, the weak and the electromagnetic interaction. But the fact that the Standard Model contains 18 (21) parameters, which have to be introduced from outside, inspired the search for a larger unifying gauge group. These Grand Unified Theories (G.U.T.) tried to derive some of the parameters of the Standard Model from more fundamental gauge symmetries. With the rise of string theory, which intends to include gravity as well, a new term popped up to express the old claims: Theory of Everything (T.O.E.).
The ideas presented here initiated from a talk Walter Thirring gave at the symposium of the Pontificial Academy Understanding Reality: The Rôle of Culture and Science and led to a joint article in Naturwissenschaften [10].
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Philip W. Anderson, “More is different — Broken Symmetry and the nature of the hierarchical structure of science”, in: Science 177 (1972), pp. 393–396.
Rudolf Camap: “Über die Aufgabe der Physik und die Anwendung des Grundsatzes der Einfachstheit”, in: Kantstudien 28, pp. 1–18.
Alan Chodos, Steven Detweiler, “Where has the fifth dimension gone?”, in: Physical Review D 21 (1980), pp. 2167–2170.
Pierre Duhem: Ziel und Struktur der physikalischen Theorien. Hamburg: Meiner 1978.
Philipp Frank: Das Kausalgesetz und seine Grenzen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1988.
Elliott H. Lieb: “The Stability of Matter”, in: Walter Thirring (Ed.), The Stability of Matter - From Atoms to Stars, Selecta of Elliott H. Lieb New York, Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer 1991.
Silvan S. Schweber, “Physics, community and the crisis in physical theory”, in: Physics Today Nov. 1993. pp. 34–40.
Carl L. Siegel, Jürgen Moser: Lectures in Celestial Mechanics. New York, Heidel- berg, Berlin: Springer 1971.
Michael Stöltzner, “Action Principles, Teleology and Hermeneutics”, in Olga Kiss, Laszlo Ropolyi (Ed.), Conference on Science and Hermeneutics. To be published in Boston Studies.
Michael Stöltzner, Walter Thirring, “Entstehen neuer Gesetze in der Evolution der Welt”, in: Naturwissenschaften 81 (1994), pp. 243–249.
Walter Thirring, “The Stability of Matter”, in: Foundations of Physics 20 (1990): pp. 1103–1110.
Walter Thirring: A Course in Mathematical Physics: VoLl, Classical Dynamical Systems. New York — Wien: Springer 1992.
Walter Thirring, Harald Posch, “Unpredictability of symmetry breaking in a phase transition”, in: Physical Review E 48,6 (Dec. 1993), pp. 4333–4339.
Steven Weinberg, “Newtonianism, reductionism and the art of congressional testimony”, in: Nature 330 (1987), pp. 433–437.
Steven Weinberg: Dreams of a Final Theory. London: Vintage 1993.
The limits of reductionism“, Correspondence between Ernst Mayr und Steven Weinberg. In: Nature 331, pp. 475.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stöltzner, M. (1995). Levels of Physical Theories. In: Depauli-Schimanovich, W., Köhler, E., Stadler, F. (eds) The Foundational Debate. Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook [1995], vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3327-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3327-4_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4617-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3327-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive