This chapter begins the project of interpreting quantum gauge field theories. It rejects an interesting recent interpretation and explains why it is so difficult to arrive at a better one. The difficulty stems from the problems of interpreting any quantum field theory. Even the non-relativistic quantum mechanics of particles is a theory whose interpretation remains at best controversial, and at worst simply lacking. Interpretations of quantum field theory face the additional hurdle that it is not clear what the theory is about: neither a field nor a particle ontology is readily squared with the mathematics of the theory. The chapter explores the status of loop representations in several approaches toward the interpretation of quantum field theory.
This chapter begins the project of interpreting quantum gauge field theories. It rejects an interesting recent interpretation and explains why it is so difficult to arrive at a better one. The difficulty stems from the problems of interpreting any quantum field theory. Even the non-relativistic quantum mechanics of particles is a theory whose interpretation remains at best controversial, and at worst simply lacking. Interpretations of quantum field theory face the additional hurdle that it is not clear what the theory is about: neither a field nor a particle ontology is readily squared with the mathematics of the theory. The chapter explores the status of loop representations in several approaches toward the interpretation of quantum field theory.
Quantum field theory (QFT) can be analyzed in terms of its mathematical structure, its conceptual system for physical descriptions, or its basic ontology. The analysis can be done logically or historically. In this chapter, only the genesis of the conceptual foundations of QFT relevant to its basic ontology will be treated; no discussion of its mathematical structures or its epistemological underpinnings will be given. Some conceptual problems, such as those related to probability and measurement, will be discussed, but only because of their relevance to the basic ontology of QFT, rather than their intrinsic philosophical interest. Here, by basic ontology I mean the irreducible entities that QFT is invented to describe. The often mentioned candidates for the basic ontology of QFT, in fact of the physical world, are the discrete particle and the continuous field. Another possible candidate (the spacetime point) has also been suggested recently (Redhead, 1983). Since the aim of this chapter is to analyze the historical process in which the conceptual foundations of QFT were laid down, rather than the logical structure of QFT which philosophers of the present day treat, no discussion of the last possibility will be given. The content of this chapter involves the formation and interpretation, in a roughly chronological order, of the concepts of the wave function, quantization, quantization of the field, the vacuum, interactions between fields, and renormalization. The first two topics will be discussed in relation to the quantization of the field, with their role being taken as the starting point of the conceptual development of QFT.
An important way in which quantum field theory (QFT) differs from non-relativistic quantum mechanics is that in QFT systems generically possess an infinite number of degrees of freedom. This chapter examines the proposals for non-fundamental roles that the particle concept plays in particle physics. The fields which feature in the QFT formalism are mathematical expressions; work needs to be done to determine the ontological properties of the entities that are represented by the mathematical field formalism. One difficulty for the quanta interpretation of QFT is that the analysis in terms of quanta offered in the preceding paragraphs is restricted to free systems. The no-go results for interacting systems inspire a different approach to regarding particles as non-fundamental entities. The fields which feature in the QFT formalism are mathematical expressions; work needs to be done to determine the ontological properties of the entities that are represented by the mathematical field formalism.
This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory, which leads to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche’s interpretation offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.
This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory that led to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory, that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche's interpretation, it is argued, offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.
Introduction: Conceptual issues in quantum field theory Part I. Philosophers' Interests in Quantum Field Theory: 1. Why are we philosophers interested in quantum field theory 2. Quantum field theory and the philosopher Part II. Three Approaches to the Foundations of Quantum Field Theory: 3. The usefulness of a general theory of quantized fields 4. Effective field theory in condensed matter physics 5. The triumph and limitations of quantum field theory 6. Comments Discussions Part III. Does Quantum Field Theory Need a Foundation: 7. Does quantum field theory need a foundation? Part IV. Mathematics, Statistical Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory: 8. Renormalization group theory: its basis and formulation in statistical physics 9. Where does quantum field theory fit into the big picture? 10. The unreasonable effectiveness of quantum field theory 11. Comment: the quantum field theory of physics and of mathematics Part V. Quantum Field Theory and Spacetime: Introduction 12. Quantum field theory and spacetime: formalism and reality 13. Quantum field theory of geometry 14. 'Localization' in quantum field theory: how much of QFT is compatible with what we know about spacetime 15. Comments VI. 16. What is quantum field theory and what did we think it was? 17. Comments Discussions Part VII.Renormalization Group: 18. What is fundamental physics? A renormalization group perspective 19. Renormalization group: an interesting yet puzzling idea Part VIII. Non-Abelian Gauge Theory: 20. Gauge fields, gravity and Bohm's theory 21. Is the Aharonov-Bohm effect local? Discussions Part IX. The Ontology of Particles or Fields: 22. The ineliminable classical face of quantum field theory 23. The logic of quanta 24. Do Feynman diagrams endorse a particle ontology? 25. On the ontology of QFT Part X. Panel Discussion.
Philosophical interpretations of theories generally presuppose that a theory can be presented as a consistent mathematical formulation that is interpreted through models. Algebraic quantum field theory (AQFT) can fit this interpretative model. However, standard Lagrangian quantum field theory (LQFT), as well as quantum electrodynamics and nuclear physics, resists recasting along such formal lines. The difference has a distinct bearing on ontological issues. AQFT does not treat particle interactions or the standard model. This paper develops a framework and methodology for interpreting such informal theories as LQFT and the standard model. We begin by summarizing two minimal epistemological interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (NRQM): Bohrian semantics, which focuses on communicables; and quantum information theory, which focuses on the algebra of local observables. Schwinger's development of quantum field theory supplies a unique path from NRQM to QFT, where each step is conceptually anchored in local measurements. LQFT and the standard model rely on postulates that go beyond the limits set by AQFT and Schwinger's anabatic methodology. The particle ontology of the standard model is clarified by regarding the standard model as an informal modular theory with a limited range of validity.