The geometry of reduction: compound reduction and overlapping state space domains
From MaRDI portal
Publication:2286503
DOI10.1007/S10701-019-00299-3zbMATH Open1434.83037arXiv1810.02611OpenAlexW3099540977WikidataQ127112112 ScholiaQ127112112MaRDI QIDQ2286503FDOQ2286503
Authors: Joshua Rosaler 
Publication date: 22 January 2020
Published in: Foundations of Physics (Search for Journal in Brave)
Abstract: The relationship according to which one physical theory encompasses the domain of empirical validity of another is widely known as "reduction." Here it is argued that one popular methodology for showing that one theory reduces to another, associated with the so-called "Bronstein cube" of physical theories, rests on an over-simplified characterization of the type of mathematical relationship between theories that typically underpins reduction. An alternative methodology, based on a certain simple geometrical relationship between dis- tinct state space models of the same physical system, is then described and illustrated with examples. Within this approach, it is shown how and under what conditions inter-model reductions involving distinct model pairs can be composed or chained together to yield a direct reduction between theoretically remote descriptions of the same system. Building on this analysis, we consider cases in which a single reduction between two models may be effected via distinct composite reductions differing in their intermediate layer of description, and motivate a set of formal consistency requirements on the mappings between model state spaces and on the subsets of the model state spaces that characterize such reductions. These constraints are explicitly shown to hold in the reduction of a non-relativistic classical model to a model of relativistic quantum mechanics, which may be effected via distinct composite reductions in which the intermediate layer of description is either a model of non-relativistic quantum mechanics or of relativistic classical mechanics. Some brief speculations are offered as to whether and how this sort of consistency requirement between distinct composite reductions might serve to constrain the relationship that any unification of the Standard Model with general relativity must bear to these theories.
Full work available at URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.02611
Recommendations
General and philosophical questions in quantum theory (81P05) Quantization of the gravitational field (83C45)
Cites Work
- The logic of \(U\cdot(TP)^{2}\)
- The remote Maxwell demon as energy down-converter
- On the Contraction of Groups and Their Representations
- Less is different: emergence and reduction reconciled
- Emergence, reduction and supervenience: a varied landscape
- Quantum chaos: a decoherent definition
- Reduction as an \textit{a posteriori} relation
- Development of the concepts of space, time and space-time from Newton to Einstein
- The Emergent Multiverse
- Toward an understanding of parochial observables
- On the reduction of general relativity to Newtonian gravitation
- Title not available (Why is that?)
- Generalized Ehrenfest relations, deformation quantization, and the geometry of inter-model reduction
- Local reduction in physics
- Inter-theory relations in quantum gravity: correspondence, reduction, and emergence
- The Bronstein hypercube of quantum gravity
Cited In (7)
- Title not available (Why is that?)
- Reduction as an \textit{a posteriori} relation
- On the reduction of general relativity to Newtonian gravitation
- A topos perspective on state-vector reduction
- A representational approach to reduction in dynamical systems
- Title not available (Why is that?)
- Title not available (Why is that?)
This page was built for publication: The geometry of reduction: compound reduction and overlapping state space domains
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2286503)
