Abstract
The laws of nature have come a long way since the time of Newton: quantum mechanics and relativity have given us good reasons to take seriously the possibility of laws which may be non-local, atemporal, ‘all-at-once,’ retrocausal, or in some other way not well-suited to the standard dynamical time evolution paradigm. Laws of this kind can be accommodated within a Humean approach to lawhood, but many extant non-Humean approaches face significant challenges when we try to apply them to laws outside the time evolution picture. Thus for proponents of non-Humean approaches to lawhood there is a clear need for a novel non-Humean account which is capable of accommodating these sorts of laws. In this paper we propose such an account, characterizing lawhood in terms of constraints, which are understood as a form of modal structure. We demonstrate that our proposed realist account can indeed accommodate a large variety of laws outside the time evolution paradigm, and describe some possible applications to important philosophical problems.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
There are in fact interesting nuances in the different ways no-signalling is manifested in each of these theories, but these will not concern us here
To define ontological priority, we first define ontological dependence by saying that A ontologically depends on B if A depends for its existence on B: for example, sets depend for their existence on their members. In many cases (indeed, some say all cases) ontological dependence seems to be asymmetric—A ontologically depends on B but not vice versa—and in such cases we say that B is ontologically prior to A [87, 88]. To enliven this rather abstract language, ontological priority may be described metaphorically as specifying the order in which God would have to create things to make a world like ours [89].
We reinforce that ‘locality’ as referenced in Bell’s theorem is not the same as the mathematical principle of ‘locality’ employed in quantum field theory; Bell’s theorem says nothing about the latter.
References
Kastner, R.E.: Is there really “retrocausation’’ in time-symmetric approaches to quantum mechanics? AIP Conf. Proc. 1841(1), 020002 (2017)
Menzies, P., Beebee, H.: Counterfactual theories of causation. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Summer 2020th edn. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Stanford (2020)
Hempel, C.G., et al.: Aspects of Scientific Explanation. Free Press, New York (1965)
Butterfield, J.: Defining determinism. In: Craig, E. (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton (2005)
Goddard, L.: The paradoxes of confirmation and the nature of natural laws. Philos. Q. 27(107), 97–113 (1977)
Dorst, C.: Towards a best predictive system account of laws of nature. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 70(3), 877–900 (2019)
Hobart, R.E.: Free will as involving determination and inconceivable without it. Mind 43(169), 1–27 (1934)
Wharton, K.: The universe is not a computer. In: Aguirre, F.B., Merali, G. (eds.) Questioning the Foundations of Physics, pp. 177–190. Springer, Berlin (2015)
Smolin, L.: The unique universe. Phys. World 22(06), 21 (2009)
Brizard, A.J.: An Introduction to Lagrangian Mechanics. World Scientific, Singapore (2008)
Adlam, E.: Spooky action at a temporal distance. Entropy 20(1), 41 (2018)
Feynman, R.P., Hibbs, A.R., Styer, D.F.: Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals. Dover Books on Physics, Dover Publications, New York (2010)
Hartle, J.B.: The spacetime approach to quantum mechanics. Vistas Astron. 37, 569–583 (1993)
Sorkin, R.D.: Quantum dynamics without the wavefunction. J. Phys. A 40, 3207–3221 (2007)
Wigner, E.P.: Events, laws of nature, and invariance principles. Science 145(3636), 995–999 (1964)
Wald, R.M.: General Relativity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2010)
Ringström, H.: The Cauchy Problem in General Relativity. European Mathematical Society, Zürich (2009)
Foures-Bruhat, Y.: Théorème d’existence pour certains systèmes d’équations aux dérivées partielles non linéaires. Acta Math. 88(1), 141–225 (1952)
Rovelli, C.: Loop quantum gravity. Living Rev. Relat. 11(1), 5 (2008)
Wallace, D.: Observability, redundancy and modality for dynamical symmetry transformations (2019)
Spekkens, R.W.: The paradigm of kinematics and dynamics must yield to causal structure (2012)
Aharonov, Y., Vaidman, L.: The Two-State Vector Formalism of Quantum Mechanics, pp. 369–412. Springer, Berlin (2002)
Cramer, J.G.: The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 647–687 (1986)
Kent, A.: Solution to the Lorentzian quantum reality problem. Phys. Rev. A 90(1), 012107 (2014)
Wharton, K.: A new class of retrocausal models. Entropy 20(6), 410 (2018)
Sutherland, R.: Causally symmetric bohm model (2006). arXiv:quant-ph/0601095
Price, H.: Does time-symmetry imply retrocausality? How the quantum world says “maybe’’? Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. B 43(2), 75–83 (2012)
Leifer, M., Pusey, M.: Is a time symmetric interpretation of quantum theory possible without retrocausality? Proc. R. Soc. A 473, 20160607 (2016)
Evans, P.W., Price, H., Wharton, K.B.: New slant on the EPR-bell experiment. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 64(2), 297–324 (2013)
Masanes, L., Renner, R., Christandl, M., Winter, A., Barrett, J.: Full security of quantum key distribution from no-signaling constraints. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 60(8), 4973–4986 (2014)
Pawlowski, M., Paterek, T., Kaszlikowski, D., Scarani, V., Winter, A., Żukowski, M.: Information causality as a physical principle. Nature 461, 1101–1104 (2009)
Toner, B.: Monogamy of non-local quantum correlations. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 465, 59–69 (2009)
Toner, B., Verstraete, F.: Monogamy of Bell correlations and Tsirelson’s bound (2006). arXiv:quant-ph/0611001
Scarani, V., Iblisdir, S., Gisin, N., Acín, A.: Quantum cloning. Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 1225–1256 (2005)
Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G.M., Perinotti, P.: Informational derivation of quantum theory. Phys. Rev. A 84(1) (2011)
Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G.M., Perinotti, P.: Probabilistic theories with purification. Phys. Rev. A 81, 062348 (2010)
Rohrlich, D., Popescu, S.: Nonlocality as an axiom for quantum theory (1995). arXiv:quant-ph/9508009
Hardy, L.: Quantum theory from five reasonable axioms (2001). arXiv:quant-ph/0101012
Barrett, J.: Information processing in generalized probabilistic theories (2005). arXiv:quant-ph/0508211
Barnum, H., Barrett, J., Orloff Clark, L., Leifer, M., Spekkens, R., Stepanik, N., Wilce, A., Wilke, R.: Entropy and information causality in general probabilistic theories. N. J. Phys. 12(3), 033024 (2010)
Masanes, L., Müller, M.: A derivation of quantum theory from physical requirements. N. J. Phys. 13(6), 063001 (2011)
Abramsky, S., Brandenburger, A.: The sheaf-theoretic structure of non-locality and contextuality. N. J. Phys. 13(11), 113036 (2011)
Colbeck, R.: Quantum and relativistic protocols for secure multi-party computation. PhD thesis (2009)
Adlam, E., Kent, A.: Device-independent relativistic quantum bit commitment. Phys. Rev. A 92(2), 022315 (2015)
Tomamichel, M., Fehr, S., Kaniewski, J., Wehner, S.: One-sided device-independent QKD and position-based cryptography from monogamy games. In: Johansson, T., Nguyen, P.Q. (eds.) Advances in Cryptology—EUROCRYPT 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7881, pp. 609–625. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Acín, A., Brunner, N., Gisin, N., Massar, S., Pironio, S., Scarani, V.: Device-independent security of quantum cryptography against collective attacks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(23), 230501 (2007)
Thorne, K.S.: Closed timelike curves. In: 13th Conference on General Relativity and Gravitation (GR-13), pp. 295–315 (1993)
Earman, John.: Recent work on time travel. (1995)
Deutsch, D., Marletto, C.: Constructor theory of information. Proc. R. Soc. A 471(2174), 20140540 (2015)
Brown, H.R., Myrvold, W., Uffink, J.: Boltzmann’s h-theorem, its discontents, and the birth of statistical mechanics. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. B 40(2), 174–191 (2009)
Valente, G.: The approach towards equilibrium in Lanford’s theorem. Eur. J. Philos. Sci. 4(3), 309–335 (2014)
Filomeno, A.: Typicality of dynamics and the laws of nature. In: Soto, C. (ed.) Current Debates in Philosophy of Science. In Honor of Roberto Torretti. Synthese Library Series. Springer, New York (2021)
Hooker, C.: On the import of constraints in complex dynamical systems. Found. Sci. 18(4):757–780 (2013)
Armstrong, D.M.: What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983)
Dretske, F.I.: Laws of nature. Philos. Sci. 44(2), 248–268 (1977)
Tooley, M.: The nature of laws. Can. J. Philos. 7(4), 667–698 (1977)
Bird, A.: Nature’s Metaphysics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Ioannidis, S., Livanios, V., Psillos, S.: No laws and (thin) powers in, no (governing) laws out. Eur. J. Philos. Sci. 11(1), 1–26 (2021)
Vetter, B.: Dispositional essentialism and the laws of nature. In: Bird, A., Ellis, B., Sankey, H. (eds.) Properties, Powers, and Structures: Issues in the Metaphysics of Realism. Routledge, Milton Park (2012)
Hicks, M.T., Schaffer, J.: Derivative properties in fundamental laws. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 68(2) (2017)
Tugby, M.: The problem of retention. Synthese 194(6), 2053–2075 (2017)
Masanes, L., Acin, A., Gisin, N.: General properties of nonsignaling theories. Phys. Rev. A 73(1) (2006)
Kadanoff, L.P.: Scaling and universality in statistical physics. Physica A 163(1), 1–14 (1990)
Bird, A.: The dispositionalist conception of laws. Found. Sci. 10(4), 353–370 (2005)
Ellis, B.: Scientific Essentialism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)
Molnar, G.: Powers: A Study in Metaphysics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)
Mumford, S.: Laws in Nature. Routledge, Milton Park (2002)
Bigelow, J., Ellis, B., Lierse, C.: The world as one of a kind: natural necessity and laws of nature. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 43(3), 371–388 (1992)
Maudlin, T.: The Metaphysics Within Physics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Carroll, J.W.: Laws of Nature. Cambridge Studies in Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)
Lange, M., Lange, P.P.M.: Natural Laws in Scientific Practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)
Schaffer, J.: It is the business of laws to govern. Dialectica 70(4), 577–588 (2016)
French, S.: Structure as a weapon of the realist. Proc. Arist. Soc. 106, 169–187 (2006)
Ladyman, J.: What is structural realism? Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. A 29(3), 409–424 (1998)
Morganti, M.: On the preferability of epistemic structural realism. Synthese 142, 81–107 (2004)
Worrall, J.: Structural realism: the best of both worlds?*. Dialectica 43(1–2), 99–124 (1989)
French, S., Ladyman, J.: In defence of ontic structural realism. In: Bokulich, A., Bokulich, P. (eds.) Scientific Structuralism, pp. 25–42. Springer, Berlin (2011)
Berenstain, N., Ladyman, J.: Ontic structural realism and modality. In: Landry, Elaine, Rickles, Dean (eds.) Structural Realism: Structure, Object, and Causality. Springer, Berlin (2012)
Ladyman, J., Ross, D.: Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Esfeld, M.: The modal nature of structures in ontic structural realism. Int. Stud. Philos. Sci. 23(2), 179–194 (2009)
Kitcher, P.: The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)
Psillos, S.: Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth. Philosophical Issues in Science. Taylor & Francis, Milton Park (2005)
Esfeld, M.: Ontic structural realism and the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Eur. J. Philos. Sci. 3 (2013)
Ladyman, J.A.C.: Structure Not Selection, vol. 1, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2021)
Soto, C., Romero-Maltrana, D.: Local selective realism: shifting from classical to quantum electrodynamics. Found. Sci. 25(4), 955–970 (2020)
Ross, D., Ladyman, J., Spurrett, D.: Causation in a structural world. In: Ladyman, J. (ed.) Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Schaffer, J.: The internal relatedness of all things. Mind 119(474), 341–376 (2010)
Cameron, R.P.: Turtles all the way down: regress, priority and fundamentality. Philos. Q. 58(230), 1–14 (2008)
Schaffer, J.: On what grounds what. In: Manley, D., Chalmers, D.J., Wasserman, R. (eds.) Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology, pp. 347–383. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)
Stanley, J.: “Assertion’’ and intentionality. Philos. Stud. 151(1), 87–113 (2010)
Adlam, E.: Quantum mechanics and global determinism. Quanta 7, 40–53 (2018)
Hildebrand, T.: Scientific practice and the epistemology of governing laws. J. Am. Philos. Assoc. 5(2), 174–188 (2019)
Ismael, J.: An empiricist’s guide to objective modality. In: Slater, M., Yudell, Z. (eds.) Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science: New Essays, pp. 109–125. Oxford University Press, New York (2017)
Jaag, S., Loew, C.: Why defend humean supervenience? J. Philos. 117(7), 387–406 (2020)
Tastevin, G., Laloë, F.: The outcomes of measurements in the de broglie-bohm theory. C. R. Phys. (2021)
Wallace, D.: Everett and structure. Stud. Hist. Philos. 34(1), 87–105 (2003)
Martens, N.C.M., Read, J.: Sophistry about symmetries? Synthese 199(1), 315–344 (2020)
List, C., Pivato, M.: Dynamic and stochastic systems as a framework for metaphysics and the philosophy of science. Synthese 198(3), 2551–2612 (2019)
Cohen, J., Callender, C.: A better best system account of lawhood. Philos. Stud. 145(1), 1–34 (2009)
Laplace, P.S.: Théorie analytique des probabilités. Courcier (1820)
Kripke, S.A.: Semantical analysis of modal logic i normal modal propositional calculi. Math. Log. Q. 9(5–6), 67–96 (1963)
Callender, C.: There is no puzzle about the low entropy past. In: Hitchcock, C. (ed.) Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science, pp. 240–255. Blackwell, Oxford (2004)
Hicks, M.T.: Dynamic humeanism. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 69(4), 983–1007 (2017)
Wallace, D.: The logic of the past hypothesis, November 2011. In: B. Loewer, E. Winsberg and B. Weslake (ed.) Currently-Untitled Volume Discussing David Albert’s “Time and Chance”
van Fraassen, B.C.: The Scientific Image. Clarendon Library of Logic and Philosophy, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1980)
Hildebrand, T.: Platonic laws of nature. Can. J. Philos. 50(3), 365–381 (2020)
Hochberg, H.: Natural necessity and laws of nature. Philos. Sci. 48(3), 386–399 (1981)
Van Fraassen, B.C.: Armstrong, cartwright, and Earman on laws and symmetry. Philos. Phenomenol. Res. 53(2):431–444 (1993)
Lewis, D.: Philosophical Papers, vol. 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1987)
Bell, J.: Against ‘measurement’. Phys. World (1990)
Seevinck, M.P.: Can quantum theory and special relativity peacefully coexist? (2010)
Cartwright, N.: How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1983)
Loewer, B.: Humean supervenience. Philos. Top. 24(1), 101–127 (1996)
Lanczos, C.: The Variational Principles of Mechanics. Mathematical Expositions, University of Toronto Press, Toronto (1949)
Ostrogradsky, M.: Mémoire sur les equations différentielles relative au problème des isopérimètres. Mémoiries de l’Academie de St Pétèrsburg 6 (1850)
Butterfield, J.: Some aspects of modality in analytical mechanics (2002). arXiv:physics/0210081
Orr, J.: No god, no powers. Int. Philos. Q. 59(4), 411–426 (2019)
Cartwright, N.: No god, no laws (2008)
McTaggart, J.E.: The unreality of time. Mind 17(68), 457–474 (1908)
Acknowledgements
This publication was made possible through the support of the ID 61466 grant from the John Templeton Foundation, as part of the “The Quantum Information Structure of Spacetime (QISS)” Project (qiss.fr). The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Adlam, E. Laws of Nature as Constraints. Found Phys 52, 28 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-022-00546-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-022-00546-0