Skip to main content

The Mathematical Overdetermination of Physics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Philosophy of Mathematics Today

Part of the book series: Episteme ((EPIS,volume 22))

Abstract

You are fully entitled not to know what I mean by the “mathematical overdetermination of physics”. As a first approximation to such an understanding I would like to remind you of the related though different so-called theoretical overdetermination of a corpus of observational data. Just as a physical theory often exhibits an unnecessary rich structure when compared with the observational data to be explained by it, so the mathematics introduced to formulate a physical theory frequently brings a wealth of structures into play that cannot be matched by the physical elements of that theory. One might even be tempted to identify the two cases. But the distinction between theoretical and observational terms, on which the second overdetermination is based, is generally different from the distinction between mathematical and physical terms. Theoretical terms may be intended to have physical referents, though unobservable ones. By contrast, mathematical terms occurring in a physical theory may be meant to have no physical interpretation within this theory. Yet there are structural similarities between the two cases. In both we find ourselves deluded in the expectation that for a precise reformulation of an informally given corpus of statements only two things have to be considered: (1) the concepts characteristic for the corpus in question, and (2) the logical notions binding together those concepts. Rather a third component has to be taken into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Einstein, A. [1934] Geometrie und Erfahrung, in: Mein Weltbild, Frankfurt, [1989], 119–127; here pp. 119f.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wigner, E. [1979] The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences, in: Symmetries and Reflections, Woodbridge, Conn., 222–237; here pp. 223 and 229f.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Weinberg, S. [1986] in: Mathematics: The unifying thread in science, Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 33, 716–733; here pp. 725 and 727.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Bridgman, P. W. The Nature of Physical Theory, Princeton, N. J.; pp. 116f, 67, 66, and 65.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Field, H. [1980] Science Without Numbers. A Defence of Nominalism, Princeton, N. J., here pp. If.

    Google Scholar 

  6. ibid. p. 107, n. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ludwig, G. 2[1990] Die Grundstrukturen einer physikalischen Theorie, Berlin etc.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ludwig, G. [1985] An Axiomatic Basis for Quantum Mechanics, vol 1: Derivation of Hilbert Space Structure, Berlin etc.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cf. Scheibe, E. [1986] Mathematics and physical axiomatization, in: Mérites et Limites des Méthodes Logiques en Philosophie, ed. by Fondation Singer-Polignac, Paris; 251–277; [1992] The role of mathematics in physical science, in: The Space of Mathematics. Philosophical, Epistemological, and Historical Explorations, ed. by J. Echeverria et al., Berlin, etc., 141–55.

    Google Scholar 

  10. For a modern presentation see Suppes, P. [1960] Axiomatic Set Theory, Princeton, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  11. See n. 7, ch. 4 and Bourbaki, N. [1968] Elements of Mathematics: Theory of Sets, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tarski, A. [1959] What is elementary geometry? in: Henkin, L. et al. eds., The Axiomatic Method, Amsterdam, 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Yamabe, H. [1953] A Generalization of a theorem of Gleason, Annales of Mathematics, 58, 351–365.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Mackey, G. W. [1963] Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, New York, etc., here p. 71.

    Google Scholar 

  15. To a large extent the material is included in Hooker, C. A., ed., [1975], [1979] The Logico-Algebraic Approach to Quantum Mechanics, Dordrecht, etc., vols. I and II. See also Varadarajan, V. S, [1968] Geometry of Quantum Theory, vol. 1, Princeton, N.J., chap. VII; Ludwig’s result is presented in his book referred to in no. 8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Scheibe, E. (1997). The Mathematical Overdetermination of Physics. In: Agazzi, E., Darvas, G. (eds) Philosophy of Mathematics Today. Episteme, vol 22. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5690-5_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5690-5_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6400-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-5690-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics