Philosophy of physics is concerned with the deepest theories of modern physics - notably quantum theory, our theories of space, time and symmetry, and thermal physics - and their strange, even bizarre conceptual implications. A deeper understanding of these theories helps both physics, through pointing the way to new theories and new applications, and philosophy, through seeing how our worldview has to change in the light of what we learn from physics.
This Very Short Introduction explores the core topics in philosophy of physics through three key themes. The first - the nature of space, time, and motion - begins by considering the philosophical puzzles that led Isaac Newton to propose the existence of absolute space, and then discusses how those puzzles change - but do not disappear - in the context of the revolutions in our understanding of space and time that came first from special, and then from general, relativity. The second - the emergence of irreversible behavior in statistical mechanics - considers how the microscopic laws of physics, which know of no distinction between past and future, can be compatible with the melting of ice, the cooling of coffee, the passing of youth, and all the other ways in which the large-scale world distinguishes past from future. The last section discusses quantum theory - the foundation of most of modern physics, yet mysterious to this day. It explains just why quantum theory is so difficult to make sense of, how we might nonetheless attempt to do it, and why the question has been highly relevant to the development of physics, and continues to be so.
0 有用 Thomas-Maria 2022-09-02 09:00:08 美国
作为一本"A Very Short Introduction",其内容难免还是十分简单的,而且其中还是花了太多篇幅介绍物理背景,难免会让具有物理学背景的读者觉得乏味,因为除了最后一章之外并没有涉及非常non-trivial的哲学讨论(这也会让读者觉得不知道物理学哲学到底做了什么有用的工作)。总的来说没有Maudlin写得清晰,相对论部分非常old-fashioned,因此非常繁琐,其原因大约是Wa... 作为一本"A Very Short Introduction",其内容难免还是十分简单的,而且其中还是花了太多篇幅介绍物理背景,难免会让具有物理学背景的读者觉得乏味,因为除了最后一章之外并没有涉及非常non-trivial的哲学讨论(这也会让读者觉得不知道物理学哲学到底做了什么有用的工作)。总的来说没有Maudlin写得清晰,相对论部分非常old-fashioned,因此非常繁琐,其原因大约是Wallace想引入所谓"dynamics-first"时空观点因此避免完全使用微分几何语言(因为那对应于所谓"geometry-first"观点),但是从书中我并没有读出"动力学优先"有什么深刻动机(或许来自量子引力,但书中没有交代)。最后一章论证重点还是放在了作者擅长的多世界上,对其他则论证不多。 (展开)
0 有用 Thomas-Maria 2022-09-02 09:00:08 美国
作为一本"A Very Short Introduction",其内容难免还是十分简单的,而且其中还是花了太多篇幅介绍物理背景,难免会让具有物理学背景的读者觉得乏味,因为除了最后一章之外并没有涉及非常non-trivial的哲学讨论(这也会让读者觉得不知道物理学哲学到底做了什么有用的工作)。总的来说没有Maudlin写得清晰,相对论部分非常old-fashioned,因此非常繁琐,其原因大约是Wa... 作为一本"A Very Short Introduction",其内容难免还是十分简单的,而且其中还是花了太多篇幅介绍物理背景,难免会让具有物理学背景的读者觉得乏味,因为除了最后一章之外并没有涉及非常non-trivial的哲学讨论(这也会让读者觉得不知道物理学哲学到底做了什么有用的工作)。总的来说没有Maudlin写得清晰,相对论部分非常old-fashioned,因此非常繁琐,其原因大约是Wallace想引入所谓"dynamics-first"时空观点因此避免完全使用微分几何语言(因为那对应于所谓"geometry-first"观点),但是从书中我并没有读出"动力学优先"有什么深刻动机(或许来自量子引力,但书中没有交代)。最后一章论证重点还是放在了作者擅长的多世界上,对其他则论证不多。 (展开)