Inventing your mother-in-law or More is Different II
P. W. Anderson, “Emergence, Reductionism and the Seamless Web: When and Why Is Science Right,” Current Science 78:6 (2000), 1. [Based on the Pagels lecture, Aspen, 1999].
Anderson suggests that emergence is the mechanism for consilience (the unifying of disparate pieces of knowledge) and reduction is the evidence for it. Theories may be under-determined, i.e., there may be many possible theories that can explain what is actually known. Hence, a successful theory may not actually correspond to what is happening. If there are only a few constraints (hypotheses, observations) that a theory must satisfy it has sometimes been the case that more than one theory can satisfy the constraints. However, as the number of constraints increases, acceptance of a theory is more likely and it becomes hard to conceive of alternative theories that could satisfy these constraints. Reduction can greatly increase the number of conditions that a theory must satisfy. For example, any alternative to quantum theory must be able to explain all known principles of atomic physics and of chemistry. Anderson concludes ``it is as impossible to `socially construct’ science as it is to invent A. Abrikosov or your mother-in-law.’’
Anderson mentions work of Kirkpatrick concerning the problem of satisfying many constraints. An example is this Science paper.
Anderson suggests that emergence is the mechanism for consilience (the unifying of disparate pieces of knowledge) and reduction is the evidence for it. Theories may be under-determined, i.e., there may be many possible theories that can explain what is actually known. Hence, a successful theory may not actually correspond to what is happening. If there are only a few constraints (hypotheses, observations) that a theory must satisfy it has sometimes been the case that more than one theory can satisfy the constraints. However, as the number of constraints increases, acceptance of a theory is more likely and it becomes hard to conceive of alternative theories that could satisfy these constraints. Reduction can greatly increase the number of conditions that a theory must satisfy. For example, any alternative to quantum theory must be able to explain all known principles of atomic physics and of chemistry. Anderson concludes ``it is as impossible to `socially construct’ science as it is to invent A. Abrikosov or your mother-in-law.’’
Anderson mentions work of Kirkpatrick concerning the problem of satisfying many constraints. An example is this Science paper.
Comments
Post a Comment