The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of...
Transcript of The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of...
-
Page 1 of 2
The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of PhysicsEditedbyRobertBatterman
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.ItfurtherstheUniversity'sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,andeducationbypublishingworldwide.OxfordNewYorkAucklandCapeTownDaresSalaamHongKongKarachiKualaLumpurMadridMelbourneMexicoCityNairobiNewDelhiShanghaiTaipeiTorontoWithofficesinArgentinaAustriaBrazilChileCzechRepublicFranceGreeceGuatemalaHungaryItalyJapanPolandPortugalSingaporeSouthKoreaSwitzerlandThailandTurkeyUkraineVietnamOxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPressintheUKandcertainothercountries.PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016OxfordUniversityPress2013Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,bylicense,orundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereproductionrightsorganization.InquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove.Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherformandyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer.LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
-
TheOxfordhandbookofphilosophyofphysics/editedbyRobertBatterman.p.cm.ISBN978-0-19-539204-3(alk.paper)1.PhysicsPhilosophy.I.Batterman,RobertW.II.Title:Handbookofphilosophyofphysics.QC6.O9252012530.1dc232012010291135798642
-
CONTENTS
Contributors Introduction
Robert Batterman
1. For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics Olivier Darrigol
2. What Is "Classical Mechanics" Anyway? Mark Wilson
3. Causation in Classical Mechanics
Sheldon R. Smith
4. Theories of Matter: Infinities and Renormalization Leo P. Kaodanoff
5. Turn and Face the Strange Ch-ch-changes: Philosophical
Questions Raised by Phase Transitions Tarun Menon and Craig Callender
6. Effective Field Theories
]onathan Bain
7. The Tyranny of Scales Robert Batterman
8. Symmetry
Sorin Bangu
9. Symmetry and Equivalence Gordon Belot
10. lndistinguishability
Simon Saunders
-
11. Unification in Physics
Margaret Morrison 12. Measurement and Classical Regime in Quantum Mechanics
Guido Bacciagaluppi 13. The Everett Interpretation
David Wallace 14. Unitary Equivalence and Physical Equivalence
Laura Ruetsche 15. Substantivalist and Relationalist Approaches to Spacetime
Oliver Pooley 16. Global Spacetime Structure
John Byron Manchak 17. Philosophy of Cosmology
Chris Smeenk Index
-
Page 1 of 5
ContributorsTheOxfordHandbookofPhilosophyofPhysicsEditedbyRobertBatterman
Contributors
GuidoBacciagaluppi
isReaderinPhilosophyattheUniversityofAberdeen.Hisfieldofresearchisthephilosophyofphysics,inparticularthephilosophyofquantumtheory.Healsoworksonthehistoryofquantumtheoryandhaspublishedabookonthe1927Solvayconference(togetherwithA.Valentini).Healsohasinterestsinthefoundationsofprobabilityandinissuesoftimesymmetryandasymmetry.
JonathanBain
isAssociateProfessorofPhilosophyofScienceatthePolytechnicInstituteofNewYorkUniversity.Hisresearchinterestsincludephilosophyofspace-time,scientificrealism,andphilosophyofquantumfieldtheory.
-
Contributors
Page 2 of 5
SorinBangu
isAssociateProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofBergen,Norway.HereceivedhisPh.D.fromtheUniversityofTorontoandhaspreviouslybeenapostdoctoralfellowattheUniversityofWesternOntarioandafixed-termlecturerattheUniversityofCambridge,DepartmentofHistoryandPhilosophyofScience.Hismaininterestsareinphilosophyofscience(especiallyphilosophyofphysics,mathematics,andprobability)andlaterWittgenstein.Hehaspublishedextensivelyintheseareasandhasrecentlycompletedabookmanuscriptonthemetaphysicalandepistemologicalissuesarisingfromtheapplicabilityofmathematicstoscience.
RobertBatterman
isProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofPittsburgh.HeisaFellowoftheRoyalSocietyofCanada.HeistheauthorofThedevilinthedetails:Asymptoticreasoninginexplanation,reduction,andemergence(Oxford,2002).Hisworkinphilosophyofphysicsfocusesprimarilyupontheareaofcondensedmatterbroadlyconstrued.Hisresearchinterestsincludethefoundationsofstatisticalphysics,dynamicalsystemsandchaos,asymptoticreasoning,mathematicalidealizations,thephilosophyofappliedmathematics,explanation,reduction,andemergence.
GordonBelot
isProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofMichigan.Hehaspublishedanumberofarticlesonphilosophyofphysicsandrelatedareasandonesmallbook,Geometricpossibility(Oxford,2011).
CraigCallender
isProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego.Hehaswrittenwidelyinphilosophyofscience,metaphysics,andphilosophyofphysics.HeistheeditorofPhysicsmeetsphilosophyatthePlancklength(withHuggett)andtheOxfordhandbookofthephilosophyoftime.Heiscurrentlyworkingonabookmonographontherelationshipbetweenphysicaltimeandtimeasweexperienceit.
-
Contributors
Page 3 of 5
OlivierDarrigol
isaCNRSresearchdirectorintheSPHERE/RehseisresearchteaminParis.Heinvestigatesthehistoryofphysics,mostlynineteenthandtwentiethcentury,withastronginterestinrelatedphilosophicalquestions.HeistheauthorofseveralbooksincludingFromc-numberstoq-numbers:Theclassicalanalogyinthehistoryofquantumtheory(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1992),ElectrodynamicsfromAmpretoEinstein(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2000),Worldsofflow:AhistoryofhydrodynamicsfromtheBernoullistoPrandtl(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2005),andAhistoryofopticsfromGreekantiquitytothenineteenthcentury(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2012).
LeoP.Kadanoff
isatheoreticalphysicistandappliedmathematicianwhohascontributedwidelytoresearchinthepropertiesofmatter,thedevelopmentofurbanareas,statisticalmodelsofphysicalsystems,andthedevelopmentofchaosinsimplemechanicalandfluidsystems.Hisbest-knowncontributionwasinthedevelopmentoftheconceptsofscaleinvarianceanduniversalityastheyareappliedtophasetransitions.Morerecently,hehasbeeninvolvedintheunderstandingofsingularitiesinfluidflow.
JohnByronManchak
isanAssistantProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofWashington.Hisprimaryresearchinterestsareinphilosophyofphysicsandphilosophyofscience.Hisresearchhasfocusedonfoundationalissuesingeneralrelativity.
TarunMenon
isagraduatestudentinPhilosophyattheUniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego.Hisresearchinterestsareinthephilosophyofphysicsandmetaphysics,particularlytime,probability,andthefoundationsofstatisticalmechanics.Heisalsointerestedinformalepistemologyandthecognitivestructureofscience.
-
Contributors
Page 4 of 5
MargaretMorrison
isProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofToronto.Sheistheauthorofseveralarticlesonvariousaspectsofphilosophyofscienceincludingphysicsandbiology.SheisalsotheauthorofUnifyingscientifictheories:Physicalconceptsandmathematicalstructures(Cambridge,2000)andtheeditor(withMaryMorgan)ofModelsasmediators:Essaysonthephilosophyofnaturalandsocialscience(Cambridge,1999).
OliverPooley
isUniversityLecturerintheFacultyofPhilosophyattheUniversityofOxfordandaFellowandTutoratOrielCollege,Oxford.Heworksinthephilosophyofphysicsandinmetaphysics.Muchofhisresearchfocusesonthenatureofspace,time,andspacetime.
LauraRuetsche
isProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofMichigan.HerInterpretingquantumtheories:Theartofthepossible(Oxford,2011)aimstoarticulatequestionsaboutthefoundationsofquantumfieldtheorieswhoseanswersmightholdinterestforphilosophymorebroadlyconstrued.
SimonSaunders
isProfessorinthePhilosophyofPhysicsandFellowofLinacreCollegeattheUniversityofOxford.Hehasworkedinthefoundationsofquantumfieldtheory,quantummechanics,symmetries,thermodynamics,andstatisticalmechanicsandinthephilosophyoftimeandspacetime.HewasanearlyproponentoftheviewofbranchingintheEverettinterpretationasaneffectiveprocessbasedondecoherence.Heisco-editor(withJonathanBarrett,AdrianKent,andDavidWallace)ofManyworlds?Everett,quantumtheory,andreality(OUP2010).
ChrisSmeenk
isAssociateProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofWesternOntario.Hisresearchinterestsarehistoryandphilosophyofphysics,andseventeenth-centurynaturalphilosophy.
-
Contributors
SheldonR.Smith
isProfessorofPhilosophyatUCLA.Hehaswrittenarticlesonthephilosophyofclassicalmechanics,therelationshipbetweencausationandlaws,thephilosophyofappliedmathematics,andKant'sphilosophyofscience.
DavidWallace
studiedphysicsatOxfordUniversitybeforemovingintophilosophyofphysics.HeisnowTutorialFellowinPhilosophyofScienceatBalliolCollege,Oxford,anduniversitylecturerinPhilosophyatOxfordUniversity.Hisresearchinterestsincludetheinterpretationofquantummechanicsandthephilosophicalandconceptualproblemsofquantumfieldtheory,symmetry,andstatisticalphysics.
MarkWilson
isProfessorofPhilosophyattheUniversityofPittsburgh,aFellowoftheCenterforPhilosophyofScience,andaFellowattheAmericanAcademyofArtsandSciences.Hismainresearchinvestigatesthemannerinwhichphysicalandmathematicalconcernsbecomeentangledwithissuescharacteristicofmetaphysicsandphilosophyoflanguage.HeistheauthorofWanderingsignificance:Anessayonconceptualbehavior(Oxford,2006).Heiscurrentlywritingabookonexplanatorystructure.Heisalsointerestedinthehistoricaldimensionsofthisinterchange;inthisvein,hehaswrittenonDescartes,Frege,Duhem,andWittgenstein.HealsosupervisestheNorthAmericanTraditionsSeriesforRounderRecords.
-
Introduction
Page 1 of 8
IntroductionRobertBattermanTheOxfordHandbookofPhilosophyofPhysicsEditedbyRobertBatterman
AbstractandKeywords
Thischapterdiscussesthethemeofthisbook,whichisaboutthephilosophyofphysics.Thebookprovidesanoverviewofthetopicsbeingstudiedbyphilosophersofphysicsandidentifiestheoriesthatwouldnothavebeenconsideredfundamentalduringthe1980s.Itdescribesnewproblemsandissuesthatbecamethefocusofthephilosophyofphysicsinrecentyears,whichincludethephilosophyofhydrodynamics,classicalmechanics,effectivefieldtheories,andmeasurementinquantummechanics.
Keywords:philosophyofphysics,hydrodynamics,classicalmechanics,effectivefieldtheories,quantummechanics
WhenIwasingraduateschoolinthe1980s,philosophyofphysicswasfocusedprimarilyontwodominantreasonablyself-containedtheories:Orthodoxnonrel-ativisiticquantummechanicsandrelativisticspacetimetheories.Ofcourse,therewereafewpaperspublishedoncertainquestionsinotherfieldsofphysicssuchasstatisticalmechanicsanditsrelationtothermodynamics.Theselatter,however,primarilytargetedtheextenttowhichthereductiverelationsbetweenthetwotheoriescouldbeconsideredastraightforwardimplementationoftheorthodoxstrategyoutlinedbyErnestNagel.
Philosophicalquestionsaboutthemeasurementproblem,thequestionofthepossibilityofhiddenvariables,andthenatureofquantumlocalitydominatedthephilosophyofphysicsliteratureonthequantumside.Questionsaboutrelationalismvs.substantivalism,thecausalandtemporalstructureoftheworld,aswellasissuesaboutunderdeterminationoftheoriesdominatedtheliteratureonthespacetimeside.Someworriesaboutdeterminismvs.indeterminismcrossedthedividebetweenthesetheoriesandplayedasignificantroleinshapingthedevelopmentofthefield.(HereIamthinkingofEarman'sAPrimeronDeterminism(1986)asaparticulardrivingforce.)
Theseissuesstillreceiveconsiderableattentionfromphilosophersofphysics.Butmanyphilosophershaveshiftedtheirattentiontootherquestionsrelatedtoquantummechanicsandtospacetimetheories.Inparticular,therehasbeenconsiderableworkonunderstandingquantumfieldtheory,particularlyfromthepointofviewofalgebraicoraxiomaticformulations.Newattentionhasalsobeengiventophilosophicalissuessurroundingquantuminformationtheoryandquantumcomputing.Andtherehas,naturally,beenconsiderableinterestinunderstandingtherelationsbetweenquantumtheoryandrelativitytheory.Questionsaboutthepossibilityofunifyingthesetwofundamentaltheoriesarise.Relatedly,therehasbeenafocusonunderstandinggaugeinvarianceandsymmetries.
However,Ibelievephilosophyofphysicshasevolvedevenfurther,andthisbeliefpromptsthepublicationofthisvolume.Recently,manyphilosophershavefocusedtheirattentionsontheoriesthat,forthemostpart,werelargelyignoredinthepast.Asnotedabove,therelationshipbetweenthermodynamicsandstatisticalmechanicsoncethoughttobeaparadigminstanceofunproblematictheoryreductionisnowahotlydebatedtopic.Philosophersandphysicistshavelongimplicitlyorexplicitlyadoptedareductionistmethodologicalbent.Yet,overtheyearsthismethodologicalslanthasbeenquestioneddramatically.Attentionhasbeenfocusedontheexplanatoryanddescriptiverolesofnon-fundamental,phenomenologicaltheories.Inlargepartbecauseofthisshiftoffocus,
-
Introduction
Page 2 of 8
oldtheoriessuchasclassicalmechanics,oncedeemedtobeoflittlephilosophicalinterest,haveincreasinglybecomethefocusofdeepmethodologicalinvestigations.
Furthermore,somephilosophershavebecomemoreinterestedinlessfundamentalcontemporaryphysics.Forinstance,therearedeepquestionsthatariseincondensedmattertheory.Thesequestionshaveinterestingandimportantimplicationsforthenatureofmodels,idealizations,andexplanationinphysics.Forexample,modelsystems,suchastheIsingmodel,playimportantcomputationalandconceptualrolesinunderstandinghowtherecanbephasetransitionswithspecificcharacteristics.And,theuseofthethermodynamiclimitisanidealizationthat(somehaveargued)playsanessential,ineliminableroleinunderstandingandexplainingtheobserveduniversalityofcriticalphenomena.Thesespecificissuesarediscussedinseveralofthechaptersinthisvolume.
IntheUnitedStatesduringthe1970sand1980s,therewasagreatdebatebetweenparticlephysicistswhopushedforfundingofhigh-energyparticleacceleratorsandsolid-stateorcondensed-mattertheoristsforwhomthesiphoningoffofsomuchgovernmentfundingtofundamentalphysicswasunacceptable.AfamouspaperchampioningthelatterpositionisPhilipAnderson'sMoreIsDifferent(1972).Notonlywasthisadebateoverfunding,butitraisedissuesaboutexactlywhatshouldcountasfundamentalphysics.Whilehistoriansofphysicshavefocusedconsiderableattentiononthispublicdebate,philosophersofphysicshavereallyonlyrecentlybeguntoengagewiththeconceptualimplicationsofthepossibilitythatcondensedmattertheoryisinsomesensejustasfundamentalashigh-energyparticlephysics.
Thiscollectionaimstodotwothings.First,ittriestoprovideanoverviewofmanyofthetopicsthatcurrentlyengagephilosophersofphysics.Andsecond,itfocusesattentiononsometheoriesthatbyorthodox1980sstandardswouldnothavebeenconsideredfundamental.Itstrivestosurveysomeofthesenewissuesandtheproblemsthathavebecomeafocusofattentioninrecentyears.Additionally,itaimstoprovideup-to-datediscussionsofthedeepproblemsthatdominatedthefieldinthepast.
Inthefirstchapter,ForaPhilosophyofHydrodynamics,OlivierDarrigolfocusesattentiononlessonsthatcanbelearnedfromthehistoricaldevelopmentoffluidmechanics.Henotesthathydrodynamicshasprobablyreceivedtheleastattentionofanyphysicaltheoryfromphilosophersofphysics.Hydrodynamicsisnotafundamentaltheoryalongthelinesofquantummechanicsandrelativitytheory,anditsbasicformulationhasnotevolvedmuchfortwocenturies.Thesefacts,togetherwithalackofdetailedhistoricalstudiesofhydrodynamics,havekeptthetheoryofftheradar. DarrigolprovidesanaccountofthedevelopmentofhydrodynamicsasacomplextheoryonethatisnotfullycapturedbythebasicNavier-Stokesequations.Forthetheorytobeapplicable,particularlyforittoplayanexplanatoryrole,ahostoftechniquesidealizations,modelingstrategies,andempiricallydetermineddatamustcomeintoplay.Thisdiscussionshowsclearlyhowintricate,sophisticated,andmodernthetheoryofhydrodynamicsactuallyis.Darrigoldrawsanumberoflessonsaboutthestructuresofphenomenologicaltheoriesfromhisdetaileddiscussion,focusingparticularlyonwhathecallsthemodularstructureofhydrodynamics.
Continuingthediscussionofoldbutbynomeansdeadoreliminatedtheories,MarkWilsontakesontheformidabletaskoftryingtosayexactlywhatisthenatureofclassicalmechanics.Acommoninitialreactiontothistopicistodismissit:Surelyweallknowwhatclassicalmechanicsis!Justlookatanytextbook.ButasWilsonshowsinWhatIsClassicalMechanicsAnyway?,thisdismissiveattitudeismisleadingonanumberofimportantlevels.Classicalmechanicsislikeafive-leggedstoolonaveryunevenfloor.Itshiftsdramaticallyfromonefounda-tionalperspectivetoanotherdependingupontheproblemathand,whichinturnisoftenafunctionofthescalelengthatwhichthephenomenonisinvestigated.Inthecontextofplanetarymotions,billiards,andsimplifiedidealgasesinboxes,thepoint-particleinterpretationofclassicalmechanicswillmostlikelyprovideanappropriatetheoreticalsetting.However,assoonasonetriestoprovideamorerealisticdescriptionofwhatgoesoninsideactualbilliardballcollisions,onemustconsiderthefactthattheballswilldeformandbuildupinternalstressesuponcollision.Insuchsituations,thepoint-particlefoundationwillfailandonewillneedtoshifttoanalternativefoundation,providedbyclassicalcontinuummechanics.Yetathirdpotentialfoundationforclassicalmechanicscanbefoundwithinso-calledanalyticmechanics,inwhichthenotionofarigidbodybecomescentral.Hereconstraintforces(suchastheconnectionsthatallowaballtoroll,ratherthanskid,downaninclinedplane)playacrucialrole.Forcesofthistypearenotwhollyconsistentwiththesuppositionscentraltoeitherthepoint-particleorcontinuumpointsofview.AmajorlessonfromWilson'sdiscussionisthatclassicalmechanicsshouldbestbethoughtofasconstitutedbyvariousfoundationalmethodologiesthatdonotfitparticularlywellwithoneanother.Thisgoesagainstcurrentorthodoxythatatheorymustbeseenasaformallyaxiomatizableconsistentstructure.
1
-
Introduction
Page 3 of 8
Onthecontrary,toproperlyemployclassicalmechanicsfordescriptiveandexplanatorypurposes,onepushesafoundationalmethodologyappropriateatonescaleofinvestigationtoitslimitingutility,afterwhichoneshiftstoadifferentsetofclassicalmodelingtoolsinordertocapturethephysicsactiveatalowersizescale.Wilsonarguesthatagooddealofphilosophicalconfusionhasarisenfromfailingtorecognizethecomplicatedscale-dependentstructuresofclassicalphysics.
SheldonSmith'scontributionaddstoourunderstandingofaparticularaspectofclassicalphysics.InCausationinClassicalMechanics,headdressesskepticalargumentsinitiatedbyBertrandRusselltotheeffectthatcausationisnotafundamentalfeatureoftheworld.Inthecontextofclassicalphysics,onewayofmakingthisclaimmorepreciseistoarguethatthereisnoreasontoprivilegeretardedoveradvancedGreen'sfunctionsforasystem.Green'sfunctions,crudely,describetheeffectofaninstantaneous,localizeddisturbancethatactsuponthesystem.Itseemsthatthelawsofmotionforelectromagnetismorforthebehaviorofaharmonicoscillatordonotdistinguishbetweenretarded(presumablycausal)andadvanced(presumablyacausal)solutions.Ifthereistoberoomforaprincipleofcausalityinclassicalphysics,thenitlookslikeweneedtofindextra-nomologicalreasonstoprivilegetheretardedsolutions.SmithsurveysawiderangeofattemptstoanswerthecausalskepticinthecontextsoftheuseofGreen'sfunctionsandtheimpositionof(Sommerfeld)radiationconditions,amongotherattempts.Theupshotisthatitisremarkablydifficulttofindjustificationwithinphysicaltheoryforthemaximthatcausesprecedetheireffects.
Thenextchapter,byLeoKadanoff,focusesoncondensedmatterphysics.Inparticular,Kadanoffdiscussesprogressinphysicallyunderstandingthefactthatmattercanabruptlychangeitsqualitativestateasitundergoesaphasetransition.Aneverydayexampleoccurswiththeboilingwaterinateakettle.Asthetemperatureincreases,thewaterchangesfromitsliquidphasetoitsvaporphaseintheformofsteam.Mathematically,suchtransitionsaredescribedbyanimportantconceptcalledanorderparameter.Inafirst-orderphasetransition,suchastheliquidvaportransition,theorderparameterchangesdiscontinuously.Certainphasetransitions,however,arecontinuousinthesensethatthediscontinuityinthebehavioroftheorderparameterapproacheszeroatsomespecificcriticalvalueoftherelevantparameterssuchastemperatureandpressure.Foralongtimethereweretheoreticalattemptstounderstandthephysicsinvolvedinsuchcontinuoustransitionsthatfailedtoadequatelyrepresenttheactualbehavioroftheorderparameterasitapproacheditscriticalvalue.Thedevelopmentoftherenormalizationgroupinthe1970sremediedthissituation.Kadanoffplayedapivotalroleintheconceptualdevelopmentofrenormalizationgrouptheory.Inthischapter,hefocusesonthesedevelopments(particularly,theimprovementuponearlymeanfieldtheories)andonadeeplyinterestingfeaturehecallstheextendedsingularitytheorem.Thisistheideathatsharp,qualitativelydistinct,changesinphaseinvolvethepresenceofamathematicalsingularity.Thissingularitytypicallyemergesinthelimitinwhichthesystemsizebecomesinfinite.Theunderstandingofthebehaviorofsystemsatandnearphasetransitionsrequiresradicallydifferentconceptualapparatuses.Itinvolvesasynthesisbetweenstandardstatisticalmechanicalusesofprobabilitiesandconceptsfromdynamicalsystemstheoryparticularly,thetopologicalconceptionsofbasinsofattractionandfixedpointsofadynamicaltransformation.
ThediscussionoftherenormalizationgroupandphasetransitionscontinuesasTarunMenonandCraigCallenderexamineseveralphilosophicalquestionsraisedbyphasetransitions.Theirchapter,TurnandFacetheStrangeCh-ch-changes,focusesonthequestionofwhetherphasetransitionsaretobeunderstoodasgenuinelyemergentphenomena.ThetermemergentismuchabusedandconfusedinboththephilosophicalandphysicsliteraturesandsoMenonandCallenderprovideakindofroadmaptoseveralconceptsthathavebeeninvokedintheincreasingnumberofpapersonemergenceandphasetransitions.Inparticular,theydiscussconceptionsofreductionandcorrespondingnotionsofemergence:conceptualnovelty,explanatoryirreducibility,andontologicalirreducibility.Theirgoalistoestablishthatforanyreasonablesensesofreducibilityandemergence,phasetransitionsarenotemergentphenomena,andtheydonotpresentproblemsforthoseofareductionistexplanatorybent.Inasense,theirdiscussioncanbeseenaschallengingtheimportanceoftheextendedsingularitytheoremmentionedabove.MenonandCallenderalsoconsidersomerecentworkinphysicsthatattemptstoprovidewell-definednotionsofphasetransitionforfinitesystems.Theircontributionservestohighlightthecontroversialandevolvingnatureofourphilosophicalunderstandingofphasetransitions,emergence,andreductionism.
JonathanBain'scontributiononEffectiveFieldTheorieslooksatseveralphysicalandmethodologicalconsequencesofthefactthatsometheoriesatlow-energyscalesareeffectivelyindependentof,ordecoupledfrom,theoriesdescribingsystemsathigherenergies.Sometimesweknowwhatthehigh-energytheorylookslike
-
Introduction
Page 4 of 8
andcanfollowarecipeforconstructinglow-energyeffectivetheoriesbysystematicallyeliminatinghigh-energyinteractionsthatareessentiallyunobservableatthelowerenergies.But,atothertimes,wesimplydonotknowthecorrecthigh-energytheory,yetnonetheless,westillcanhaveeffectivelow-energytheories.Broadlyconstrued,hydrodynamicsisanexampleofthelattertypeofeffectivetheory,ifweconsideritasanineteenthcenturytheoryconstructedbeforeweknewabouttheatomicconstitutionofmatter.Bain'sfocusisoneffectivetheoriesinquantumfieldtheoryandcondensedmatterphysics.Hisdiscussionconcentratesontheintertheoreticrelationsbetweenlow-energyeffectivetheoriesandtheirhigh-energycounterparts.Giventheeffectiveindependenceoftheformerfromthelatter,shouldonethinkofthisrelationasautonomousoremergent?Baincontendsthatananswertothisquestionisquitesubtleanddependsuponthetypeofrenormalizationschemeemployedinconstructingtheeffectivetheory.
Myowncontributiontothevolumeconcernsageneralprobleminphysicaltheorizing.Thisistheproblemofrelatingtheoriesormodelsofsystemsthatappearatwidelyseparatedscales.Ofcourse,therenormalizationgrouptheory(discussedbyKadanoff,MenonandCallender,andBaininthisvolume)isoneinstanceofbridgingacrossscales.Butmoregenerally,wemaytrytoaddresstherelationsbetweenfinitestatisticaltheoriesatatomicandnanoscalesandcontinuumtheoriesthatapplyatscales10+ordersofmagnitudehigher.Onecanask,forexample,whytheNavier-Cauchyequationsforisotropicelasticsolidsworksowelltodescribethebendingbehaviorofsteelbeamsatthemacroscale.Atthemicroscalethelatticestructureofironandcarbonatomslooksnothinglikethehomogeneousmacroscaletheory.Nevertheless,thelattertheoryisremarkablyrobustandsafe.Thechapterdiscussesstrategiesforupscalingfromtheoriesormodelsatsmallscalestothoseathigherscales.Itexaminesthephilosophicalconsequencesofhavingtoconsider,inone'smodelingpractice,structuresthatappearatscalesintermediatebetweenthemicroandthemacro.
Therehasbeenconsiderabledebateaboutthenatureofsymmetriesinphysicaltheories.Recentfocusongaugesymmetrieshasledphilosopherstoadeeperunderstandingoftheroleoflocalinvariancesinelectromagnetism,particlephysics,andthehuntfortheHiggsparticle.SorinBanguprovidesabroadandcomprehensivesurveyofconceptsofsymmetryandinvarianceinhiscontributiontothisvolume.OneofthemostseductivefeaturesofsymmetryconsiderationscomesoutofWigner'ssuggestionthatonemightbeabletounderstand,explain,orgroundlawsofnaturebyappealtoakindofsuperprincipleexpressingsymmetriesandinvariancesthatconstrainlawstohavetheformsthattheydo.Onthisconceptionsymmetriesare,perhaps,ontologicallyandepistemicallypriortolawsofnature.Thisraisesdeepquestionsforfurtherresearchontherelationshipbetweenformalmathematicalstructuresandourphysicalunderstandingoftheworld.
GordonBelotalsoconsidersissuesofsymmetryandinvariance.Hiscontributionexplorestheconnectionsbetweenbeingasymmetryofatheoryamapthatleavesinvariantcertainstructuresthatencodethelawsofthetheoryandwhatitisforsolutionstoatheorytobephysicallyequivalent.Itisfairlycommonplaceforphilosopherstoadopttheideathat,ineffect,thesetwonotionscoincide.Andiftheydo,thenwehavetightconnectionbetweenapurelyformalconceptionofthesymmetriesofatheoryandamethodological/interpretiveconceptionofwhatitisfortwosolutionstorepresentthesamephysicalstateofaffairs.Belotnotesthatinthecontextofspacetimetheoriesthereseemtobewell-establishedargumentssupportingthistightconnectionbetweensymmetriesandphysicalequivalence.However,heexploresthedifficultiesinattemptingtogeneralizethisconnectionincontextsthatincludeclassicaldynamicaltheories.Belotexaminesdifferentwaysonemightmakeprecisethenotionofthesymmetriesofaclassicaltheoryandshowsthattheydonotcomportwellwithreasonableconceptionsofphysicalequivalence.Thechallengetothereaderisthentofindappropriate,nontrivialnotionsofsymmetriesforclassicaltheoriesthatwillrespectreasonablenotionsofphysicalequivalence.
Yetanothertypeofsymmetry,permutationsymmetry,isthesubjectofthechapterbySimonSaunders,entitledIndistinguishability.Hefocusesontheproperunderstandingofparticleindistinguishabilityinclassicalstatisticalmechanicsandinquantumtheory.Intheclassicalcase,Gibbshadalready(priortoquantummechanics)recognizedaneedtotreatparticles,atleastsometimes,asindistinguishable.ThisisrelatedtotheinfamousGibbsparadoxthatSaundersdiscussesindetail.Theconceptofindistinguishabilityhadmeanwhileenteredphysicsinacompletelynewway,involvinganewkindofstatistics.ThiscamewiththederivationofPlanck'sspectraldistribution,inwhichPlanck'squantumofactionhfirstenteredphysics.Commonwisdomhaslongheldthatparticleindistinguisha-bilityisstrictlyaquantumconcept,inapplicabletotheclassicalrealm;andthatclassicalstatisticalmechanicsisanywayonlytheclassicallimitofaquantumtheory.Thisfitswiththestandardviewoftheexplanationofquantumstatistics(Bose-EinsteinorFermi-Diracstatistics):departuresfromclassical(Maxwell-
-
Introduction
Page 5 of 8
Boltzmann)statisticsareexplainedbyparticleindistinguishability.WiththisSaunderstakesissue.Heshowshowitispossibletotreatthestatisticalmechanicalstatisticsforclassicalparticlesasinvariantunderpermutationsymmetryinexactlythesamewaythatitistreatedinthequantumcase.Hearguesthattheconceptionofpermutationsymmetrydeservesaplacealongsidealltheothersymmetriesandinvariancesofphysicaltheories.Specifically,hearguesthattheconceptofindistinguishable,permutationinvariant,classicalparticlesiscoherentandreasonablecontrarytomanyclaimsfoundintheliterature.
MargaretMorrison'stopicisUnificationinPhysics.Shearguesthatthereareanumberofdistinctsensesofunificationinphysics,eachofwhichhasdifferentimplicationsforhowweviewunifiedtheoriesandphenomena.Ontheonehand,thereisatypeofunificationthatisachievedviareductionistprograms.HereaparadigmexampleistheunificationprovidedbyMaxwellianelectrodynamics.Maxwell'semphasisonmechanicalmodelsinhisearlyworkinvolvedtheintroductionofthedisplacementcurrent,whichwasnecessaryforafieldtheoreticrepresentationofthephenomena.Thesemodelsalsoenabledhimtoidentifytheluminiferousaetherwiththemediumoftransmissionofelectromagneticphenomena.Twoaetherswereessentiallyreducedtoone.Whenthesemodelswereabandonedinhislaterderivationofthefieldequations,thedisplacementcurrentprovidedtheunifyingparameterortheoreticalquantitythatallowedfortheidentificationofelectromagneticandopticalphenomenawithintheframeworkofasinglefieldtheoreticaccount.ThistypeofunificationwasanalogoustoNewton'sunificationofthemotionsoftheplanetsandterrestrialtrajectoriesunderthesame(gravitational)theoreticalframework.However,notallcasesofunificationareofthistype.Morrisondiscussestheexampleoftheelectroweaktheoryinsomedetail,arguingthatthisunificatorysuccessrepresentsakindofsynthetic,ratherthanreductive,unity.Theelectroweaktheoryalsoinvolvesaunifyingparameter,namely,theWeinbergangle.However,theunityachievedthroughgaugesymmetryisasynthesisofstructure,ratherthanofsubstance,asexemplifiedbythereductivecases.Finally,incallingattentiontothedifficultieswiththeStandardModelmoregenerally,Morrisonnotesthatyetadifferentkindofunificationisachievedintheframeworkofeffectivefieldtheory.Thisprovidesanothervantagepointfromwhichtounderstandtheimportanceoftherenormalizationgroup.Morrisonarguesforathirdtypeofunificationintermsoftheuniversalityclasses,onethatfocusesonunificationofphenomenabutshouldbeunderstoodindependentlyofthetypeofmicro-reductioncharacteristicofunifiedfieldtheoryapproaches.
Asnotedearlier,therecontinuestobesignificantresearchonfoundationalproblemsinquantummechanics.GuidoBacciagaluppi'schapterprovidesanup-to-datediscussionofworkontwodistinctproblemsinthefoundationsofquantummechanicsthataretypicallyconflatedintheliterature.Thesearetheproblemoftheclassicalregimeandthemeasurementproblem.Bothproblemsarisefromdeepissuesinvolvingentanglementandthefailureofanignoranceinterpretationofreducedquantumstates.Bacciagaluppiprovidesacontemporaryandthoroughintroductiontotheseissues.Theproblemoftheclassicalregimeisthatofprovidingaquantummechanicalexplanationoraccountofthesuccessofclassicalphysicsatthemacroscale.Itis,inessence,aproblemofintertheoreticrelations.Contemporaryworkhasconcentratedontheroleofenvironmentaldecoherenceintheemergenceofclassicalkineticsanddynamics.Bacciagaluppiarguesthatthesuccessofappealstodecoherencetosolvethisproblemwilldependuponone'sinterpretationofquantummechanics.Hesurveysanontologicallyminimalistinstrumentalinterpretationandastandard,ontologicallymorerobustorrealisticinterpretation.
ThemeasurementproblemisthedistinctproblemofderivingthecollapsepostulateandtheBornrulefromthefirstprinciples(Schrdingerevolution)ofthequantumtheory.Inexaminingthemeasurementproblem,Bacciagaluppiprovidesadetailedpresentationofamodern,realistictheoryofmeasurementthatgoesbeyondtheusualidealizeddiscussionsofspinmeasurementsusingStern-Gerlachmagnets.ThisdiscussiongeneralizestheusualcollapsepostulateandtheBornruletotakeintoaccountthefactthatrealmeasurementsareunsharp.Itdoessobyemployingtheapparatusofpositiveoperatorvalue(POV)measuresandobservables.Theupshotisthatthemeasurementproblemremainsarealworryforsomeonewhowantstomaintainastandard,reasonablyorthodoxinterpretationofquantumtheory.PerhapsEveretttheories,GRW-likespontaneouscollapsetheories,andsoonarerequiredforasolution.
TheEverett,orManyWorlds,interpretationofquantummechanicsisthesubjectofDavidWallace'schapter.Itiswellknownthatthelinearityofquantummechanicsleads,viatheprincipleofsuperposition,tothepossibilitythatmacroscopicobjectssuchascatscanbefoundinbizarrestatessuperpositionsofbeingaliveandbeingdead.Wallacearguesthataproperunderstandingofwhatquantummechanicsactuallysayswillenableustounderstandsuchbizarresituationsinawaythatdoesnotinvolvechangingthephysics(e.g.,asinBohmianhidden
-
Introduction
Page 6 of 8
variablemechanicsorGRWspontaneouscollapsetheories).Neither,heclaims,doesitinvolvechangingone'sphilosophyby,forexample,providinganoperationalistinterpretationthatimposessomespecialstatustotheobserverortowhatcountsasmeasurement,alongthelinesofBohr.Suchinterpretationsareatoddswithourunderstandingof,say,theroleoftheobserverintherestofscience.Wallacearguesforastraightforward,fullyrealistinterpretationofthebaremathematicalformalismofquantummechanicsandclaimsthatthisinterpretationwillmakesenseofsuperposedcats,andsoon,withoutchangingthetheoryandwithoutchangingouroverallviewofscience.ThestraightforwardrealistinterpretationthatistodoallofthisworkistheEverettinterpretation.Primafacie,thisclaimisitselfbizarre:afterall,theEverettinterpretationhasusmultiplyingworldsoruniversesuponmeasurements.Nevertheless,Wallacemakesastrongcasethatanunderstandingofsuperpositionasadescriptionofmultiplicity,ratherthanoftheindefinitenessofstates,isexactlywhatisneeded.Furthermore,thatisexactlywhattheEverettinterpretation(andnoother)provides.ThebulkofWallace'scontributionexaminesvariousproblemsthathavebeenraisedfortheEverettinterpretation.Inparticular,hefocuseson(1)theproblemofprovidingapreferredbasiswhatactuallyjustifiesourunderstandingofsuperpositionintermsofmultiplicityofworlds,and(2)theprobabilityproblemhowtounderstandtheprobabilisticnatureofquantummechanicsifonehasonlythefullydeterministicdynamicsprovidedbytheSchrdingerequation.HearguesthatthecontemporaryunderstandingoftheEverettinterpretationhastheresourcestoaddresstheseissues.
LauraRuetsche'schapterUnitaryEquivalenceandPhysicalEquivalenceinves-tigatesaquestionofdeepphysicalandphilosophicalimportance:Thedemandforcriteriaestablishingthephysicalequivalenceoftwoformulationsofaphysicaltheory.Inordinaryquantummechanicsthereceivedviewisthattwoquantumtheoriesarephysicallyequivalentjustincasetheyareunitarilyequivalent.Anypairoftheoriespurporting,say,todescribetwoentangledspin1/2systemsarereallyjustoneandthesamebecauseoftheJordanandWignertheoremshowingthatatheorythatrepresentsthecanonicalanticommutationrelationsforasystemofnspinsisuniqueuptounitaryequivalence.AsimilartheoremduetoStoneandvonNeumannguaranteesananalogousresultforanyHilbertspacerepresentationofthecanonicalcommutationrelationsforaHamiltoniansystem.Whataretheconsequencesofthebreakdownofunitaryequivalenceforthosequantumsystemsforwhichthesetheoremsfailtohold?Suchsystemsincludetheinfinitesystemsstudiedinquantumfieldtheory,quantumstatisticalmechanics,andevensimplerinfinitesystemslikeaninfiniteone-dimensionalchainofquantumspins.ShecallsthesetheoriescollectivelyQM .Theplethoraofunitarilyinequivalentrepresentationsintheseinfinitecasesdemandsthatwerevisitourassumptionsaboutphysicalequivalenceandthenatureofquantumtheories.Ruetscheexaminesvariouscompetingsuggestions,orcompetingprinciplesthatmayguidetheinvestigationintothisproblem.
Thenextchapter,byOliverPooley,providesanup-to-date,comprehensivediscussionofsubstantivalistandrelationalistapproachestospacetime.Crudely,thisisadebateabouttheontologyofourtheoriesofspaceandspacetime.Thesubstantivalistsholdthatamongthefundamentalobjectsoftheworldisspace-timeitself.Relationists,tothecontrary,denythatpropositionsaboutspacetimeareultimatelytobeunderstoodintermsofclaimsaboutmaterialobjectsandpossiblespatiotemporalrelationsthatmayobtainbetweenthem.Pooleypresentsahistoricalintroduction,aswellasadetaileddiscussionofthecurrentlandscapeintheliterature.Specifically,heconsidersrecentrelationist,neo-MachianproposalsbyBarbour,aswellasdynamicalapproachesfavoredbyBrown,andPooleyandBrown,thataimtoprovideareductiveaccountofthespacetimesymmetriesintermsofthedynamicalsymmetriesoflawsgoverningthebehaviorofmatter.Inaddition,Pooleyprovidesacurrentassessmentoftheimpactoftheso-calledHoleArgumentagainstsubstantivalism.
InGlobalSpacetimeStructureJohnManchakexaminesthequalitative,primarilytopologicalandcausal,aspectsofgeneralrelativity.Heprovidesanabstractclassificationofvariouslocalandglobalspacetimeproperties.Intheglobalcausalcontextheexplicitlydefinesasetofcausalconditionsthatformastricthierarchyofpossiblecasualpropertiesofspacetime.Thestrongestistheconditionofglobalhyperbolicity,whichimpliesothersincludingcausalityandchronology.Anothersetofglobalpropertiesofspacetimeconcernsinwhatsenseaspacetimecanbesaidtopossesssingularities.Herehefocusesonthenotionofgeodesicincompleteness.Manchakthentakesupphilosophicalquestionsconcerningthephysicalreasonablenessofthesevariousspacetimeproperties.Inalocalcontext,beingasolutiontoEinstein'sFieldEquationistypicallytakentobephysicallyreasonable.But,globalpropertiesconcerningtheexistenceandnatureofsingularitiesandthepossibilityoftimetravelleadtoopenquestionsofphilosophicalinterestthatarecurrentlybeinginvestigated.
Last,butnotleast,ChrisSmeenk'scontributionconcernsphilosophicalissuesraisedincontemporaryworkoncosmology.Acommonviewisthatcosmologyrequiresadistinctivemethodologybecausetheuniverse-as-a-
-
Introduction
Page 7 of 8
wholeisauniqueobject.Restrictionsonobservationalaccesstotheuniverseduetothefinitespeedoflightposeseverechallengestoestablishingglobalpropertiesoftheuniverse.Howcanweknowthatthelocalgeneralizationswetaketobelawfulinourlimitedregioncanbeextendedinaglobalfashion?Here,ofcourse,thereisoverlapwiththediscussionsofthepreviouschapter.Successesoftheso-calledStandardModelforcosmologyincludebig-bangnucleosynthesisandtheunderstandingofthecosmicbackgroundradiation,amongothers.ChallengestotheStandardModelresultfromgrowingevidencethatifitiscorrect,thenmostofthematterandenergypresentintheuniverseisnotwhatwewouldconsiderordinary.Instead,thereapparentlyneedstobedarkmatteranddarkenergy.Smeenkprovidesanoverviewofrecenthypothesesaboutdarkmatterandenergy,andrelatesthesediscussionstophilosophicaldebatesaboutunderdetermination.Adifferentkindofproblemarisesinassessingtheoriesregardingtheveryearlyuniverse.ThesetheoriesareoftenmotivatedbytheideathattheinitialstaterequiredbytheStandardModelishighlyimprobable.Thisdeficiencycanbeaddressedbyintroducingadynamicalphaseofevolution,suchasinflationarycosmology,thatalleviatesthisneedforaspecialinitialstate.Smeenknotesthatassessingthisresponsetofine-tuningisconnectedwithdebatesaboutexplanationandfoundationaldiscussionsregardingtime'sarrow.Oneveryimportantaspectofrecentworkincosmologyistheappealtoanthropicreasoningtohelpexplainfeaturesoftheearlyuniverse.Asecondrecentdevelopment,oftenrelatedtoanthropicconsiderations,isthemultiversehypothesistheexistenceofcausallyisolatedpocketuniverses.Thischapterbringsthesefascinatingissuestotheforeandraisesanumberofphilosophicalquestionsaboutthenatureofexplanationandconfirmationappropriateforcosmology.
Itismyhopethatreadersofthisvolumewillgainasenseofthewidevarietyofissuesthatconstitutethegeneralfieldofphilosophyofphysics.Thefocusofthefieldhasexpandedtremendouslyoverthelastthirtyyears.Newproblemshavecomeup,andoldproblemshavebeenrefocusedandrefined.Itisindeedmypleasuretothankalloftheauthorsfortheircontributions.Inaddition,IwouldliketothankPeterOhlinfromOxfordUniversityPress.Anumberofotherscontributedtothisprojectinvariousways.IamparticularlyindebtedtoGordonBelot,JuliaBursten,NicolasFillion,LauraRuetsche,ChrisSmeenk,andMarkWilsonforinvaluableadviceandsupport.
References
P.W.Anderson.Moreisdifferent.Science,177(4047):393396,1972.
OlivierDarrigol.WorldsofFlow:AHistoryofHydrodynamicsfromtheBernoullistoPrandtl.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,2005.
JohnEarman.APrimeronDeterminism.Reidel,Dordrecht,1986.
Notes:
(1)Darrigol'srecentWorldsofFlowfillsthislacunaprovidinganexceptionaldiscussionofthehistory(Darrigol2005).
RobertBattermanRobertBattermanisProfessorofPhilosophyatTheUniversityofPittsburgh.HeisaFellowoftheRoyalSocietyofCanada.Heistheauthorof_TheDevilintheDetails:AsymptoticReasoninginExplanation,Reduction,andEmergence_(Oxford,2002).Hisworkinphilosophyofphysicsfocusesprimarilyupontheareaofcondensedmatterbroadlyconstrued.Hisresearchinterestsincludethefoundationsofstatisticalphysics,dynamicalsystemsandchaos,asymptoticreasoning,mathematicalidealizations,thephilosophyofappliedmathematics,explanation,reduction,andemergence.
-
Page 1 of 22
ForaPhilosophyofHydrodynamicsOlivierDarrigolTheOxfordHandbookofPhilosophyofPhysicsEditedbyRobertBatterman
AbstractandKeywords
Thischapterdiscussestheneedforaphilosophyofhydrodynamicsandthelessonsthatcanbelearnedfromthehistoricaldevelopmentoffluidmechanics.Itexplainsthathydrodynamicshasbeennotgivenattentionbyphilosophersofphysicsbecauseofalackofdetailedhistoricalstudiesofhydrodynamics,andhighlightstheneedforidealizationsandmodelingstrategiesforthistheorytobeapplicable.Thechapteralsoconsidersthestructuresofphenomenologicaltheoriesandtheso-calledmodularstructureofhydrodynamics.
Keywords:hydrodynamics,fluidmechanics,philosophersofphysics,historicalstudies,idealizations,modelingstrategies,phenomenologicaltheories,modularstructure
Amongthemajortheoriesofphysics,hydrodynamicsisprobablytheonethathasreceivedtheleastattentionfromphilosophersofscience.Untilrecently,threecircumstanceseasilyexplainedthisneglect.First,therewasverylittlehistoricalliteratureonwhichphilosopherscouldrely.Second,philosopherstendedtofocusonfundamentaltheoriessuchasrelativitytheoryandquantumtheoryandtoneglectmorephenomenologicaltheories.Third,theyharboredaneo-Hempelianconceptofexplanationfollowingwhichthefoundationsofatheoryimplicitlycontainallitsexplanatoryapparatus. EvenThomasKuhn,whobroughtthenormalphasesofsciencetothefore,restrictedconceptualinnovationtotherevolutionaryphases. Sincethefundamentalequationsofhydrodynamicshaveremainedessentiallythesameforabouttwocenturies,thisviewreducesthedevelopmentofthistheorytoamatteroftechnicalprowessinsolvingtheequations.
Inrecentyearsthesethreecircumstanceshavelostmuchoftheirweight.Wenowhavefairlydetailedhistoriesofhydrodynamics. Thesuperiorityoffundamentaltheoriesoverlowerscaleorphenomenologicaltheorieshasbeenmultiplychallenged,bothwithinscienceandinthephilosophyofscience. Andtherehasbeenagrowingawarenessthatexplanationmostlyresidesindevicesthatarenotcontainedinthebarefoundationsofatheory.Forexample,MaryMorganandMargaretMorrisonhaveemphasizedtheroleofmodelsasmediatorsbetweentheoryandexperiment;JeffryRamseyhasarguedtheconceptualsignificanceofapproximationsandtransformationreductions;RobertBattermanhasmadeexplanationdependonstrategiesfortheeliminationofirrelevantdetailsinthefoundations;PaulHumphreyshasplacedcomputabilityatthecenterofhisassessmentofthenatureandvalueofscientificknowledge.EricWinsberghasshowntheimportanceofextratheoreticalconsiderationsinjudgingthevalidityofnumericalsimulationsbasedonthefundamentalequations.Alreadyin1983,IanHackingandC.W.F.Everitt,whoweremoreintouchwiththeactualpracticeofphysiciststhanaveragephilosophers,introducedtheoryarticulationorcalculationasanessentialsemanticbridgebetweentheoryandobservation.
Grantingthattheoryarticulationisasphilosophicallyimportantasthebuildingoffoundations,hydrodynamicsbecomesatopicofexceptionalphilosophicalinterestlargelybecauseofthehugetimespanbetweentheestablishmentofitsfoundationsanditssuccessfulapplicationtosomeofthemostpressingengineeringproblems.Thisdelayisanindirectproofofthecreativityneededtoexpandtheexplanatorypoweroftheories.Itenablesus
1
2
3
4
5
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 2 of 22
toobservearichsampleofthedevicesthroughwhichexplanatoryexpansionmayoccur.MargaretMorrison,MichaelHeidelberg,andMoritzEpplehaverecentlygivenphilosophicalstudiesoftwoofthesedevices:LudwigPrandtl'sboundary-layertheoryandhiswingtheory.Thepresentessayisconductedinthesamespirit.
Thefirstsectiongivesafewhistoricalexamplesofthemeansbywhichhydrodynamicsbecameapplicabletoagrowingnumberofconcretesituations.Thesecondprovidesatentativeclassificationofthesemeans.Thethirdcontainsadefinitionofphysicaltheoriesthatincludestheirevolvingexplanatoryapparatus.Specialemphasisisgiventoamodularstructureoftheoriesthatmakesthemmoreamenabletotests,comparisons,communication,andconstruction.
1.SomeHistory
Inthemid-eighteenthcentury,JeanleRondd'AlembertandLeonhardEulerformulatedthegenerallawsofmotionofanonviscousfluid.InEuler'sform,callingvthevelocityofthefluid,Pitspressure,itsdensity,andfanimpressedforcedensity,theselawsaregivenbytheequationofmotion
theequationofcontinuity,
andtheboundaryconditionthatthefluidvelocitynexttothewallsofarigidcontainershouldbeparalleltothesewalls.Ifthefluidhasafreesurfaceatwhichittouchesanotherfluid,theboundaryconditions(laterprovidedbyLagrange)aretheequalityofthepressuresofthetwofluids,andtheconditionthataparticleofthesurfaceofonefluidshouldremainonitssurface.
Euler'sderivationoftheequationoffluidmotionassumesthepressurebetweentwocontiguousfluidpartstobeperpendiculartotheseparatingsurface,asisthecaseinhydrostatics.In1822ClaudeLouisNavierimplicitlydroppedthisassumptionbycomparingtheinternalfluidforceswiththemolecularforcesofhisgeneraltheoryofelasticity.TheresultingequationofmotionistheNavier-Stokesequation
whichinvolvestheviscosity.Thisequationwasreinventedseveraltimes.Therewasmuchhesitationontheproperboundaryconditions,althoughin1845GeorgeGabrielStokescorrectlyarguedforavanishingrelativevelocityofthefluidnexttorigidbodies.
Fromamathematicalpointofview,themostevidentgoalofthetheoryistointegratetheequationsofmotionforanygiveninitialconditionsandboundaryconditions.Thereareatleastthreereasonsnottoconfinefluidmechanicstothisgoal:
1.Inthecaseofacompressiblefluid,thesystemofequationsisnotcompletebecauseoneneedstherelationbetweenpressureanddensity.Thisrelationimpliesthermodynamicconsiderations,andthereforeforcesustoleavethenarrowcontextoffluidmechanics.2.Itisgenerallyimpossibletosolvetheequationsbyanalyticalmeansbecauseoftheirnonlinearcharacter.Moreover,thefewrestrictedcasesinwhichthisispossiblemayhavelittleornoresemblancewithactualflowbecauseofinstabilities.Nowadays,numericalintegrationisoftenpossibleandis,indeed,sufficientforsomeengineeringproblems.Thisleadsustothethirdcaveat.3.Theanswertomostphysicalquestionsregardingfluidbehaviorisnottobefoundinthesolutionofspecificboundary-valueproblems.Rather,thephysicistisofteninterestedingenericpropertiesofclassesofsolutions.Inmathematicalterms,weneedtohaveahandleonthestructureofthespaceofsolutions.
Whatdophysicistsdowhenthesolutionofboundaryproblemsnolongerservestheirinterests?Inordertoanswerthisquestion,wewillconsultsomeofthehistoricalevolutionofhydrodynamics.
1.1Bernoulli'sLaw
6
7
8
9
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 3 of 22
Fromapracticalpointofview,themainresultthatEulercouldderivefromhisnewhydrodynamicswasthelaw
relatingthepressureP,thepositionr,andthevelocityvforthesteadymotionsofanincompressiblefluidthatadmitavelocitypotential(gistheaccelerationofgravity).Thisachievementmayseemmeagerforthefollowingreasons: thelawhadalreadybeenderivedbyDanielBernoulliinthe1730sasanapplicationoftheconservationofliveforce(energy)tosteady,parallel-slice,incompressiblefluidmotion;thelawrequiresanarrowspecializationofthetheory;oneaspectofthisspecialization,theexistenceofavelocitypotential,is(orwas)physicallyobscure(itsoriginalpurposewastosimplifytheequationsofmotionandtopermittheirintegration);underthisspecialization,thelawisastraightforwardmathematicalconsequenceofEuler'sequations.
Fromtheseremarks,onemightbetemptedtojudgethatBernoulli'slawaddsnothingsignificanttothefundamentalequationsofhydrodynamics.Yetthepracticeofphysicistsandengineerssuggeststhecontrary:Thislawisusedinmanycircumstances,surelymoreoftenthanEuler'sequationsthemselves.Thereareseveralgoodreasonsforthis:
(1)Bernoulli'slawrelateseasilyaccessibleparametersoffluidmotioninasimplemanner,withoutanyreferencetothesubtletiesoftheunderlyingdynamics;(2)itisrelatedtothegeneralprincipleofenergyconservation,whichbridgeshydrodynamicswithmechanics;(3)itprovidesthebasisforthehydraulicianslanguageofpressurehead,velocityhead,andgravityhead;and(4)thislanguageisstillusedwhenthelawisviolated.
Althoughthislastpointmayseemparadoxical,itillustratesahighlyimportantmodeofconceptformationinthepost-foundationallifeofatheory:thesolutionsofthegeneraltheoryarecharacterizedwithreferencetothesolutionsofamoreworkablespecializationofthistheory.Theconceptsengenderedbythespecializationthusenrichthelanguageofthegeneraltheory.Theyareusefulaslongasthelawisvalidinpartsoftheinvestigatedsystemandaslongasthelociofitsviolationsaresufficientlyunderstood.Intypicalhydraulicsystems,thereareregularpipesandreservoirsinwhichthelawapplieswithaknowncorrection(viscousorboundary-layerretardationinpipes)andtherearephenomenologicallyortheoreticallyknownlossesofheadwhensomeaccidents,suchaspipe-to-pipeconnectionsorsuddenenlargementsofthesectionofapipe,occur.
1.2SurfaceWaves
Historically,thesecondsuccessfulapplicationofEuler'sequationswastotheproblemofwaterwaves.Inthiscase,specializationisalsonecessary:thefluidistakentobeincompressibleandavelocitypotentialisassumed.Moreover,someapproximationsmustbeintroducedtocircumventthenonlinearityoftheequations.Inamemoirof1781,JosephLouisLagrangeoriginallyassumedwavesofsmallamplitudeandoflengthmuchlargerthanthedepthofthewater.Inthemid-1810s,SimonDenisPoissonandAugustinCauchydidwithoutthelatterapproximation.Theresultingdifferentialequationforthedeformationofthewatersurfaceislinear,anditadmitssine-wavesolutionswhosepropagationvelocitydependsonthewavelength.Atthis(first-order)approximation,onemayuseanautonomouslanguageofsinewavesthatisnolongerreminiscentoftheunderlyingfluiddynamicsandthatisequallyapplicabletootherkindsoflinearwaves.Alloneneedstoknowishowtocombine(superpose)varioussinewavesinordertoaccommodategiveninitialshapesorperturbationsofthewatersurface.Wehereencounterasecondcaseofbridgingofhydrodynamicswithothertheories:theintroductionofconceptsthatapplytosimilarmodesofmotionindifferenttheories(optics,hydrodynamics,acoustics).
Thisisnottosaythatalllinearwaveproblemsareunderstoodonceweknowthedispersionlaw(howthevelocityofasinewavedependsonitswavelength).Historically,mucheffortwasneededtounderstandthestructureofasuperpositionofsinewaves.Employingstrictlymathematicalmethods,PoissonandCauchyonlysucceededindescribingthewavecreatedbyastonethrownintoapond.JohnScottRussell(in1844)andWilliamFroude(in1873)laterobservedthatthefrontofagroupofwavestraveledatasmallervelocitythanindividualwavesinthegroup.In1876,Stokesgavethemoderntheoreticalexplanationintermsofphaseandgroupvelocity.Tenyearslater,WilliamThomson(LordKelvin)determinedtheformofshipwavesbyacleverapplicationoftheseconcepts.Onthephysicalsideofhisdeduction,hereliedontheopticalprincipleofinterference.Onthemathematicalside,
10
11
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 4 of 22
heinventedthemethodofthestationaryphase,whichisnowcommonlyusedinvariousdomainsofphysics.Again,wehaveacaseofconceptsandtoolsgeneratedinaregionofagiventheorybutultimatelyappliedtoregionsofmanyothertheories(byregion,Imeanarestrictionofthetheorytoalimitedclassofsystemsandboundaryconditions).Theseconceptswerepartlyderivedbyamathematicalprocessofspecializationandapproximation,partlybyobservation,partlybyanalogywithotherdomainsofphysics.
Similarremarksapplytothecaseofnonlinearwaves.GeorgeBiddellAiryandStokestamednonlinearperiodicwavesbysuccessiveapproximationstothefundamentalequations,withapplicationstooceanwavesandrivertides.Thiswasamostlymathematicalprocessofacumbersomebutfairlyautomaticnature.Incontrast,ScottRussellobservedsolitarywaves(isolatedswells)ofinvariableshapelongbeforetheoristsadmittedtheirpossibility.WhenJosephBoussinesqandLordRayleighatlastdeducedsuchwavesfromtheory,itbecameclearthatqualitativeresults(suchasthedeformationoftravelingwaves)derivedbyconsideringseparatelyasmall-depth(nondispersive)approximationandasmall-amplitude(linear)approximation,nolongerobtainedwhenthedepthandamplitudewerebothlarge.Thecompensationofthedispersiveandnonlinearcausesofdeformationforwavesofaproperlyselectedshapeisamechanismwhich,again,appliestomanyotherdomainsofphysics.
1.3VortexMotion
EarlyfluidmechanicsusuallyassumedtheexistenceofavelocitypotentialbecauseitgreatlysimplifiedthefundamentalequationsandalsobecauseLagrangehadshownthatitresultedfromtheequationsofmotionforalargeclassofboundaryconditions(motionstartedfromrestandcausedbymovingsolids).Anotherreason,emphasizedbyBritishfluidtheorists,wasthefactthatthevelocitypotentialofanincompressiblefluidobeysthesamedifferentialequation(Laplace'sequation)asthegravitational,electric,andmagneticpotentials.ThisformalanalogywasaconstantsourceofinspirationforStokes,Thomson,andJamesClerkMaxwell.Itpermittedanintuitivedemonstrationofsomebasictheoremsoftheabstractpotentialtheory,anditprovidedfluid-mechanicalanalogsofelectrostatic,electrokinetic,andmagnetostaticphenomena.
Figure1.1 Aportionofavortexfilament.Theproductofthevorticity(indicatedbythearrows)bythenormalsectionofthefilamentisaconstantalongthefilament.Itisalsoinvariableduringthemotionofthefluid.
Thegeneralcaseinwhichnovelocitypotentialexistswasjudgedintractableuntil1858whenHermannHelmholtzdiscoveredafewremarkabletheoremsthatpushedthiscasetotheforefrontofthetheory.AsCauchyandStokeshadearlierproved,theinfinitesimalevolutionofafluidelementcanberegardedasthesuperpositionofthreekindsofmotion:atranslationofthecenterofgravityoftheelement,adilationoftheelementalongthreemutuallyorthogonalaxes,andarotation.Formally,therotationperunittimeishalfthevector=vwhichhasthecomponents /y /zetc.Thisvector,nowcalledvorticity,vanishesifandonlyifthereexistsavelocitypotential(inaconnecteddomain).Thiskinematicanalysisofinfinitesimalfluidmotionispartoftheconceptualfurnitureofmodernfluidmechanics.Maxwellusedittodevelopthephysico-mathematicalconceptsofcurlanddivergencethatapplytoanyfieldtheory.Helmholtzreinventedittointerpretthenon-existenceofthevelocitypotentialandthevector=vgeometrically.
Helmholtzextendedthegeometricalinterpretationtothevorticityequation,
whichderivesfromEuler'sequationswhenthefluidisincompressible.Forthispurpose,hedefinedvortexfilamentsasthinbundlesoflineseverywheretangenttothevorticity,andtheintensityofafilamentastheproductofanormalsectionofthisfilamentbythevalueofthevorticityinthesection(seefigure1.1).Hethenshowedthattheintensityofafilamentwasaconstantalongafilamentandthatthevorticityequationwasequivalenttothestatementthatthevortexfilamentsmovedtogetherwiththefluidwithoutalteringtheirintensity.Thistheoremimpliesthatthedistributionofvorticityinaperfectliquidisinasenseinvariant:ittravelstogetherwiththefluidwithoutanyalteration.
12
13
z y
14
15
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 5 of 22
Inthislight,Helmholtzarguedthatthevorticityfield(astoday'sphysicistssay)betterrepresentedarbitraryflowsthanthevelocityfield:itsinvariantpropertiescompletelydeterminetherotationalcomponentoftheflow,whiletheirrotationalcomponentisruledbythetheoremsofpotentialtheory.Withthehelpofanelectromagneticanalogy,Helmholtzthendeterminedthevelocityfieldsassociatedwithsimpledistributionsofvorticity:straightvortexlines,vortexsheets,andvortexrings.Healsocalculatedtheinteractionsofvorticesandverifiedhispredictionsexperimentally.
ThevortexsheetsplayedanimportantroleinHelmholtz'slaterwritings.Theyaremathematicallyequivalenttoafiniteslideoffluidoverfluid,andtheyshouldoccur,accordingtoHelmholtz,wheneverafluidisforcedtopasstheedgeofanimmersedbody.Asanillustrationofthisprocess,Helmholtzgavetheformationofsmokejetswhenheblewthesmokeofacigarthroughhislips.Throughingeniousreasoning,heprovedtheinstabilityofthediscontinuitysurfacesorvortexsheets:anysmallbumponthemmustrollupspirally.Thismechanism,nowcalledHelmholtz-Kelvininstability,playsanimportantroleinmanyhydraulicandmeteorologicalphenomena,asHelmholtzhimselfforesaw.
Helmholtznotonlymeanttoimprovetheapplicabilityofhydrodynamicsbutalsotoequipthistheorywithanewmodeofdescriptionforfluidmotioninwhichvorticesanddiscontinuityweretheleadingstructuralfeatures.Theenormoussuccessofthisprojectinthelaterhistoryofhydrodynamicsissomewhatparadoxical,becauseHelmholtz'stheoremsonlyholdintheunrealisticcaseofaperfectliquid.ThephysicistsuseofthevorticityconceptinmuchmoregeneralsituationsiscomparabletothehydrauliciansuseoftheconceptofhydraulicheadinsituationsinwhichBernoulli'stheoremdoesnotapply.Insomecasesofvortexmotion,theeffectsofcompressibilityandviscositycanbeshowntobenegligible.Inallcases,onecantakeHelmholtz'stheoremsasareferenceandcorrectthemthroughtermsderivedfromtheNavier-Stokesequation,asVilhelmBjerknesdidinthelatenineteenthcentury.Asforthevortexsheets,wewillseeinamomentthatintheearlytwentiethcenturyLudwigPrandtlusedthemtoapproximatelydescribeimportantaspectsoffluidresistanceathighReynoldsnumber(lowviscosity).
Inthehistoricalexamplesdiscussedsofar,itbecameincreasinglydifficulttoproducetheneedednewconceptualapparatus.ThedegreeofdifficultycanbetakentobeproportionaltothetimeelapsedbetweentheinventionofEuler'sequationsandtheintroductionofthisapparatus.Forexample,Bernoulli'slawwaseasiesttoderive,asitonlyrequiresasimpleintegration.Butpuremathematicsdidnotsufficetodiscoverthelawsofwavepropagationonawatersurface.Someintuitionofinterferenceprocesses(borrowedfromoptics),andalsoafewexperimentalobservations(groupsofwaves,solitarywaves),wereinstrumental.Thediscoveryofthelawsofvortexmotionwasevenmoredifficult.Acenturyelapsedfromthetimewhend'AlembertandEulergavethevorticityequationtothetimewhenHelmholtzinterpreteditthroughhistheorem.Experimentsorobservationsdidnotbythemselvessuggestthisinterpretation,thoughHelmholtz'seffortswere,infact,partofaprojectforimprovingthetheoreticalunderstandingoforganpipes.Helmholtz'ssuccessprimarilydependedonhisabilitytocombinevariousheuristicdevicesincludingalgebraicmanipulationinthestyleofLagrange,geometricvisualizationinthestyleofThomsonandMaxwell,andafocusoninvariantquantitiesasexemplifiedinhisownworkonenergyconservation.
1.4Instabilities
ExactsolutionsofEuler'sorNavier'sequationsundergivenboundaryconditionsmaydifferwidelyfromtheflowobservedinaconcreterealizationoftheseconditions.Forinstance,theflowofwaterinapipeofrapidlyincreasingdiameterneverhasthesmooth,laminarcharacterofexactsteadysolutionsoftheNavier-Stokesequationinthiscase.AsStokesalreadysuspectedinthe1840s,thisdiscrepancyhastodowiththeinstabilityoftheexactsteadysolutions:anysmallperturbationofthesesolutionswillinducewidedeparturesfromtheoriginalmotion.Consequently,theknowledgeofexactsolutionsofthefundamentalequationsor(morerealistically)theknowledgeofsomefeaturesofthesesolutionsundergivenboundaryconditionsisnotsufficientforthepredictionofobservedflows.Onemustalsodeterminewhetherthesesolutionsorfeaturesarestable.
Inprinciplethisquestioncanbemathematicallydecided,byexamininghowaslightlyperturbedsolutionoftheequationsevolvesintime.Aswesaw,afirstsuccessinthisdirectionwasHelmholtz'spredictionofthespiralrollingupofabumponadiscontinuitysurface.Laterinthecentury,LordRayleighandLordKelvintreatedthemoredifficultproblemofthestabilityofplaneparallelflow.Theirresultswereonlypartial(Rayleigh'sinflectiontheoreminthenonviscouscase),orwrong(Kelvin'spredictionofstabilityfortheplanePoiseuilleflow).Mostofthesequestions
16
17
18
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 6 of 22
exceededthemathematicalcapacityofnineteenth-centurytheorists,andsomeofthemhaveremainedunresolvedtothisday.TheeffortsofRayleighandothersnonethelessyieldedageneralmethodandlanguageofperturbativestabilityanalysis.Rayleighlinearizedtheequationofevolutionoftheperturbation,andsoughtplane-wavesolutions.Thesesolutionsarepropermodeswhoseoscillatoryorgrowingcharacterdependsontherealorimaginarycharacterofthefrequency.Thisproper-modeanalysisofstabilitygoesbeyondhydrodynamics:itoriginatedinLagrange'scelestialmechanicsanditcanbefoundinmanyotherpartsofphysics.
Asthemathematicaldiscussionofstabilitywasnearlyasdifficultasthefindingofexactsolutionsofthefundamentalequations,themostimportantresultsinthisdomainwerereachedbyempiricalmeans.Plausibly,theobservedinstabilityofjetsmotivatedHelmholtz'sderivationoftheinstabilityofdiscontinuitysurfaces.Certainly,Tyndall'sobservationsofthiskindmotivatedRayleigh'scalculationsforparallelflow.Mostimportant,GotthilfHagen(1839)andOsborneReynolds(1883)discoveredthatpipeflow,foragivendiameterandagivenviscosity,suddenlychangeditscharacterfromlaminartoturbulentwhenthevelocitypassedacertaincriticalvalue.Thesharpnessofthistransitionwasasurprisetoalltheorists.FromReynoldstothepresent,attemptstomathematicallydeterminethecriticalvelocity(orReynoldsnumber)incylindricalpipeshavefailed.Thisisaquestionofacademicinterestonly,becauseunpredictableentranceeffects(thewaythefluidisintroducedintothepipe),nottheinherentinstabilityinapipeofinfinitelength,usuallydeterminethetransition.
Inthetwentiethcentury,significantprogresshasbeenmadeinunderstandingthetransitionfromlaminartoturbulentflow.Inthefirsthalfofthecentury,LudwigPrandtl,WalterTollmien,WernerHeisenberg,andChiaChiaoLinprovedtheinstabilityoftheplanePoiseuilleflowandunveiledthespatialperiodicityofthemechanismofthisinstability. Inthesecondhalfofthecentury,developmentsinthetheoryofdynamicalsystemsattheintersectionbetweenpuremathematics,meteorology,andhydrodynamicspermittedadetailedqualitativeunderstandingofthetransitiontoturbulence,withintermediateoscillatoryregimes,bifurcations,andstrangeattractors. Itremainstruethatmostofthepracticalapplicationsofhydrodynamicsonlyrequirearoughknowledgeoftheconditionsunderwhichturbulenceoccurs.Thesourceofthisknowledgeispartlytheoreticalandpartlyempirical.Thereisnoeasywaytogatheritfromthefundamentalequations.Inmostcases,thebestthatcanbedoneistorepeatReynolds'sroughargumentthatthefullvorticityequationhastwoterms,aviscoustermthattendstodampanyeddyingmotion,andaninertialtermwhichpreservestheglobalamountofvorticity.Thelaminarorturbulentcharacterofthemotiondependsontheratioofthesetwoterms,whoseorderofmagnitudeisgivenbytheReynoldsnumber.
1.5Turbulence
Thestateofmotionthatfollowstheturbulenttransitionisevenmoredifficulttoanalyzethanthetransitionitself.Casualobservationofturbulentflowrevealsitschaoticandmulti-scalecharacter.Thedetaileddescriptionofanymotionofthiskindseemstorequireahugeamountofinformation,muchmorethanishumanlyaccessible(withoutcomputersatleast).AsReynoldspondered,weareherefacingasituationsimilartothatofthekinetictheoryofgases:theeffectivedegreesoffreedomaretoonumeroustobehandledbyahumancalculator.Unfortunately,turbulentmotionismoreoftenencounteredinnatureandinmanmadehydraulicdevicesthanlaminarmotion.Engineersandphysicistshavehadtoinventwaysofcopingwiththisdifficulty.
Onestrategyistodesignthehydraulicoraeronauticartifactssothatturbulencedoesnotoccur.Whenturbulencecannotbeavoided,onemayadoptapurelyempiricalapproachandseekrelationsbetweenmeasuredquantitiesofinterest.Forinstance,nineteenth-centuryengineersgaveempiricallawsfortheretardation(lossofhead)inhydraulicpipes.Asecondapproachistofindrulesallowingthetransferoftheresultsofmeasurementsdoneatonescaletoanotherscale.Stokes,Helmholtz,andFroudepioneeredthisapproachinthecontextsofpendulumdamping,balloonsteering,andshipresistance,respectively.TheyderivedtheneededscalingrulesfromthescalingsymmetriesoftheNavier-Stokesequationoroftheunderlyingdynamicalprinciples.Thisisanexampleofahybridapproach,foundedpartlyonthefundamentalequations,andpartlyonmeasurementsoftheoreticallyunpredictableproperties.
Inathirdapproach,onemaycompletelyignorethefoundationsoffluidmechanicsandcookupamodelbasedonagrosslysimplifiedpictureoftheflow.Animportantexampleisthelawsforopenchannelflowdiscoveredinthe1830sand1840sbyafewFrenchPolytechnique-trainedengineers:JeanBaptisteBlanger,JeanVictorPoncelet,andGaspardCoriolis.Theyassumedtheflowtooccurthroughparallelslicesthatrubbedagainstthebottomofthechannelaccordingtoaphenomenologicalfrictionlaw,andtheyappliedmomentumorenergybalancetoeach
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 7 of 22
slice.
Inthe1840sAdhmarBarrdeSaint-Venantemphasizedthetumultuouscharacterofthefluidmotioninopenchannelflowandsuggestedadistinctionbetweenthelarge-scaleaveragemotionofthefluidandthesmaller-scaletumultuousmotion.Themaineffectofthelattermotionontheformer,Saint-Venantargued,wastoenhancemomentumexchangebetweensuccessive(large-scale)fluidlayers.Basedonthisintuition,hereplacedtheviscosityintheNavier-Stokesequationwithaneffectiveviscositythatdependedonvariousmacroscopiccircumstancessuchasthedistancefromawall.Inthe1870s,BoussinesqsolvedtheresultingequationforopenchannelsofsimplesectionandthusobtainedlawsthatresembledBlanger'sandCoriolis'slaws,withdifferentinterpretationsoftherelevantparameters.
In1895,Reynoldsreliedonanalogywiththekinetictheoryofgasestodevelopanexplicitlystatisticalapproachtoturbulentflow.InthespiritofMaxwell'skinetic-molecularderivationoftheNavier-Stokesequation,hederivedalarge-scaleequationoffluidmotionbyaveragingoverthesmall-scalemotionsgovernedbytheNavier-Stokesequation.Reynolds'sequationdependsontheReynoldsstress,whichdescribestheturbulentexchangebetweensuccessivemacrolayersofthefluid.LikeSaint-Venant'seffectiveviscosity,theReynoldsstresscannotbedeterminedwithoutfurtherassumptionsconcerningtheturbulentfluctuationaroundthelarge-scalemotion.Therehavebeenmanyattemptstofillthisgapinthetwentiethcentury.ThemostusefuloneswereKrmn'sandPrandtl'sderivationsofthelogarithmicvelocityprofileofaturbulentboundarylayer.Theassumptionsmadein(improved)versionsofthesederivationsaresimpleandnatural(uniformstress,matchingbetweentheturbulentlayerandalaminarsublayernexttothewall),andtheresultingprofilefitsexperimentsextremelywell(muchbetterthanearlierphenomenologicallaws).Thelogarithmicprofileisthebasisofeverymodernengineeringcalculationofretardationinpipesoropenchannels.
DespitepowerfulstudiesbyGeoffreyTaylor,AndreyNikolaevichKolmogorov,andmanyothers,theprecisemannerinwhichturbulencedistributesenergybetweendifferentscalesoffluidmotionremainsamystery. Thereisnodoubt,however,thatthegeneralideaofdescribingturbulentflowstatisticallyhasbeenfruitfulsinceitsfirstintimationsbySaint-Venant,Boussinesq,andReynolds.Inthecaseofturbulentfluidmechanics,asinstatisticalmechanics,anewconceptualstructureemergesatthemacroscaleofdescription.Similarquestionscanberaisedinbothcasesconcerningthenatureofthereductionoremergence.Doesthemicroscaletheorytrulyimplythemacroscalestructure?Isthisstructureuniquelydefined?Canthisstructurebeusedwithoutfurtherreferencetothemicroscale?Aretheresingularsituationsinwhichthereductionfails?Theanswerstothesequestionstendtobemorepositiveinthecaseofstatisticalmechanicsthaninthecaseofthestatisticaltheoryofturbulence,becausetherelevantstatisticsarebetterknownintheformerthaninthelattercase.
1.6BoundaryLayers
Fromapracticalpointofview,twooutstandingproblemsoffluidmechanicsarefluidresistanceandfluidretardation.Fluidresistanceisthedeceleratingforceexperiencedbyarigidbodymovingthroughafluid.Fluidretardationisthefallofpressureorlossofheadexperiencedbyafluidduringitstravelalongpipesorchannels.Thetwoproblemsarerelated,sincetheybothinvolvethemutualactionofafluidandanimmersedsolid.In1768,d'Alembertchallengedthesagaciousgeometerswiththeparadoxthatresistancevanishedforaperfectliquidinhisnewhydrodynamics.Therewerevariousstrategiestocircumventthistheoreticalfailure.Someengineersdeterminedbypurelyempiricalmeanshowtheresistancedependedonthevelocityandshapeoftheimmersedbody.OthersretreatedtoIsaacNewton'snavetheorybytheimpactoffluidparticlesonthefrontofthebody,althoughsomeconsequencesofthistheory(suchastheirrelevanceoftheshapeoftheendofthebody)hadalreadybeenrefuted.Inthemid-nineteenthcentury,Saint-Venant,Poncelet,andStokestracedresistancetoviscosityandtheproductionofeddies.Withthedampingofpendulumsinmind,StokessuccessfullydeterminedtheresistanceofsmallspheresandcylindersbyfindingsolutionstothelinearizedNavier-Stokesequation.Formostpracticalproblems,thelargersizeoftheimmersedbodyandthesmallnessoftheviscositiesofairandwaterimplythatthenonlineartermofthisequationcannotbeneglected(theReynoldsnumberistoohigh).Stokeshadnothingtosayinsuchcasesbeyondthequalitativeideaofdissipationbytheproductionofeddies.
25
26
27
28
29
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 8 of 22
Figure1.2 Discontinuitysurface(ee)formedwhenadownwardflowencountersthediskA.FromThomson(1894,220).
Intheidealcaseofvanishingviscosity,theproofofd'Alembert'sparadoximplicitlyassumesthecontinuityofthefluidmotion.However,Helmholtz'sstudyofvortexmotionimpliesthatfiniteslipoffluidoverfluidisperfectlycompatiblewithEuler'sequations.Around1870,KirchhoffandRayleighrealizedthatHelmholtz'sdiscontinuitysurfacesyieldedafiniteresistanceforanimmersedplate.AccordingtoHelmholtz,atubulardiscontinuitysurfaceisindeedproducedatthesharpedgesoftheplate.Thewaterbehindtheplateandwithinthissurfaceisstagnant,sothatitspressurevanishes(whenmeasuredinreferencetoitsuniformvalueatinfinitedistancesfromtheplate)(seefigure1.2).Sincethepressureatthefrontoftheplateispositive,thereisafiniteresistance,whichKirchhoffandRayleighdeterminedbyanalyticalmeans.Theresultroughlyagreedwiththemeasuredresistance.
Inthecaseofships,theresistanceproblemiscomplicatedbythefactthatshipsarenotsupposedtobecompletelyimmersed.Consequently,waveformationatthewatersurfaceisasignificantcontributiontotheresistance.Theleadingnineteenthcenturyexpertsonthisquestion,WilliamJohnMacquornRankineandWilliamFroude,distinguishedthreecausesofresistance:waveresistance,skinresistance,andeddyresistance.Skinresistancecorrespondstosomesortoffrictionofthewaterwhenittravelsalongthehull.Eddyresistancecorrespondstotheformationofeddiesatthesternoftheship;itisusuallyavoidedbyproperprofilingofthehull.RankineandFroudetracedskinresistancetotheformationofaneddyingfluidlayernexttothehull.Theyderivedthisnotionfromtheobservationthattheflowofwateraroundtheship,whenseenfromthedeck,appearstobesmootheverywhereexpectforanarrowtumultuouslayernexttothehullandforthewake.RankineassumedthevalidityofEuler'sequationsinthesmoothpartoftheflowandsolvedittodeterminethehullshapesthatminimizedwaveformation.Froudegaveafairlydetaileddescriptionofthemechanismofretardationintheeddyinglayer,althoughhewasnotabletodrawquantitativeconclusions.Intheend,Froudemeasuredskinfrictiononplates,totalresistanceonsmall-scaleshipmodels,andthenusedseparatescalinglawsforskinandwaveresistanceinordertodeterminetheresistanceofaprospectiveshiphull.
Figure1.3 Formationofadiscontinuitysurfacebehindacylinder.FromPrandtl(1905,57980).
Insum,RankineandFroudedistinguishedtwodifferentregionsofflowamenabletodifferenttheoreticalorsemi-empiricaltreatmentsandcombinedtheresultinginsightstodeterminethetotalresistance.FroudethusobtainedthefirstquantitativesuccessesintheproblemoffluidresistanceatahighReynoldsnumber.Althoughhisand Rank-ine'sconsiderationsappealedtohighertheoryinseveralmanners,theyalsorequiredconsiderableempirical input.
ThenextandmostfamousprogressinthehighReynolds-numberresistanceproblemoccurredinGttingen,undertheleadershipofLudwigPrandtl.ImpressedbythequalitativesuccessofHelmholtz'ssurfacesofdiscontinuity,PrandtlassumedthatthesolutionoftheNavier-Stokesequationforhigh-ReynoldsflowaroundabodysomewhatresembledasolutionofEuler'sequation(withstrictlyvanishingviscosity).Inthelattersolution,thefluidslidesalongthesurfaceofthebody,whereasforaviscousfluidtherelativevelocityofthefluidmustvanishatthesurfaceofthebody.Consequently,fortherealflowPrandtlassumedathin(invisible)layerofintenseshearthat
30
31
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Page 9 of 22
imitatedthefiniteslideoftheEuleriansolution.HealsoassumedthatinsomecasesthislayercouldshootoffthesurfaceofthebodytomimicaHelmholtziansurfaceofdiscontinuity(withitscharacteristicinstabilityresultinginaneddyingtrail).Thisistheso-calledseparationprocess.Outsidetheboundarylayer,PrandtlnaturallyappliedEuler'sequations.Withintheboundarylayer,theintenseshearallowedhimtouseanapproximationoftheNavier-Stokesequationthatcouldbeintegratedtodeterminetheevolutionofthevelocityprofilealongthebody.Forsufficientlycurvedbodies,Prandtlfoundthatatsomepointtheflowwasinvertedinthepartoftheboundarylayerclosesttothebody.Heinterpretedthispointastheseparationpointfromwhicha(quasi)discontinuitysurfacewasformed.Inthecaseofaflatorlittlecurvedsurface(forwhichseparationdoesnotoccur),hedeterminedtheresistancebyintegrationofthesheerstressalongthesurfaceofthebody.Heillustratedtheseparationprocessthroughexperimentsdonewithatankandapaddle-wheelmachine(figure1.3).
ComparisonwithFroude'searlierconceptofeddyinglayerleadstothefollowingremarks.UnlikeFroude,Prandtlwasabletodeterminetheoreticallyandpreciselytheflowwithintheboundarylayer.ThisdeterminationrequiresaprevioussolutionoftheEulerianflowproblemaroundthebody,becausetheevolutionoftheboundarylayerdependsonthepressureatitsconfines.Conversely,thisevolutionmayinduceseparation,whichnecessarilyaffectstheEulerianpartoftheflow.PrandtlhimselfemphasizedthisinteractionbetweentheEulerianflowandtheboundarylayer.WhereasFroudehadnointerestinseparation(whichshipbuilderssystematicallyavoided),Prandtlhadaprecisecriterionforitsoccurrence.WhereasFroudecouldonlymeasurethesheerstressoftheboundarylayer,Prandtlcoulddetermineittheoretically.
SofarthecomparisonseemstofavorPrandtl.Inreality,inmanycasesincludingshipresistance,theboundarylayerhasaninternalturbulencethatisnottakenintoaccountinPrandtl'soriginaltheory.In1913,Prandtl'sformerstudentHeinrichBlasiusfoundthatbeyondacertaincriticalReynoldsnumber,theedgewiseresistanceofaplateobeyedFroude'sempiricallawandnotPrandtl'stheoreticallaw.PrandtlexplainedthattheprofileofalaminarboundarylayercouldbecomeunstableandthusleadtoaturbulentboundarylayerlaFroude.HeusedthisnotiontoexplainthebizarrereductionoftheresistanceofspheresthatGustaveEiffelhadobservedatacertaincriticalvelocity:turbulenceinaboundarylayer,Prandtlexplained,delaystheseparationprocessandthussharplydecreasestheresistance.Paradoxically,itiswhentheboundarylayeristurbulentthattheglobalflowmostlyresemblesthesmoothEulerianflow.
Astheboundarylayersaroundairplanewingsareturbulent,Prandtlneededtoknowthesheerstressalongsuchlayersinordertodeterminethedragofthewings.Heoriginallyreliedonplateresistancemeasurements,asFroudehaddoneinthepast.Aswasalreadymentioned,itbecamepossibletocalculatethisstressinthe1830swhenKrmnandPrandtldiscoveredthelogarithmicvelocityprofileofturbulentlayers.
Itisnowtimetoreflectontherelationthatboundary-layertheoryhastothefoundationaltheoryofNavier-Stokes.Prandtl'sidea(ifwebelievehisownplausibleaccount)hasitstheoreticaloriginintheideaofusingsolutionstoEuler'sequationsasaguideforsolvingtheNavier-StokesequationatahighReynoldsnumber.Thisisonlyaheuristic,becausePrandtlhadnomathematicalproofthatthelow-viscositylimitofasolutionoftheNavier-StokesequationisasolutionofEuler'sequation.YetthemotionimaginedbyPrandtl,withitsEulerian,high-sheer,andstagnantregions,clearlyisanapproximatesolutionoftheNavier-Stokesequation.Whatismissingisaproofoftheuniquenessofthissolution(undergivenboundaryconditions),aswellasageneralproofofitsexistenceforanyshapeoftheimmersedbody.Withthisconcession,theboundary-layertheorycanlegitimatelyberegardedasanapproximationoftheNavier-Stokestheory.
Aninterestingfeatureoftheboundary-layertheoryisitsuseofdifferentapproximateequationsindifferentregionsoftheflow.OurdiscussionofBernoulli'slawshowedthatthislawisoftenusedregionally(i.e.,inlaminarregionsoftheflow)withheadlosseslocalizedinturbulentregions.Boundary-layertheorysimilarlyintroducesdifferentregionsofflow,althoughitdoessoinamoreinteractivemanner.Eachregionisdescribedthroughcomputablesolutionsofappropriateequationsofmotion,andthepreciseconditionsforthematchingoftheregionalsolutionsareknown(continuityofpressure,stress,andvelocity).Thesematchingconditionsimplycausalrelationsbetweenfeaturesofthetworegions:forinstance,thepressuredistributionintheEulerianregiondeterminestheevolutionofthevelocityprofileintheboundarylayer,andinthecaseofseparatedflow,thepositionoftheseparatingsurfaceaffectstheEulerianregion.
Inqualitativeapplications,Prandtl'stheorymayberestrictedtothegeneralideasofaboundarylayer,afreefluid,
32
33
34
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
andtheirinteractionsometimesleadingtoseparation.Inquantitativeengineeringapplications,thispicturemustbesupplementedwithalawfortheevolutionofthesheerstressalongaboundarylayer(laminarorturbulent),andwithquantitativecriteriaforseparationandforthetransitionbetweenlaminarandturbulentlayer.Grantedthatthissupplementaryinformationisavailable,thetheorycanbeusedwithoutreferencetotheNavier-Stokestheory.Thegaininpredictiveefficiencyisenormous,asverifiedbytheimmensesuccessofPrandtl'stheoryinengineeringapplications.Yetoneshouldnotforgetthatmuchofthesupplementaryinformationcomesfromtheintimateconnectionbetweentheboundary-layertheoryandtheNavier-Stokestheory.Infactthelegitimacyofthewholepicturedependsuponthisintimateconnection.Theboundary-layertheory,unliketheearlyFrenchmodelsofopenchannelflow,isnotanadhocmodelthatowesitssimplicitytocounterfactualassumptions.ItisalegitimatearticulationoftheNavier-Stokestheory.
2.ExplanatoryProgress
Theaboveexamplesmakeclearthatinthecourseofitshistory,hydrodynamicshasacquiredasophisticatedexplanatoryapparatuswithoutwhichitwouldremainmerelyapapertheory.Theexplanatoryapparatusispresentedinvariouschaptersinmoderntextbooks.Wewillnowreflectonthewaysthisapparatuswasobtained,onitscomponents,andonitsfunctions.
2.1TheSourcesofExplanatoryProgress
Insomecases,explanationwasimprovedthroughblindmathematicalmethods.Forinstance,asimpleintegrationyieldedBernoulli'slaw(afterproperspecialization),thesymmetriesoftheNavier-Stokesequationyieldedscalinglaws,andstandardapproximationproceduresyieldedthetheoryofwavesofsmallamplitude.Despitetherelativelyeasyandautomaticwayinwhichtheseresultswereobtained,theyconsiderablyimprovedtheexplanatorypowerofthetheorybydirectlyrelatingquantitiesofphysicalinterest.
Inothercases,moreintra-orintertheoreticalheuristicswasneeded.KinematicanalysisofthevorticityequationledtoHelmholtz'svortextheorems;asymptoticreasoningledtoPrandtl'snotionsoflaminarboundarylayerandseparation;scalingandmatchingargumentsledtothelogarithmicvelocityprofileofturbulentboundarylayers.Theseheuristicsrequiredanunusualamountofcreativity;theyinvolvedintuitionsboundtopersonalstylesofthinking.Suchintuitionsaretentativeandmayleadtoerroneousguesses.Forinstance,thegreatKelvinerredinhisstabilityanalysisofparallelflow.Arigorouscheckofthecompatibilityoftheconclusionswiththefundamentalequationsisalwaysneeded.
Instillothercases,observationsorexperimentssuggestednewconceptssuchasgroupvelocity,solitarywaves,thestabilityorinstabilityoflaminarflow,andturbulentboundarylayers.Theveryfactthatpuretheorywashistoricallyunabletoleadtotheseconcepts(andsometimesevenresistedtheirintroduction)showsthevanityofregardingthemasimplicitconsequencesofthefundamentalequations.Theyneverthelessbelongtofundamentalhydrodynamicsinasmuchastheircompatibilitywiththefundamentalequationscanbeverifiedaposteriori.
Lastly,theimpossibilityofsolvingthefundamentalequationandtheevidentcomplexityofobservedflowssometimesforcedengineersandevenphysiciststoarbitrarilyanddrasticallysimplifyaspectsoftheflow.Thishappenedforinstanceinearlymodelsofopenchannelflow.Thesemodelscannotbestrictlyregardedaspartsoffundamentalhydrodynamics,sincesomeoftheirassumptionscontradictbothobservedandtheoreticalpropertiesoftheflow.YettheirsuccesssuggestsaloosersortofrelationwiththeNavier-Stokestheory.Inthecaseofopen-channelflow,themodelscanbereinterpretedasre-parametrizationsofthetrueequationsfortheapproximate,large-scalemotionderivedfromturbulentsolutionsoftheNavier-Stokesequations.
Ineverycase,thetheoreticaldevelopmentsoccurredwithspecificapplicationsinmind:somekindofflowfrequentlyobservedinnatureneededtobeexplainedorthefunctioningofsomeinstrumentsordevicesneededtobeunderstood.Purelymathematicalmethodsbroadlyappliedtogeneralflowwereoflittleavail.Insightwasgainedasaresultofinvestigationdirectedatconcreteandrestrictedgoals.Thisiswhytheheroesofnineteenth-centuryandearlytwentieth-centuryfluidmechanicswereeithermathematicallyfluentengineersorphysicistswhohadafootintheengineeringworld.
35
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
2.2TheComponentsofExplanation
Afirstalleytowardbetterexplanationinvolvestherestrictionofthescopeofatheory.TheNavier-Stokesequations,regardedasthegeneralfoundationofhydrodynamics,canbespecializedinvariousways.Therearehomogeneousspecializationsoridealizationsinwhichtherestrictedchoiceofparametersandkindsofsystems(boundaryconditions)leadstomoretractableintegrationproblemsorsuccessfulstatisticalapproaches.TypicalexamplesareirrotationalEulerianflow,lowReynolds-numberflow,andfullyturbulentflow.Therearealsoheterogeneousspecializationsinwhichtherestrictionsonparametersandsystemsleadtoflowsthathavedifferentregions,eachofwhichdependsuponaspecificsimplificationoftheNavier-Stokesequations.Thisisthecaseforthehigh-ReynoldsresistanceproblemandtheairplanewingproblemaccordingtoPrandtl.Aswasalreadymentioned,successhererequirespropermatchingbetweenthedifferentregions.
Anotherexplanatoryresourceistheidentificationofinvariantstructuresofaflowbelongingtoagivenclass.ThemostimpressiveexampleofthissortisHelmholtz'sdemonstrationoftheconservationofvortexfilaments.Asthemindtendstofocusoninvariantaspectsofourenvironment,theidentificationofnewinvariantsoftenshapeourdescriptivelanguage.AsHelmholtzpredicted,thishas,infact,happenedinfluidmechanics:thevorticityfieldisnowoftenpreferredtothevelocityfieldasadescriptionofflow.
Third,insteadofseekingstructureinagivensolution,wemayattendtothestructureofthespaceofsolutionsofthefundamentalequationwhentheboundaryconditionsvary.Forinstance,wemayaskwhetherlaminarsolutionsaretypical,whethersmallperturbationsleadtodifferentsortsofsolutions:thisistheissueofstability.Wemayalsoaskwhethersomeclassesofsolutionsharecommonlarge-scalefeatures,aswedointhestatisticaltheoriesofturbulence.And,wemayaskwhethersomepropertiesorlawsaregenericinsomeregimeofflow:thisistheissueofuniversality,whichwebrieflytouchedwiththelogarithmicprofileofturbulentboundarylayers.
Lastly,explanationandunderstandingmaycomefromlinkinghydrodynamicstoothertheories.Wehaveencounteredafewexamplesofthiskind:potentialtheory,waveinterference,groupvelocity,solitarywaves,fieldkinematics,andproper-modeanalysisofstability.Inhalfofthesecases,conceptsofhydrodynamicoriginwerebroughttobearonothertheoriesandnotviceversa.Thecross-theoreticalsharingofconceptsnonethelessremainsatokenoftheirexplanatoryvalue.
2.3APragmaticDefinitionofExplanation
Aswasstatedabove,thegoaloffluidmechanicscannotbereducedtofindingintegralsofthefundamentalequationsthatsatisfygivenboundaryconditions.Thisisusuallyimpossiblebyanalyticalmeans,andmodernnumericalmeansrequireadifferentsimulationforeachchoiceintheinfinitevarietyofboundaryconditions.AsBatterman,Ramsey,andHeidelbergerhaveargued,barefoundationsdonotanswerthequestionsthattrulyinterestphysicistsandengineers.Practitionerswanttobeabletocharacterizeaphysicalsituationbyahumanlyaccessiblenumberofphysicalparametersandtopossessapictureofthesituationthatenablesthemtoderiverelationsbetweentheseparametersinareasonableamountoftime.Inotherwords,theyneedaconceptofexplanationthatintegratesourhumancapacityatrepresentingandintervening.AsBattermanemphasizes,thisrequiresmeansforeliminatingirrelevantdetailsinourdescriptionofsystems.Thisalsoimpliestheelaborationofadescriptivelanguage,theconceptsofwhichdirectlyrefertocontrollablefeaturesofthesystem.
Withthispragmaticdefinitionofexplanation,itbecomesclearthattheearlierdescribeddevelopmentsofhydrodynamicsservedthepurposeofincreasingtheexplanatorypowerofthetheory.Homogeneousspecializationsdosobyofferingadequateconceptsandmethodsforcertainkindsofflow.Heterogeneousspecializationsdosobycombiningtheformerspecializationstodescribeflowsthatoccurinproblemsofgreatpracticalimport.Theidentificationofinvariantstructuresforcertainclassesofmotionimprovestheeconomyoftherepresentation.Attentiontostructureinthespaceofsolutionsenablesustodecidetowhatextentsmallerdetailsofthemotionaffectthefeaturesofpracticalinterest,andtowhatextenttheireffectcanbesmoothedoutbysomeaveragingprocess.Intertheoreticallinksproducefamiliarconceptsthatcanindifferentlybeusedinvariousdomainsofphysics.
Inthislight,thepracticeofphysicshasmoresimilaritywithengineeringthanisusuallyassumed.Theremarkisnotuncommoninrecentwritingsinthephilosophyofscience.Forinstance,RamseyrevivesJ.J.Thomson'sold
36
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
characterizationoftheoriesastoolsforsolvingphysicsorengineeringproblems;EpplecomparestheformationofPrandtl'swingtheorytoanengineeringprocesscombiningmultipletheoreticalandexperimentalresources.Inthesescholarsview,theengineeronlydiffersfromthephysicistby(usually)notparticipatingintheinventionofthetheoriesandbyhismoresystematicappealtoextra-theoreticalcomponents.Physicistsandengineersnotonlysharethegoalofefficientintervention,theyalsosharesomeofthemeans.
RamseyandHeidelbergerinsistthatthearticulationoftheoriesimpliestheformationofnew,adequateconcepts.OnecouldevenarguethatthebareNavier-Stokestheoryhasnophysicalconcepts.Itharborsonlymathematicalconceptssuchasthevelocityfieldthatcorrespondtoanidealdescriptionoftheflow,ignoringmolecularstructureandpresumingindefiniteresolution.Aconcept,intheetymologicalsenseoftheword(concipioinLatin,orbegreifeninGerman),isamentalmeanstograspsomeconcreteobjectorsituation.Hydraulichead,vortices,wavegroups,solitarywaves,thelaminar-turbulenttransition,boundarylayers,separation,etc.areconceptsinthispracticalsense.ThedetailedvelocityfieldorthevarioustermsoftheNavier-Stokesequationarenot.WhatThomasKuhnoncebelittledasthemoppingupoftheoriesinthenormalphasesofsciencetrulyisconceptformation.
3.TheoriesAndModules
3.1DefiningPhysicalTheories
Oncewerecognizethecognitiveimpotenceofthebarefoundationsofatheory,weneedageneraldefinitionoftheorythatisnotlimitedtothefundamentalequationsandafewnaverulesofapplication.Thedefinitionmustallowforevolvingcomponents,sincethecognitiveefficiencyofanygoodtheoryalwaysincreasesintime.Itmustincludeexplanatorydevicesanditmustallowtheintertheoreticalconnectivityfoundinmaturetheories.Thefollowingisasketchofsuchanenricheddefinition.
Aphysicaltheoryisamathematicalconstructincluding:
(a)asymbolicuniverseinwhichsystems,states,transformations,andevolutionsaredefinedbymeansofvariousmagnitudesbasedonCartesianpowersofR(orC)andonderivedfunctionalspaces.(b)theoreticallawsthatrestrictthebehaviorofsystemsinthesymbolicuniverse.(c)interpretiveschemesthatrelatethesymbolicuniversetoidealizedexperiments.(d)methodsofapproximationandconsiderationsofstabilitythatenableustoderiveandjudgetheconsequencesthatthetheoreticallawshaveontheinterpretiveschemes.
Thesymbolicuniverseandthetheoreticallawsarepermanentlygiven.Theycorrespondtothefamilyofmodelsofthesemanticviewofphysicaltheories.Inthecaseofhydrodynamics,thesymbolicuniverseconsistsinthevelocity,pressure,anddensityfieldsforeachfluidofthesystem,intheboundariesofrigidbodiesthatmayormaynotmove,andinforcedensitiessuchasgravity.ThetheoreticallawsaretheNavier-Stokesequations,boundaryconditions,and(forcompressiblefluids)arelationbetweendensityandpressurethatmayinvolvemodularcouplingwiththermodynamics(wewillreturntothispoint).
Inthesemanticviewoftheories,theempiricalcontentofatheoryisdefinedbyanisomorphismbetweenpartsofthesymbolicuniverseandempiricaldata;althoughthemeansbywhichthisisomorphismisdeterminedareusuallyleftinthedark.Thenotionofaninterpretiveschemeisintendedtofillpartofthisgap.Bydefinitionaninterpretiveschemeconsistsinagivensystemofthesymbolicuniversetogetherwithalistofcharacteristicquantitiesthatsatisfythethreefollowingproperties.(1)Theyareselectedamongorderivedfromthe(symbolic)quantitiesthatdefinethestateofthissystem.(2)Atleastforsomeofthem,idealmeasuringproceduresareknown.(3)Thelawsofthesymbolicuniverseimplyrelationsofafunctionalorastatisticalnatureamongthem.Morespecifically,interpretiveschemesareblueprintsofconceivableexperimentswhoseoutcomesdependonlyonrelationsbetweenafinitesetofmutuallyrelatedquantities,asufficientnumberofwhicharemeasurable.Insomecases,theintendedexperimentsmaybedesignedtodeterminesometheoreticalparametersfromthemeasuredquantities.Inothercases,thetheoreticalparametersaregiven,andtheoreticalrelationsbetweenthemeasuredquantitiesareverified.Inallcases,theinterpretiveschemesdonotcontainrigidlinguisticconnectionsbetweentheoreticaltermsandphysicalquantities;theirconcreteimplementationisanalogical,historical,andsubjecttorevisions.
37
38
39
40
-
For a Philosophy of Hydrodynamics
Theintroductionofinterpretiveschemesimpliesaselectionofsystemsandquantitiesfromtheinfinitevarietyofelementsinthesymbolicuniverseofthetheory.Thisselectioncanevolvedramaticallywiththenumberandnatureoftheimaginedapplicationsofthetheory.Thetwomainclassesofinterpretiveschemesofearlyhydrodynamicswerethepiercedvessel,inwhichtheeffluxofwaterisrelatedtotheheightofthewatersurface;andtheresistanceschemeinwhichasolidbodyimmersedinastreamofwaterexperiencesaforcerelatedtothevelocityofthestream.Anotherinterestingscheme,Bernoulli'spipeofvariablesection,impliedpressuremeasurementthroughverticalcolumnsofwater.Asampleoflaterschemesincludesthedeterminationofthevelocityofsurfacewavesasafunctionofdepthandwavelength,thevisualizedmotionofvorticesasafunctionoftheirrelativeconfiguration,thevisualizedlinesofflowaroundanimmersedbodyasafunctionoftheasym