Ritson Sophie
University of Sydney, Australia.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2021 Dec;90:39-49. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.08.016. Epub 2021 Sep 20.
This paper examines historic appraisals of string theory to develop a less abstract understanding of the string theory controversy and assessment in non-empirical physics. This historical approach reveals several points of conflict in the controversy, each centring on a constraint. By proceeding stepwise through these constraints, I reveal the role that constraints played in determining divergent assessments of string theory. Rather than disagreement between two competing methods, a level of agreement is found amongst those critical and supportive of string theory as to the commitment to the relevant constraints, but disagreement as to the sufficiency of consistency, the path to background independence and a non-perturbative formulation, and how to interpret the significance of applications. Furthermore, the string theory community itself is shown to be divided in its commitment to the necessity of uniqueness and the legitimacy of anthropic reasoning. These varied assessments, guided by considerations of constraints, have informed divergent claims as to the past and future fertility of string theory. These are claims as to the value of string theory in guiding research in quantum gravity: claims as to whether string theory has and will be valuable as a means rather than an end.
本文考察了弦理论的历史评价，以对弦理论在非经验性物理学中的争议和评估形成一种不那么抽象的理解。这种历史方法揭示了争议中的几个冲突点，每个冲突点都围绕着一个约束条件。通过逐步梳理这些约束条件，我揭示了约束条件在决定对弦理论的不同评估中所起的作用。在对弦理论持批评态度和支持态度的人之间，并非存在两种相互竞争方法的分歧，而是在对相关约束条件的坚持上有一定程度的共识，但在一致性的充分性、实现背景独立性和非微扰表述的途径以及如何解释应用的意义等方面存在分歧。此外，弦理论界本身在对唯一性必要性的坚持和人择推理的合法性上也存在分歧。这些受约束条件考量所引导的不同评估，为关于弦理论过去和未来的丰富性的不同主张提供了依据。这些主张涉及弦理论在指导量子引力研究方面的价值：即弦理论作为一种手段而非目的是否具有以及将是否具有价值的主张。
