Deep Beauty: Understanding the Quantum World through Mathematical Innovation

by Hans Halvorson (Editor)

No scientific theory has caused more puzzlement and confusion than quantum theory. Physics is supposed to help us to understand the world, but quantum theory makes it seem a very strange place. This book is about how mathematical innovation can help us gain deeper insight into the structure of the physical world. Chapters by top researchers in the mathematical foundations of physics explore new ideas, especially novel mathematical concepts, at the cutting edge of future physics. These creative developments in mathematics may catalyze the advances that enable us to understand our current physical theories, especially quantum theory. The authors bring diverse perspectives, unified only by the attempt to introduce fresh concepts that will open up new vistas in our understanding of future physics.

Genres: Mathematics, Physics

486 pages, Hardcover

First published March 31, 2011

About the author

The Stuart Professor of Philosophy at Princeton University, Dr. Halvorson's research interests include category theory, logic, philosophy of science, philosophy of physics, and the interplay of science and religion.

In 2001, he received a PhD in Philosophy from the University of Pittsburgh, where he also earned an MA in Mathematics (1998) and an MA in Philosophy (1997). He graduated from Calvin College in 1995 with a BA in Philosophy.

Academic appointments:
2016- Stuart Professor of Philosophy, Princeton
2010-16 full professor: Princeton philosophy
2012 associated faculty: Princeton mathematics
2005-10 associate professor: Princeton philosophy
2001-05 assistant professor: Princeton philosophy

Reviews

[Drew]

I've read the first chapter and have read some of the papers leading up to this book over the last -- 10 years or so?

You can get at the text online pretty well, if you are confortable reading from a browser.

If you come from a heavy computer science kind of background, this book promises to be satisfying ... that folks are moving away from early 20th century metamathematics towards something that looks a lot more like the objects and methods of our world. That is sad for folks in certain "cottage industries" (see http://scholar.google.com/citations?v...), but promises to wake up moribund speculation, at least a little.