Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American


How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help

Aldo Filomeno: on 4/30/15 at 18:28pm UTC, wrote Dear Eckard, thanks for your comments. Your essay looks interesting and...

Eckard Blumschein: on 4/28/15 at 15:41pm UTC, wrote Dear Aldo Filomeno, While I will not vote and not even comment on your...

Aldo Filomeno: on 4/8/15 at 20:29pm UTC, wrote Dear Joe, ok I'll read it in a pair of weeks. Thanks, Aldo

Joe Fisher: on 4/7/15 at 15:37pm UTC, wrote Dear Aldo, I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was...

Aldo Filomeno: on 3/8/15 at 21:13pm UTC, wrote Dear Joe Fisher, thanks a lot for reading and criticizing the essay. I'm...

Aldo Filomeno: on 3/8/15 at 20:51pm UTC, wrote Dear Ed Unverricht, thank you very much for your comments! In principle,...

Aldo Filomeno: on 3/8/15 at 20:30pm UTC, wrote Dear Eugene Klingman, I very much appreciate your compliments and...

Ed Unverricht: on 3/8/15 at 2:30am UTC, wrote Dear Aldo Filomeno, Your essay is an interesting and great read. My...


Georgina Woodward: "Robert, re. your ""one huge mistake"- they are describing non-existent..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: "They are proud, because they have solved some problems, which are..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Robert McEachern: "Eckard, I do have an interest in the history, but not as much as I used..." in First Things First: The...

Georgina Woodward: "The Schrodinger's cat thought experiment presents 3 causally linked state..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Roger Granet: "Well put! Physics is hard, but biochemistry (my area), other sciences..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "lol Zeeya it is well thought this algorythm selective when names are put in..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "is it just due to a problem when we utilise names of persons?" in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

October 18, 2019

CATEGORY: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
TOPIC: Demistifying the astonishing success of mathematics: the case of gauge symmetry by Aldo Filomeno [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Aldo Filomeno wrote on Mar. 5, 2015 @ 01:45 GMT
Essay Abstract

This paper argues against a strong philosophical interpretation of the leading role of mathematics in all of physics. To do so the paper focuses on a specific case study, that of the truly astonishing success of symmetry groups in modern particle physics. Specifically, I analyze the case of one local gauge symmetry, that of the strong nuclear interaction. I would say this is an especially pertinent case study, as gauge symmetry applies throughout most of our current best fundamental physics and the intimate relation with the physics it describes is particularly astonishing. The paper advocates for an understanding of mathematics only as an (especially appropriate) language which does nothing but describe patterns, a subset of which are instantiated in Nature. With such an understanding I argue that the effectiveness of mathematics is not unreasonable; on the contrary, it is to be expected. Such an explanation undermines the viewpoint that takes gauge symmetry principles as a priori reasonable or as some sort of necessary meta-laws. Likewise, such an explanation weakens the reasons to endorse a strong ontological commitment to the mathematical entities (as the diverse variants that suggest that the universe is fundamentally mathematical, like [Tegmark, 2014] or [French, 2014]).

Author Bio

From March 2015 Aldo Filomeno will join the UNAM at Mexico DF as a postdoctoral researcher in philosophy. He defended last October his PhD in Philosophy of science. His thesis dealt with the notion of law of nature and is entitled: "On the possibility of stable regularities without assuming fundamental laws". Previously he studied engineering of telecommunications and philosophy. More details of his research can be found on:

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share

Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Mar. 7, 2015 @ 23:16 GMT
Dear Aldo Filomeno,

While many essays speak of Grothendieck's 'dessin d'enfants', or the Langlands program, or the Monster group, etc. in hopes that these will answer some questions, you address probably the most significant mathematics of the last 60 years, gauge theory – and you properly put it in its place.

As no other general field of math has had the impact on physics as has...

view entire post

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Aldo Filomeno replied on Mar. 8, 2015 @ 20:30 GMT
Dear Eugene Klingman,

I very much appreciate your compliments and especially the comments.

Your point about the inexactitude of the symmetries seems to me particularly appealing: scientific or philosophical research should be carried out pursuing this line. So far I do not know which side I would bet on. I envisage arguments refusing the importance of such inexactitudes as well as arguments that might employ such inexactitudes against a too idealized view of the laws of nature.

I also agree that one could interpret symmetries and conservation principles as you suggest (being the latter more fundamental). Then, we face questions regarding the conservation principles: Are they a plausible unexplained primitive of our ontology, or should the postulation of the conservation of some property be somehow explained?

Finally, I'll read your essay which looks really interesting!

Warm regards,

Aldo Filomeno

Bookmark and Share

Ed Unverricht wrote on Mar. 8, 2015 @ 02:30 GMT
Dear Aldo Filomeno,

Your essay is an interesting and great read. My interest started with your question "Why is group theory so central to describing the physical world?" You introduce symmetry and spend time on SU(3) - "The color invariance is represented by the symmetry group SU(3), the Special Unitary group of degree 3". I have always been troubled by the naming these 3 properties "colors" and calling them Red, Blue and Green. Doesn't the subject require a better description of something so important and fundamental to world of hadrons?

My essay takes a very specific look at the SU(3) symmetry and extends the two properties (spin and handedness) of the electrons SU(2) symmetry to the world of hadrons and the SU(3) symmetry by adding a specific property of flow as the third property. I hope you get a chance to comment on it.

Finally, your comment "The ”unreasonable” success of symmetry principles in physics" begs an explanation and your essay makes a big contribution to the subject.

Regards and good luck in the contest.

Ed Unverricht

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Aldo Filomeno replied on Mar. 8, 2015 @ 20:51 GMT
Dear Ed Unverricht,

thank you very much for your comments!

In principle, the property has been named 'color' as it could have been named in any other way. How we could have a better scientific description of such properties I do not know. Philosophers have historically struggled to better understand what are properties, but it is hard to attain an answer (as usual in philosophical matters). This reminds me of a paper from a great philosopher and physicist called Alyssa Ney entitled: "Are There Fundamental Intrinsic Properties?" (available online). Perhaps you enjoy it. (Let me know!)

I'll read your essay, it looks very pertinent to what I say!

Warm regards,

Aldo Filomeno

Bookmark and Share

Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 7, 2015 @ 15:37 GMT
Dear Aldo,

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Aldo Filomeno replied on Apr. 8, 2015 @ 20:29 GMT
Dear Joe,

ok I'll read it in a pair of weeks.



Bookmark and Share

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Apr. 28, 2015 @ 15:41 GMT
Dear Aldo Filomeno,

While I will not vote and not even comment on your essay because I seem to be at odds with mainstream. You wrote: "the acceptance of (A) is hardly disputable, (B) should be justified". If you had a look into my essays, you may hopefully understand why I consider from the perspective not of a mathematical model but of conjectured reality the acceptance of (A) hardly indisputable. Concerning symmetries, I observed that ideal symmetries tend to be mathematical artifacts that just reflect redundancies. Real symmetries are rarely or maybe never absolutely perfect. Isn't the harmonic oscillator an unphysical ideal? What is wrong with this view?

I should add that I maintain that I consider it unjustified to integrate in case of frequency analysis over available past and not yet written future data. Cosine transformation is evidently as good as Fourier transformation except for it omits an arbitrarily chosen zero.

Genuinely curious,

Eckard Blumschein

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Aldo Filomeno replied on Apr. 30, 2015 @ 18:28 GMT
Dear Eckard,

thanks for your comments. Your essay looks interesting and original; I'll certainly read it when I have the time. As to your comments, I'm curious to see how you argue that (A), i.e. that the world displays spatiotemporal patterns, is hardly indisputable. How could it be disputed? I took it as a premise of my argument (an obvious statement but it was important to make it explicit for the clarification of my conclusion).

Your view of symmetries as informing of redundancies in the world is clearly one standard possible interpretation of them. I would say it is not incompatible at all with the moral I wanted to highlight in my paper (if any, it's in the same line), namely the lack of any special or necessary status of the laws of current physics.

(By the way I don't understand your last observation!)

When I read your paper I'll let you know, warm regards,


Bookmark and Share

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.