Standard

Universality caused : The case of renormalization group explanation. / Sullivan, Emily.

In: European Journal for Philosophy of Science, Vol. 9, No. 3, 36, 2019, p. 1-21.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Harvard

Sullivan, E 2019, 'Universality caused: The case of renormalization group explanation' European Journal for Philosophy of Science, vol. 9, no. 3, 36, pp. 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-019-0260-x

APA

Vancouver

Author

Sullivan, Emily. / Universality caused : The case of renormalization group explanation. In: European Journal for Philosophy of Science. 2019 ; Vol. 9, No. 3. pp. 1-21.

BibTeX

@article{782e30f9b4f24364b6552c84bae2188c,
title = "Universality caused: The case of renormalization group explanation",
abstract = "Recently, many have argued that there are certain kinds of abstract mathematical explanations that are noncausal. In particular, the irrelevancy approach suggests that abstracting away irrelevant causal details can leave us with a noncausal explanation. In this paper, I argue that the common example of Renormalization Group (RG) explanations of universality used to motivate the irrelevancy approach deserves more critical attention. I argue that the reasons given by those who hold up RG as noncausal do not stand up to critical scrutiny. As a result, the irrelevancy approach and the line between casual and noncausal explanation deserves more scrutiny.",
keywords = "Abstraction, Causal explanation, Critical phenomena, Non-causal explanation, Renormalization group, Universality",
author = "Emily Sullivan",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1007/s13194-019-0260-x",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "1--21",
journal = "European Journal for Philosophy of Science",
issn = "1879-4912",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Universality caused

T2 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science

AU - Sullivan, Emily

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Recently, many have argued that there are certain kinds of abstract mathematical explanations that are noncausal. In particular, the irrelevancy approach suggests that abstracting away irrelevant causal details can leave us with a noncausal explanation. In this paper, I argue that the common example of Renormalization Group (RG) explanations of universality used to motivate the irrelevancy approach deserves more critical attention. I argue that the reasons given by those who hold up RG as noncausal do not stand up to critical scrutiny. As a result, the irrelevancy approach and the line between casual and noncausal explanation deserves more scrutiny.

AB - Recently, many have argued that there are certain kinds of abstract mathematical explanations that are noncausal. In particular, the irrelevancy approach suggests that abstracting away irrelevant causal details can leave us with a noncausal explanation. In this paper, I argue that the common example of Renormalization Group (RG) explanations of universality used to motivate the irrelevancy approach deserves more critical attention. I argue that the reasons given by those who hold up RG as noncausal do not stand up to critical scrutiny. As a result, the irrelevancy approach and the line between casual and noncausal explanation deserves more scrutiny.

KW - Abstraction

KW - Causal explanation

KW - Critical phenomena

KW - Non-causal explanation

KW - Renormalization group

KW - Universality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068118800&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s13194-019-0260-x

DO - 10.1007/s13194-019-0260-x

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 1

EP - 21

JO - European Journal for Philosophy of Science

JF - European Journal for Philosophy of Science

SN - 1879-4912

IS - 3

M1 - 36

ER -

ID: 55452764