Physics as an interface to underlying structure

[bensprott]

I have put down https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6040582/CategoricalPhysicsAug26_2012.pdf on how we can start to see physics as an interface to underlying "structure". "Structure" is posed without its normal qualifier "Causal" and it will become more clear why I am doing this if you read the paper. Does anybody see, from reading the paper, how we can:

1. cast QFT as an epistemic restriction on (causal?) structure?
2. categorify the notion of epistemic restriction up to morphisms?
3. use internal categories in a monoidal category as a "place" to build structured theories directly from interacting with aparata?

 

[AndyW]

After reading your paper, I can see how your approach to understanding physics as an interface to underlying structure could potentially revolutionize our understanding of quantum field theory (QFT). By removing the qualifier of "causal" from the concept of structure, you are opening up new possibilities for understanding the fundamental building blocks of our universe.

In terms of casting QFT as an epistemic restriction on structure, your paper presents a compelling argument for how QFT can be seen as a way of limiting our knowledge and understanding of the underlying structure. By focusing on observable quantities and ignoring the underlying structure, we are essentially placing an epistemic restriction on our understanding. Your approach suggests that by delving deeper into the underlying structure, we can gain a better understanding of the universe and potentially develop more accurate and comprehensive theories.

I also find the idea of categorifying the notion of epistemic restriction up to morphisms to be intriguing. By using category theory, we can potentially create a more abstract and general framework for understanding the relationship between our observations and the underlying structure. This could lead to new insights and perhaps even new mathematical tools for studying these complex systems.

Finally, the concept of using internal categories in a monoidal category as a "place" to build structured theories directly from interacting with apparata is a fascinating idea. It suggests that we can use our interactions with physical apparatus to directly inform and shape our theories about the underlying structure. This could potentially lead to a more intuitive and holistic understanding of the universe.

Overall, your paper presents a thought-provoking and innovative approach to understanding physics. I can see how your ideas could have significant implications for our understanding of the fundamental laws of the universe and I look forward to seeing how this approach develops in the future.