|< Forum >|
|< Definition >|
|< Abstracts for the Meetings Held by the Physical Society >|
|< JPS 2005 Autumn Meeting >|
Features of the World at Grammar Levels
Uda's Special School / Yuichi Uda
The phrase 'features of the world at grammar level' was coined by me.
In some cases I use this phrase to mean how Nature that is the real world is, and in some other cases I also use it to mean a specific methodology of physics.
I call the methodology grammatism.
The word 'bunpoushugi' (Japanese translation of 'grammatism'), too, was coined by me.
Now here I propose researches, defined by these words, as a new research area 'features of the world at grammar level' in physics.
This proposal is so epoch-making that it is worth marking the World Year of Physics.
This new area should be located at the top of theoretical physics that is before elementary particles theory, or it should be located at the position translated from theoretical physics to the same direction and the same distance as theoretical physics is from experimental physics.
With my proposal as a turning point, the center of fundamental physics from now on should be shifted gradually to 'features of the world at grammar level'.
'At grammar level' indicates forms of theories, and roughly speaking it indicates what we adopt as a coordinate system, and especially it indicates what we adopt as the domain of definition of the coordinate system.
A coordinate system which I say is a mapping which maps a mathematical notion onto a history of an object system, and it is different from the term 'coordinate system' being used ordinarily.
A coordinate system of the ordinary meaning is a constituent of some coordinate system of my meaning.
Exactly speaking, grammatism is not restricted even to assuming that a physical theory is a set of a coordinate system and some equations (some physical laws), and it contains considering forms of physical theories as freely as possible.
Transition from quantum mechanics to quantum field theory and proposal of string theory are at grammar level, but they are not beyond the scope of the grammar of quantum theory fundamentally and they are nothing more than proposals of new models within the scope of the grammar of quantum theory.
Why can we say that the grammar is a feature of Nature?
Because, for example, the essence of quantum theory is change of grammar from classical theory.
Most people say that physical law governing micro world is called quantum theory and is different from the law of classical physics extracted from daily phenomenon.
But, strictly speaking, the difference is in grammar rather than in law.
Nature has a feature that it can be described with the grammar of quantum theory but can not be described with the grammar of classical theory.
In this sense, the grammar is a feature of Nature.
The central issue of grammatism is, at present, to invent new grammars beyond one of quantum theory and to invent new grammars in place of field form grammar without escaping to new model such as string.
Since Einstein appeared, physicists have proposed new theories more freely than before he appeared.
But, all what they did were limited to proposals of new models within the framework of the grammar of quantum theory.
With my proposal as a turning point, physicists on and after the World Year of Physics should get unfettered to propose new grammars as well in my name.
This article is a rewrite of the following article.
JPS 2005 Autumn Meeting@Abstracts for the Meetings Held by the Physical Society@Definition of Grammatical Physics@Grammatical Physics@Forum@Vintage(2008-2014)
|Author Yuichi Uda, Write start at 2015/05/25/18:28JST, Last edit at 2015/05/25/18:29JST|