[Paper Review] On the Philosophical Foundations of Physics: An Experimentalist's Perspective

S. P. Boughn|arXiv (Cornell University)|May 17, 2019

Quantum Mechanics and Applications45 references4 citations

TL;DR

This paper presents a pragmatic philosophical framework for fundamental physics, grounded in the author's experimentalist background. It argues that interpretational problems in quantum mechanics and relativity can be addressed through a focus on empirical adequacy and operational consistency rather than metaphysical speculation, offering a coherent, flexible worldview for foundational physics inquiry.

ABSTRACT

Since I first became enthralled with physics as a teenager, I've been intrigued by the philosophical aspects of the discipline. As I approached the end of my career as an experimental physicist and observational astronomer (I'm now retired), I decided to return to these philosophical matters, some of which were still perturbing me, to see if I could finally make enough sense of them to quiet my discomfort. I've more or less succeeded in this quest in large part, I believe, because of my experimentalist background and a concomitant proclivity for pragmatic explanation. My purpose in this essay is to sketch a pragmatic worldview with which one might be able to approach fundamental philosophical and interpretational problems. You might ask how I can possibly expect to say anything meaningful in the less than 50 pages of the present essay? On the other hand, it might be an advantage to avoid the depth and precision that would limit flexibility in dealing with the philosophical conundrums I seek to resolve. In any case, I here offer my thoughts on the philosophical foundations of physics.

Motivation & Objective

• To resolve long-standing philosophical tensions in physics through a pragmatic worldview informed by experimental practice.
• To address interpretational challenges in quantum mechanics and relativity without relying on speculative metaphysics.
• To provide a flexible, empirically grounded framework for understanding foundational issues in physics.
• To quiet lingering philosophical discomfort by anchoring interpretation in experimental reality and operational procedures.
• To demonstrate that a non-technical, pragmatic approach can yield meaningful insights into deep foundational problems.

Proposed method

• Adopting a first-person, reflective narrative grounded in decades of experimental physics experience.
• Focusing on operational definitions and empirical adequacy as primary criteria for theoretical legitimacy.
• Rejecting metaphysical interpretations in favor of explanations that align with measurable, repeatable experimental outcomes.
• Using historical and conceptual analysis of key physics theories to identify recurring philosophical tensions.
• Constructing a worldview that prioritizes consistency with experimental data over abstract philosophical coherence.
• Emphasizing the role of the experimentalist’s perspective in resolving interpretational ambiguities in foundational physics.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How can a pragmatic, experimentalist-oriented worldview resolve enduring philosophical problems in quantum mechanics and relativity?
• RQ2 What role does empirical adequacy play in evaluating foundational interpretations of physics?
• RQ3 Why do traditional metaphysical approaches to foundational physics fail to resolve interpretational tensions?
• RQ4 Can a non-technical, experience-based framework provide a coherent foundation for physics without invoking speculative metaphysics?
• RQ5 How does the experimentalist’s perspective differ from and improve upon purely theoretical or philosophical approaches to foundational physics?

Key findings

• The author concludes that philosophical discomfort in physics arises not from conceptual flaws in the theories, but from overreliance on metaphysical interpretations detached from experimental practice.
• A pragmatic worldview centered on operational consistency and empirical adequacy provides a more coherent and flexible foundation than metaphysical speculation.
• The paper demonstrates that many foundational puzzles in quantum mechanics and relativity stem from interpretational overreach rather than from the theories themselves.
• By grounding interpretation in experimental procedures and measurable outcomes, the framework avoids the pitfalls of metaphysical entanglement.
• The author finds that his experimentalist background uniquely equips him to resolve foundational issues by prioritizing what can be observed and tested.
• The essay succeeds in quieting long-standing philosophical discomfort by reorienting foundational inquiry toward empirical practice and operational clarity.