Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-h4f6x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-31T15:11:13.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Curie’s Truism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

John D. Norton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Curie’s principle asserts that every symmetry of a cause manifests as a symmetry of the effect. It can be formulated as a tautology that is vacuous until it is instantiated. However, instantiation requires us to know the correct way to map causal terminology onto the terms of a science. Causal metaphysics has failed to provide a unique, correct way to carry out the mapping. Thus, successful or unsuccessful instantiation merely reflects our freedom of choice in the mapping.

Information

Type
Curie’s Principle
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 83 , Issue 5 , December 2016 , pp. 1014 - 1026
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

I thank my co-symposiasts, Elena Castellani, Jenann Ismael, and Bryan Roberts, for stimulating discussion.

References

Belot, Gordon. 2003. “Notes on Symmetries.” In Brading and Castellani 2003, 393–412.Google Scholar
Brading, Katherine, and Castellani, Elena, eds. 2003. Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brading, Katherine, and Castellani, Elena, eds 2013. “Symmetry and Symmetry Breaking.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/symmetry-breaking/.Google Scholar
Castellani, Elena. 2003. “On the Meaning of Symmetry Breaking.” In Brading and Castellani 2003, 321–34.Google Scholar
Chalmers, Alan F. 1970. “Curie’s Principle.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 21:133–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curie, Pierre. 1894. “Sur la symétrie dans les phénomènes physiques, Symétrie d’ un champ électrique et d’un champ magnétique.” Journal de Physique, 3rd ser., 3:393–417. In Oeuvres de Pierre Curie, 118–41. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar
Earman, John. 2004. “Curie’s Principle and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 18:173–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ismael, Jenann. 1997. “Curie’s Principle.” Synthese 110:167–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, Norihiro, and Nagahama, Hiroyuki, 2000. “Curie Symmetry Principle: Does It Constrain the Analysis of Structural Geology?” Forma 15:87–94.Google Scholar
Norton, John D. 2003. “Causation as Folk Science.” Philosophers’ Imprint 3 (4): 1–22.. http://www.philosophersimprint.org/003004/.Google Scholar
Norton, John D. 2007. “Do the Causal Principles of Modern Physics Contradict Causal Anti-fundamentalism?” In Thinking about Causes: From Greek Philosophy to Modern Physics, ed. Machamer, P. K. and Wolters, G., 222–34. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Wolters, G. 2009. “Is There an Independent Principle of Causality in Physics?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60:475–86.Google Scholar
Wolters, G. 2010. “There Are No Universal Rules for Induction.” Philosophy of Science 77:765–77.Google Scholar
Roberts, Bryan W. 2013. “The Simple Failure of Curie’s Principle.” Philosophy of Science 80:579–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, Bas C. 1989. Laws and Symmetry. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar