The philosophical problems of implementing superselection rules

TL;DR

This paper examines the philosophical issues surrounding the implementation of superselection rules in quantum mechanics, arguing against their adoption due to heuristic and epistemological concerns.

Contribution

It provides a philosophical critique of superselection rules, advocating for modifying theoretical formulations instead of imposing these rules.

Findings

Superselection rules involve significant heuristic concerns.

Implementing these rules raises epistemological issues.

Philosophical reasons support rejecting superselection rules.

Abstract

Some physicists believe that superselection rules should be implemented to get rid of inconsistencies when a theory is framed in terms of a new mathematical formulation, whilst others think that this new formulation should be modified instead of implementing those rules, at the expense of introducing additional mathematical structure. The outcome, however, is that we are still uncertain whether these rules should be implemented and how they should be interpreted and assessed from the philosophical point of view. Based on a detailed examination of the group-theoretic reformulation of (relativistic and non-relativistic) quantum mechanics that prompts physicists to impose superselection rules, I shall argue that the implementation of these rules involves serious heuristic and epistemological concerns. Considering this argument, I shall conclude that there are suitable philosophical reasons to claim that the implementation of superselection rules should be rejected and that there are certain circumstances when the formulation of a theory should be modified.