Constraints and divergent assessments of fertility in non-empirical physics in the history of the string theory controversy.

This paper examines historic appraisals of string theory to develop a less abstract understanding of the string theory controversy and assessment in non-empirical physics. This historical approach reveals several points of conflict in the controversy, each centring on a constraint. By proceeding stepwise through these constraints, I reveal the role that constraints played in determining divergent assessments of string theory. Rather than disagreement between two competing methods, a level of agreement is found amongst those critical and supportive of string theory as to the commitment to the relevant constraints, but disagreement as to the sufficiency of consistency, the path to background independence and a non-perturbative formulation, and how to interpret the significance of applications. Furthermore, the string theory community itself is shown to be divided in its commitment to the necessity of uniqueness and the legitimacy of anthropic reasoning. These varied assessments, guided by considerations of constraints, have informed divergent claims as to the past and future fertility of string theory. These are claims as to the value of string theory in guiding research in quantum gravity: claims as to whether string theory has and will be valuable as a means rather than an end.

How uncertainty can save measurement from circularity and holism.

Measurement results depend upon assumptions, and some of those assumptions are theoretical in character. This paper examines particle physics measurements in which a measurement result depends upon a type of assumption for which that very same result may be evidentially relevant, thus raising a worry about potential circularity in argumentation. We demonstrate how the practice of evaluating measurement uncertainty serves to render any such evidential circularity epistemically benign. Our analysis shows how the evaluation and deployment of uncertainty evaluation constitutes an in practice solution to a particular form of Duhemian underdetermination that improves upon Duhem's vague notion of "good sense," avoids holism, and reconciles theory dependence of measurement with piecemeal hypothesis testing.

Creativity and modelling the measurement process of the Higgs self-coupling at the LHC and HL-LHC.

This paper provides an account of the nature of creativity in high-energy physics experiments through an integrated historical and philosophical study of the current and planned attempts to measure the self-coupling of the Higgs boson by two experimental collaborations (ATLAS and CMS) at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the planned High Luminosity Large Hadron Collider (HL-LHC). A notion of creativity is first identified broadly as an increase in the epistemic value of a measurement outcome from an unexpected transformation, and narrowly as a condition for knowledge of the measurement of the self-coupling of the Higgs. Drawing upon Tal's model-based epistemology of measurement (2012) this paper shows how without change to 'readings' (or 'instrument indicators') a transformation to the model of the measurement process can increase the epistemic value of the measurement outcome. Such transformations are attributed to the creativity of the experimental collaboration. Creativity, in this context, is both a product, a creative and improved model, and the distributed collaborative process of transformation to the model of the measurement process. For the case of the planned measurements at the HL-LHC, where models of the measurement process perform the epistemic function of prediction, creativity is included in the models of the measurement process, both as projected quantified creativity and as an assumed property of the future collaborations.

'Crackpots' and 'active researchers': The controversy over links between arXiv and the scientific blogosphere.

Controversies over string theory (collectively termed the 'string wars') intensified in 2005. Also in that year, the open-access preprint publisher arXiv instituted a new feature called a 'trackback'. This new feature enabled authors of blog posts discussing a paper on arXiv to leave a trackback (a link) to the post on the paper's abstract page on arXiv. The determination of which specific bloggers would have access to the feature generated a public controversy that was played out in the blogosphere. Although the community was in almost unanimous agreement that so-called 'crackpots' should not have access to the trackback feature, it was unable to reach a consensus as to how to define a 'crackpot' or an 'active researcher'. Blogs may provide a window into science in the making, yet this study shows that blogs confound categorization as permanent or ephemeral scholarly communication. The trackback feature was originally conceived to develop certain blog discourse as an alternative or complementary form of peer review. However, the high-energy physics community as a whole questions the ongoing function of the blog.