Misconceptions on Effective Field Theories and spontaneous symmetry breaking: Response to Ellis' article

Abstract

In an earlier paper~\cite{Luu:2019jmb} we discussed emergence from the context of effective field theories, particularly as related to the fields of particle and nuclear physics. We argued on the side of reductionism and weak emergence. George Ellis has critiqued our exposition in~\cite{Ellis:2020vij}, and here we provide our response to his critiques. Many of his critiques are based on incorrect assumptions related to the formalism of effective field theories and we attempt to correct these issues here. We also comment on other statements made in his paper. Important to note is that our response is to his critiques made in archive versions arXiv:2004.13591v1-5 [physics.hist-ph]. That is, versions 1-5 of this archive post. Version 6 has similar content as versions 1-5, but versions 7-9 are seemingly a different paper altogether (even with a different title).

15 pages, link in abstract corrected

References in corpus (8)

• Topological Field Theory of Time-Reversal Invariant Insulators
• Measurement of the permanent electric dipole moment of the neutron
• Unraveling models of CP violation through electric dipole moments of light nuclei
• The Born-Oppenheimer approximation in an effective field theory language
• Standard Model Gauging of the WZW Term: Anomalies, Global Currents and pseudo-Chern-Simons Interactions
• Two-Hole Bound States from a Systematic Low-Energy Effective Field Theory for Magnons and Holes in an Antiferromagnet
• Precision calculation of the axion-nucleon coupling in chiral perturbation theory
• Fractional quantum Hall effect in a relativistic field theory