Now, for someone who wants to describe the universe using symbols.
Let's say I describe some phenomena up-to some approximation. I use some symbols to do this. For example consider the ideal gas equation. I have density, pressure and temperature. These are my macroscopic variables. What does density mean: well it means number of particles in a volume. I zoom in, further, a particle is an excitation in a field and so on ... Now, at some point one wonders if the "zooming in" ever ends? Since which each zoom in there seems to be different set of symbols for that description and then one worries about infinite regress.
So far there seems to be 2 obvious options:
- There is an infinite regress of symbols.
- There is a fundamental description beyond which no more symbols are required.
But I think with the rise of Quantum Field theory there is a third option on the table.
- If your theory is renormalizable then, whatever the ultimate description of reality is, it is irrelevant to the phenomena you are describing. A simple example is described here in classical mechanics where the shape of the potential doesn't really matter as long as it is "extremely steep."
What is this third position known as in philosophy? And where can I read more on this?