<p>In the description of his own paper <a href="http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/lamport/pubs/pubs.html#interprocess">"On Interprocess Communication" [Distributed Computing 1, 2 (1986), 77-101]</a>, Leslie Lamport wrote</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Most computer scientists regard synchronization problems, such as the mutual exclusion problem, to be problems of <em>mathematics</em>. How can you use one class of mathematical objects, like atomic reads and writes, to implement some other mathematical object, like a mutual exclusion algorithm? I have always regarded synchronization problems to be problems of <em>physics</em>.  How do you use physical objects, like registers, to achieve physical goals, like not having two processes active at the same time?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>My question is on the mutual exclusion problem particularly.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>What is the significance of regarding the mutual exclusion problem as a problem of physics? More specifically,  </p>
  
  <ol>
  <li>What are the differences between the mathematical perspective and the physical one on the mutual exclusion problem?</li>
  <li>What inspirations and results have been gained directly from the physical perspective?</li>
  </ol>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-08-11T17:23:13.320Z
What is the difference between physics and mathematics?
babou
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-08-11T21:38:18.050Z
I think the best we can do here is guess what Leslie meant. My guess is that the difference implied is that "Is this a good model of reality?" is a physical and not a mathematical question. Registers with atomic reads and writes may not be physically realizable, or may be expensive to realize, which motivates studying non-atomic registers.
Sasho Nikolov
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-08-12T03:12:08.890Z
@SashoNikolov I agree with you that the transition from atomic registers to non-atomic ones is essential. When I read Leslie's papers on mutual exclusion, I am often impressed by his references to wires and signals in the hardware level.
hengxin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-08-12T03:24:32.047Z
@babou Hard to answer it (at least for me). I think the answer from `Sasho Nikolov` is useful.
hengxin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-08-12T22:11:29.670Z
The immediate physical analogue that I could think of such an isolation in space and time is the [cluster decomposition principle][1] in quantum field theory (and thus all of physics). 
  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_decomposition_theorem
Kaveh Khodjasteh
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-08-13T04:42:23.167Z
@KavehKhodjasteh The "cluster decomposition principle" is totally beyond me. How is it related to the physical perspective on mutual exclusion? What made you think of this analogue?
hengxin
<soft-question><dc.distributed-comp><concurrency>
What is the significance of regarding the mutual exclusion problem as a problem of physics?
hengxin
# What is the significance of regarding the mutual exclusion problem as a problem of physics?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-08-09)

In the description of his own paper ["On Interprocess Communication" [Distributed Computing 1, 2 (1986), 77-101]](http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/lamport/pubs/pubs.html#interprocess), Leslie Lamport wrote

> Most computer scientists regard synchronization problems, such as the mutual exclusion problem, to be problems of *mathematics*. How can you use one class of mathematical objects, like atomic reads and writes, to implement some other mathematical object, like a mutual exclusion algorithm? I have always regarded synchronization problems to be problems of *physics*. How do you use physical objects, like registers, to achieve physical goals, like not having two processes active at the same time?

My question is on the mutual exclusion problem particularly.

> What is the significance of regarding the mutual exclusion problem as a problem of physics? More specifically,
>
> 1. What are the differences between the mathematical perspective and the physical one on the mutual exclusion problem?
> 2. What inspirations and results have been gained directly from the physical perspective?

**Tags:** soft-question, dc.distributed-comp, concurrency
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: What is the difference between physics and mathematics?  
> **username_2**: I think the best we can do here is guess what Leslie meant. My guess is that the difference implied is that "Is this a good model of reality?" is a physical and not a mathematical question. Registers with atomic reads and writes may not be physically realizable, or may be expensive to realize, which motivates studying non-atomic registers.  
> **username_0**: @SashoNikolov I agree with you that the transition from atomic registers to non-atomic ones is essential. When I read Leslie's papers on mutual exclusion, I am often impressed by his references to wires and signals in the hardware level.  
> **username_0**: @babou Hard to answer it (at least for me). I think the answer from `Sasho Nikolov` is useful.  
> **username_3**: The immediate physical analogue that I could think of such an isolation in space and time is the [cluster decomposition principle][1] in quantum field theory (and thus all of physics).    [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_decomposition_theorem  
> **username_0**: @KavehKhodjasteh The "cluster decomposition principle" is totally beyond me. How is it related to the physical perspective on mutual exclusion? What made you think of this analogue?  

---

## 0 answers

