Related categories
Siblings:
38 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Frank Arntenius & Cian Dorr (2012). Calculus as Geometry. In Frank Arntzenius (ed.), Space, Time and Stuff. Oxford University Press.
    We attempt to extend the nominalistic project initiated in Hartry Field's Science Without Numbers to modern physical theories based in differential geometry.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. David J. Baker (2005). Spacetime Substantivalism and Einstein's Cosmological Constant. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1299-1311.
    I offer a novel argument for spacetime substantivalism: We should take the spacetime of general relativity to be a substance because of its active role in gravitational causation. As a clear example of this causal behavior I offer the cosmological constant, a term in the most general form of the Einstein field equations which causes free floating objects to accelerate apart. This acceleration cannot, I claim, be causally explained except by reference to spacetime itself.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Gordon Belot, Some Background to the Absolute-Relational Debate.
    Some notes discussing some of the ancient and medieval background to the absolute-relational debate.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jiri Benovsky (2011). The Relationist and Substantivalist Theories of Time: Foes or Friends? European Journal of Philosophy 19 (4):491-506.
    Abstract: There are two traditionally rival views about the nature of time: substantivalism that takes time to be a substance that exists independently of events located in it, and relationism that takes time to be constructed out of events. In this paper, first, I want to make some progress with respect to the debate between these two views, and I do this mainly by examining the strategies they use to face the possibilities of ‘empty time’ and ‘time without change’. As (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Katherine A. Brading & Elena Castellani (eds.) (2003). Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections. Cambridge University Press.
    Highlighting main issues and controversies, this book brings together current philosophical discussions of symmetry in physics to provide an introduction to the subject for physicists and philosophers. The contributors cover all the fundamental symmetries of modern physics, such as CPT and permutation symmetry, as well as discussing symmetry-breaking and general interpretational issues. Classic texts are followed by new review articles and shorter commentaries for each topic. Suitable for courses on the foundations of physics, philosophy of physics and philosophy of science, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Carolyn Brighouse (1999). Incongruent Counterparts and Modal Relationism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (1):53 – 68.
    Kant's argument from incongruent counterparts for substantival space is examined; it is concluded that the argument has no force against a relationist. The argument does suggest that a relationist cannot give an account of enantiomorphism, incongruent counterparts and orientability. The prospects for a relationist account of these notions are assessed, and it is found that they are good provided the relationist is some kind of modal relationist. An illustration and interpretation of these modal commitments is given.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Carolyn Brighouse (1994). Spacetime and Holes. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:117 - 125.
    John Earman and John Norton have argued that substantivalism leads to a radical form of indeterminism within local spacetime theories. I compare their argument to more traditional arguments typical in the Relationist/Substantivalist dispute and show that they all fail for the same reason. All these arguments ascribe to the substantivalist a particular way of talking about possibility. I argue that the substantivalist is not committed to the modal claims required for the arguments to have any force, and show that this (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Mauro Dorato & Massimo Pauri, Holism and Structuralism in Classical and Quantum General Relativity.
    The main aim of our paper is to show that interpretative issues belonging to classical General Relativity (GR) might be preliminary to a deeper understanding of conceptual problems stemming from on-going attempts at constructing a quantum theory of gravity. Among such interpretative issues, we focus on the meaning of general covariance and the related question of the identity of points, by basing our investigation on the Hamiltonian formulation of GR. In particular, we argue that the adoption of a peculiar gauge-fixing (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Cian Dorr (2011). Physical Geometry and Fundamental Metaphysics. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (1pt1):135-159.
    I explore some ways in which one might base an account of the fundamental metaphysics of geometry on the mathematical theory of Linear Structures recently developed by Tim Maudlin (2010). Having considered some of the challenges facing this approach, Idevelop an alternative approach, according to which the fundamental ontology includes concrete entities structurally isomorphic to functions from space-time points to real numbers.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. John Earman (1989). World Enough and Spacetime. MIT press.
  11. John Earman (1971). Kant, Incongruous Counterparts, and the Nature of Space. Ratio 13:1--18.
  12. John Earman (1970). Who's Afraid of Absolute Space? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 48 (3):287 – 319.
  13. Nikk Effingham (2009). Universalism, Vagueness and Supersubstantivalism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):35 – 42.
    Sider has a favourable view of supersubstantivalism (the thesis that all material objects are identical to the regions of spacetime that they occupy). This paper argues that given supersubstantivalism, Sider's argument from vagueness for (mereological) universalism fails. I present Sider's vagueness argument (§§II-III), and explain why - given supersubstantivalism - some but not all regions must be concrete in order for the argument to work (§IV). Given this restriction on what regions can be concrete, I give a reductio of Sider's (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Cody Gilmore (2014). Building Enduring Objects Out of Spacetime. In Claudio Calosi & Pierluigi Graziani (eds.), Mereology and the Sciences. Springer. 5-34.
    Endurantism, the view that material objects are wholly present at each moment of their careers, is under threat from supersubstantivalism, the view that material objects are identical to spacetime regions. I discuss three compromise positions. They are alike in that they all take material objects to be composed of spacetime points or regions without being identical to any such point or region. They differ in whether they permit multilocation and in whether they generate cases of mereologically coincident entities.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Cody Gilmore (2013). Location and Mereology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  16. Adolf Grünbaum (1957). The Philosophical Retention of Absolute Space in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. Philosophical Review 66 (4):525-534.
  17. Carl Hoefer (2000). Kant's Hands and Earman's Pions: Chirality Arguments for Substantival Space. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (3):237 – 256.
    This paper outlines a new interpretation of an argument of Kant's for the existence of absolute space. The Kant argument, found in a 1768 essay on topology, argues for the existence of Newtonian-Euclidean absolute space on the basis of the existence of incongruous counterparts (such as a left and a right hand, or any asymmetrical object and its mirror-image). The clear, intrinsic difference between a left hand and a right hand, Kant claimed, cannot be understood on a relational view of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Carl Hoefer (1996). The Metaphysics of Space-Time Substantivalism. Journal of Philosophy 93 (1):5-27.
  19. Paul Horwich (1978). On the Existence of Time, Space and Space-Time. Noûs 12 (4):397-419.
  20. Nick Huggett (2000). Reflections on Parity Nonconservation. Philosophy of Science 67 (2):219-241.
    This paper considers the implications for the relational-substantival debate of observations of parity nonconservation in weak interactions, a much neglected topic. It is argued that 'geometric proofs' of absolute space, first proposed by Kant (1768), fail, but that parity violating laws allow 'mechanical proofs', like Newton's laws. Parity violating laws are explained and arguments analogous to those of Newton's Scholium are constructed to show that they require absolute spacetime structure--namely, an orientation--as Newtonian mechanics requires affine structure. Finally, it is considered (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Nick Huggett (1999). Why Manifold Substantivalism is Probably Not a Consequence of Classical Mechanics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (1):17 – 34.
    This paper develops and defends three related forms of relationism about spacetime against attacks by contemporary substantivalists. It clarifies Newton's globes argument to show that it does not bear on relations that fail to determine geodesic motions, since the inertial effects on which Newton relies are not simply correlated with affine structure, but must be understood in dynamical terms. It develops remarks by Sklar and van Fraassen into relational versions of Newtonian mechanics, and argues that Earman does not show them (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Max Jammer (1993). Concepts of Space: The History of Theories of Space in Physics. Dover Publications.
    Newly updated study surveys concept of space from standpoint of historical development. Space in antiquity, Judeo-Christian ideas about space, Newton’s concept of absolute space, space from 18th century to present. Extensive new chapter (6) reviews changes in philosophy of space since publication of second edition (1969). Numerous original quotations and bibliographical references. "...admirably compact and swiftly paced style."—Philosophy of Science. Foreword by Albert Einstein. Bibliography.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Tim Maudlin (1990). Substances and Space-Time: What Aristotle Would Have Said to Einstein. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 21 (4):531--61.
  24. Matteo Morganti (2011). Substrata and Properties: From Bare Particulars to Supersubstantivalism? Metaphysica 12 (2):183-195.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Graham Nerlich (1973). Hands, Knees, and Absolute Space. Journal of Philosophy 70 (12):337-351.
  26. Jill North (2009). The “Structure” of Physics. Journal of Philosophy 106 (2):57-88.
    We are used to talking about the “structure” posited by a given theory of physics. We say that relativity is a theory about spacetime structure. Special relativity posits one spacetime structure; different models of general relativity posit different spacetime structures. We also talk of the “existence” of these structures. Special relativity says the world’s spacetime structure is Minkowskian: it posits that this spacetime structure exists. Understanding structure in this sense seems important for understanding what physics is telling us about the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Oliver Pooley (2013). Substantivalist and Relationalist Approaches to Spacetime. In Robert Batterman (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Physics. Oxford University Press.
    Substantivalists believe that spacetime and its parts are fundamental constituents of reality. Relationalists deny this, claiming that spacetime enjoys only a derivative existence. I begin by describing how the Galilean symmetries of Newtonian physics tell against both Newton's brand of substantivalism and the most obvious relationalist alternative. I then review the (now) obvious substantivalist response to the problem, which is to ditch substantival space for substantival spacetime. The resulting position has many affinities with what are arguably the most natural interpretations (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Oliver Pooley (2003). Handedness, Parity Violation, and the Reality of Space. In Katherine Brading & Elena Castellani (eds.), Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections. Cambridge University Press. 250--280.
    In the first part of this paper a relational account of incongruent counterparts is defended against an argument due to Kant. I then consider a more recent attack on such an account, due to John Earman, which alleges that the relationalist cannot account for the lawlike left--right asymmetry manifested in parity-violating phenomena. I review Hoefer's, Huggett's and Saunders' responses to Earman's argument and argue that, while a relationalist account of parity-violating laws is possible, it comes at the cost of non-locality.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Peter Remnant (1963). Incongruent Counterparts and Absolute Space. Mind 72 (287):393-399.
  30. Jeffrey Sanford Russell (2014). On Where Things Could Be. Philosophy of Science 81 (1).
    Some philosophers respond to Leibniz’s “shift” argument against absolute space by appealing to antihaecceitism about possible worlds, using David Lewis’s counterpart theory. But separated from Lewis’s distinctive system, it is difficult to understand what this doctrine amounts to or how it bears on the Leibnizian argument. In fact, the best way of making sense of the relevant kind of antihaecceitism concedes the main point of the Leibnizian argument, pressing us to consider alternative spatiotemporal metaphysics.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Robert Rynasiewicz (2003). Field Unification in the Maxwell-Lorentz Theory with Absolute Space. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1063-1072.
    Although Trautman (1966) appears to give a unified-field treatment of electrodynamics in Newtonian spacetime, there are difficulties in cogently interpreting it as such in relation to the facts of electromagnetic and magneto-electric induction. Presented here is a covariant, non-unified field treatment of the Maxwell-Lorentz theory with absolute space. This dispels a worry in Earman (1989) as to whether there are any historically realistic examples in which absolute space plays an indispenable role. It also shows how Trautman`s formulation can be rendered (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Robert Rynasiewicz (2003). Field Unification in the Maxwell‐Lorentz Theory with Absolute Space. Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1063-1072.
    Although Trautman (1966) appears to give a unified‐field treatment of electrodynamics in Newtonian spacetime, there are difficulties in cogently interpreting it as such in relation to the facts of electromagnetic and magneto‐electric induction. Presented here is a covariant, nonunified field treatment of the Maxwell‐Lorentz theory with absolute space. This dispels a worry in Earman (1989) as to whether there are any historically realistic examples in which absolute space plays an indispensable role. It also shows how Trautman's formulation can be rendered (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Robert Rynasiewicz (1996). Absolute Versus Relational Space-Time: An Outmoded Debate? Journal of Philosophy 93 (6):279-306.
  34. Lawrence Sklar (1974). Incongruous Counterparts, Intrinsic Features and the Substantiviality of Space. Journal of Philosophy 71 (9):277-290.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Lawrence Sklar (1972). Absolute Space and the Metaphysics of Theories. Noûs 6 (4):289-309.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Bradford Skow, Once Upon a Spacetime.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Paul Teller (1991). Substance, Relations, and Arguments About the Nature of Space-Time. Philosophical Review 100 (3):363-397.
  38. Steven Weinstein (2001). Absolute Quantum Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (1):67-73.
    Whereas one can conceive of a relational classical mechanics in which absolute space and time do not play a fundamental role, quantum mechanics does not readily admit any such relational formulation.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation