Graduate studies at Western
Foundations of Physics 40 (3):276-288 (2010)
|Abstract||Malament-Hogarth spacetimes are the sort of models within general relativity that seem to allow for the possibility of supertasks. There are various ways in which these spacetimes might be considered physically problematic. Here, we examine these criticisms and investigate the prospect of escaping them|
|Keywords||Supertasks Malament-Hogarth spacetimes General relativity Computation|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
J. P. Laraudogoitia (2006). A Look at the Staccato Run. Synthese 148 (2):433 - 441.
John Earman & John D. Norton (1998). Comments on Laraudogoitia's 'Classical Particle Dynamics, Indeterminism and a Supertask'. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):123-133.
Luis Carlos Medina (2009). Evolution Nodes in Newtonian Supertasks. Theoria 24 (2):229-247.
Roger Jones (1980). Is General Relativity Generally Relativistic? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:363 - 381.
Hajnal Andréka, Judit X. Madarász, István Németi & Gergely Székely, A Logic Road From Special to General Relativity.
John Byron Manchak (2009). On the Existence of “Time Machines” in General Relativity. Philosophy of Science 76 (5).
John Byron Manchak (forthcoming). Is Spacetime Hole-Free? General Relativity and Gravitation.
John Earman & John D. Norton (1993). Forever is a Day: Supertasks in Pitowsky and Malament-Hogarth Spacetimes. Philosophy of Science 60 (1):22-42.
Jon Perez Laraudogoitia (1998). Some Relativistic and Higher Order Supertasks. Philosophy of Science 65 (3):502-517.
Added to index2009-12-09
Total downloads13 ( #95,683 of 739,081 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,081 )
How can I increase my downloads?