David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 49 (4):575-590 (1982)
In the correspondence with Clarke, Leibniz proposes to construe physical theory in terms of physical (spatio-temporal) relations between physical objects, thus avoiding incorporation of infinite totalities of abstract entities (such as Newtonian space) in physical ontology. It has generally been felt that this proposal cannot be carried out. I demonstrate an equivalence between formulations postulating space-time as an infinite totality and formulations allowing only possible spatio-temporal relations of physical (point-) objects. The resulting rigorous formulations of physical theory may be seen to follow Leibniz' suggestion quite closely. On the other hand, physical assumptions implicit in the postulation of space-time totalities are made explicit in the reconstruction of the space-time versions from the physical-relation versions
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Edward Slowik (2005). Spacetime, Ontology, and Structural Realism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19 (2):147 – 166.
Edward Slowik (2009). Newton's Metaphysics of Space: A “Tertium Quid” Betwixt Substantivalism and Relationism, or Merely a “God of the Gaps”? Perspectives on Science 17 (4):pp. 429-456.
Gordon Belot (1999). Rehabilitating Relationalism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (1):35 – 52.
Carolyn Brighouse (1999). Incongruent Counterparts and Modal Relationism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (1):53 – 68.
J. A. Cover (1993). Reference, Modality, and Relational Time. Philosophical Studies 70 (3):251 - 277.
Similar books and articles
Tim Maudlin (2010). Time, Topology and Physical Geometry. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 84 (1):63-78.
W. Aitken & J. A. Barrett (2010). A Note on the Physical Possibility of Transfinite Computation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (4):867-874.
Ned Markosian (2000). What Are Physical Objects? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (2):375-395.
Brent Mundy (1983). Relational Theories of Euclidean Space and Minkowski Spacetime. Philosophy of Science 50 (2):205-226.
Robert DiSalle (2006). Understanding Space-Time: The Philosophical Development of Physics From Newton to Einstein. Cambridge University Press.
D. Dieks (2001). Space and Time in Particle and Field Physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (2):217-241.
Mark Heller (1990). The Ontology of Physical Objects: Four-Dimensional Hunks of Matter. Cambridge University Press.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (2010). Natural World Physical, Brain Operational, and Mind Phenomenal Space-Time. Physics of Life Reviews 7 (2):195-249.
John D. Norton, What Can We Learn About the Ontology of Space and Time From the Theory of Relativity?
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads27 ( #140,684 of 1,792,039 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #207,142 of 1,792,039 )
How can I increase my downloads?