David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (2):321-334 (2005)
Recently, Alper, Bridger, Earman and Norton have all proposed examples of dynamic systems that, in their view, are incompatible with classical (Newtonian) mechanics. In the first section of the present paper I shall show that their arguments are all undermined by the same fallacy. The second section proves that their conclusions of incompatibility are indeed false, and that what we are really looking at are new forms of indeterminist evolution of the same kind as that found recently in the literature on supertasks. In the third section of the paper, I argue that one of these new forms of evolution is particularly interesting, and that analysis of it leads to a new vision of the relation between interaction by contact and impenetrability. Introduction The fallacy Understanding some physical supertasks A philosophically interesting implication: contact and impenetrability.
|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
Jon Pérez Laraudogoitia (2006). Global Interaction in Classical Mechanics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20 (2):173 – 183.
Similar books and articles
Mark Bridger & Joseph S. Alper (1999). On the Dynamics of Perez Lauraudogoitia's Supertask. Synthese 119 (3):325-337.
Jon Pérez Laraudogoitia (1999). Earman and Norton on Supertasks That Generate Indeterminism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (1):137 - 141.
Jon Perez Laraudogoitia (1998). Some Relativistic and Higher Order Supertasks. Philosophy of Science 65 (3):502-517.
Chunghyoung Lee (2013). The Staccato Roller Coaster: A Simple Physical Model of the Staccato Run. Synthese 190 (3):549-562.
Joseph S. Alper & Mark Bridger (1998). Newtonian Supertasks: A Critical Analysis. Synthese 114 (2):355-369.
Jon Pérez Laaraudogoitia, Mark Bridger & Joseph S. Alper (2002). Two Ways of Looking at a Newtonian Supertask. Synthese 131 (2):173 - 189.
John Norton (2000). What Is a Newtonian System? The Failure of Energy Conservation and Determinism in Supertasks. Synthese 124 (2):281 - 293.
J. P. Laraudogoitia (2006). A Look at the Staccato Run. Synthese 148 (2):433 - 441.
J. S. Alper, M. Bridger, J. Earman & J. D. Norton (2000). What is a Newtonian System? The Failure of Energy Conservation and Determinism in Supertasks. Synthese 124 (2):281-293.
Jon Pérez Laraudogoitia (2005). An Interesting Fallacy Concerning Dynamical Supertasks. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (2):321 - 334.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #321,696 of 1,724,733 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,160 of 1,724,733 )
How can I increase my downloads?