A new spin on the hole argument

Abstract
This brief paper shows how an exact analogue of Einstein's original hole argument can be constructed in the loop representation of quantum gravity. The new argument is based on the embedding of spin-networks in a manifold and the action of the diffeomorphism constraint on them. The implications of this result are then discussed. I argue that the conclusions of many physicists working on loop quantum gravity---Rovelli and Smolin in particular---that the loop representation uniquely supports relationalism are unfounded.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsb.2004.10.003
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 23,651
External links
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
John Earman & John Norton (1987). What Price Spacetime Substantivalism? The Hole Story. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (4):515-525.
Gordon Belot & John Earman (2001). Pre-Socratic Quantum Gravity. In Craig Callender & Nick Huggett (eds.), Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale. Cambridge University Press 213--55.
Jeremy Butterfield (1989). The Hole Truth. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 40 (1):1-28.
Tim Maudlin (1988). The Essence of Space-Time. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:82 - 91.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Edward Slowik (2013). The Deep Metaphysics of Quantum Gravity: The Seventeenth Century Legacy and an Alternative Ontology Beyond Substantivalism and Relationism. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44 (4):490-499.
Oliver Pooley (2006). A Hole Revolution, or Are We Back Where We Started? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (2):372-380.
Dean Rickles (2005). Interpreting Quantum Gravity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 36 (4):691-715.
Dean Rickles (2006). Bringing the Hole Argument Back in the Loop: A Response to Pooley. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (2):381-387.
Dean Rickles (2005). Interpreting Quantum Gravity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 36 (4):691-715.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Carolyn Brighouse (1997). Determinism and Modality. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (4):465-481.
Alan Macdonald (2001). Einstein's Hole Argument. American Journal of Physics 69:223-225.
J. Melia (1999). Holes, Haecceitism and Two Conceptions of Determinism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (4):639--64.
Tilman Sauer (2007). An Einstein Manuscript on the EPR Paradox for Spin Observables. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (4):879-887.
Dean Rickles (2006). Bringing the Hole Argument Back in the Loop: A Response to Pooley. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (2):381-387.
Oliver Pooley (2006). A Hole Revolution, or Are We Back Where We Started? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (2):372-380.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

63 ( #76,451 of 1,902,847 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

18 ( #35,183 of 1,902,847 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.