Philosophy of Science 72 (5):777-788 (2005)
|Abstract||Does the need to find a quantum theory of gravity imply that the gravitational field must be quantized? Physicists working in quantum gravity routinely assume an affirmative answer, often without being aware of the metaphysical commitments that tend to underlie this assumption. The ambition of this article is to probe these commitments and to analyze some recently adduced physical—as opposed to metaphysical—arguments pertinent to the issue of quantization. While there exist good reasons to quantize gravity, as this analysis will show, alternative approaches to gravity challenge the received wisdom. These renegade approaches do not regard gravity as a fundamental force, but rather as effective, i.e., as merely supervening on fundamental physics. I will urge that these alternative accounts at least prove the tenability of an opposition to quantization.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
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.
Han Geurdes, On an Intrinsic Quantum Theoretical Structure Inside Einstein's Gravity Field Equations.
James Mattingly (2009). Mongrel Gravity. Erkenntnis 70 (3):379 - 395.
Henrik Zinkernagel (2006). The Philosophy Behind Quantum Gravity. Theoria 21 (3):295-312.
Nick Huggett & Craig Callender (2001). Why Quantize Gravity (or Any Other Field for That Matter)? Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S382-.
Christian Wuthrich (2005). To Quantize or Not to Quantize: Fact and Folklore in Quantum Gravity. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):777-788.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #48,417 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?