Skip to main content
Log in

Eliminating Spacetime

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Erkenntnis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A number of approaches to quantum gravity (QG) seem to imply that spacetime does not exist. Philosophers are quick to point out, however, that the loss of spacetime should not be regarded as total. Rather, we should interpret these approaches as ones that threaten the fundamentality but not the existence of spacetime. In this paper, I argue for two claims. First, I argue that spacetime realism is not forced by QG; spacetime eliminativism remains an option. Second, I argue that eliminativism provides a useful framework for developing two existing approaches to the metaphysics of QG, involving functionalism and mereology respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Huggett and Wüthrich (2013) for an overview.

  2. See Le Bihan (2018b) for more on realism and eliminativism.

  3. Spacetime realists include Chalmers (2021), Le Bihan (2018b), Lam and Wüthrich (2018), Wüthrich (2017, 2019) and Yates (2021).

  4. See Butterfield and Isham (1999) for discussion.

  5. See Carrol (2019) for details.

  6. Wallace (2020) seems to hold this view.

  7. This was noted by a referee.

  8. For instance, Le Bihan and Linnemann (2019) take the presence of space and time to justify the existence of spacetime in a ‘minimal’ sense.

  9. These views are not necessarily in competition, and may be held together.

  10. The mereological approach is developed by Le Bihan (2018a, 2018b) in the context of QG. See also Ney (2020) and Paul (2012).

  11. If a spacetime region R has parts \(p_1 ... p_n\) that are not spatiotemporally located, then Inheritance of Location is false: the \(p_n\) are all parts of R and yet none are located where R is. H5 is also false: the \(p_n\) occupy no spatiotemporal regions and so a fortiori occupy no sub-region of R. Smaller than fails for much the same reason: some of the \(p_n\) will be proper parts of R. However, none of the \(p_n\) are smaller than R because none of them occupy any sub-region of R. Finally, the spatiotemporal extent of R is not a function of the spatiotemporal extent of the \(p_n\) because they are not spatiotemporally extended, and so Compositionality of Extension is false.

  12. I am grateful to a referee for pressing me to clarify this argument.

  13. This may require showing how spatial and temporal properties can be realised. Functionalist spacetime eliminativism may therefore be limited in so far as it requires the existence of fundamental spatial and temporal properties (on pain of facing a new dependence question about how spatial and temporal entities arise from non-spatial, non-temporal ones).

  14. This was pointed out by a referee.

References

  • Baron, S. (2021). Parts of spacetime. American Philosophical Quarterly, 58(4).

  • Barrett, J. A. (1999). The quantum mechanics of minds and worlds. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, J. S. (1987). Speakable and unspeakable. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield, J., & Isham, C. (1999). On the emergence of time in quantum gravity. In J. Butterfield (Ed.), The arguments of time (pp. 111–168). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrol, S. (2019). Spacetime and geometry: An introduction to general relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, D. J. (2021). Finding space in a nonspatial world. In B. Le Bihan & N. Huggett (Eds.), Philosophy beyond spacetime. Oxford University Press.

  • Crowther, K. (2018). Inter-theory relations in quantum gravity: Correspondence, reduction, and emergence. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 63, 74–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, M. (2011). Using mereological principles to support metaphysics. The Philosophical Quarterly, 61, 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huggett, N., & Wüthrich, C. (2013). Emergent spacetime and empirical (in)coherence. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44, 276–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, V., & Wüthrich, C. (2018). Spacetime is as spacetime does. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 64, 39–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, V., & Wüthrich, C. (2020). Spacetime functionalism from a realist perspective. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02642-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Bihan, B. (2018a). Priority monism beyond spacetime. Metaphysica, 19, 95–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Bihan, B. (2018b). Space emergence in contemporary physics: Why we do not need fundamentality, layers of reality and emergence. Disputatio, 10, 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Bihan, B., & Linnemann, N. (2019). Have we lost spacetime on the way? Narrowing the gap between general relativity and quantum gravity. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 65, 112–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ney, A. (2020). Finding the world in the wave function: Some strategies for solving the macro-object problem. Synthese, 197, 4227–4249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul, L. A. (2012). Building the world from its fundamental constituents. Philosophical Studies, 158, 221–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saucedo, R. (2011). Parthood and location. In K. Bennett & D. Zimmerman (Eds.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 6, pp. 223–284). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sider, T. (2007). Parthood. Philosophical Review, 116, 51–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, D. (2020). Fundamental and emergent geometry in Newtonian physics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 71, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wüthrich, C. (2017). Raiders of the lost spacetime. In D. Lehmkuhl, G. Schiemann, & E. Scholz (Eds.), Towards a theory of spacetime theories (pp. 297–335). Basel: Birkhäuser.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wüthrich, C. (2019). The emergence of space and time. In S. Gibb, R. F. Hendry, & T. Lancaster (Eds.), Routledge handbook of emergence (pp. 315–326). London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yates, D. (2021). Thinking about spacetime. In C. Wüthrich, B. Le Bihan, & N. Huggett (Eds.), Philosophy beyond spacetime. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Baptiste Le Bihan, Kristie Miller and Jonathan Tallant for useful discussion of eliminativism. Research on this paper was funded by two grants from the Australian Research Council, a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE180100414) and a Discovery Project (DP180100105).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sam Baron.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baron, S. Eliminating Spacetime. Erkenn 88, 1289–1308 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-021-00402-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-021-00402-z

Navigation