Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:23:53.453Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leibnizian Relationalism and the Problem of Inertia*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Barbara Lariviere
Barbara Lariviere*
Affiliation:
1620 Palmerston Ave., West Vancouver, B.C., CanadaV7V 2T8
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I consider the contrast between Leibniz's relational concept of spacetime and Einstein's special and general theories of relativity. I suggest that there are two interpretations of Leibniz's view, which I call L1 and L2. L1 amounts to saying that there is no real inertial structure to spacetime, whereas in general relativity the inertial structure is dynamical or real in Lande's sense (see Popper, 46); i.e., it can be ‘kicked’ and ‘kicks back,’ causing gravitational effects. If there is no real inertial structure to space-time then, as Weyl points out (Weyl, 105), the concept of the relative motive of several bodies has no more foundation than the concept of absolute motion for a single body. Thus, L1 seems to be untenable. L2 is a more sophisticated view which rejects the geometrical aspect of Newtonian space-time as a container for events, but accepts the existence of a real structure which determines the inertial properties of matter.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 437 - 447
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Informative discussions with Jeffrey Bub on Weyl and the inertial structure of space-time are gratefully acknowledged.

References

Alexander, H. G. The Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence (New York: Barnes and Noble 1956).Google Scholar
Anderson, J.L. Principles of Relativity Physics (New York: Academic Press 1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earman, J. ‘Covariance, In variance, and the Equivalence of Frames,’ Foundations of Physics 4 (1974), 267-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einstein, A. (1919), ‘What is the Theory of Relativity,’ The London Times, November 1919; reprinted inIdeas and Opinions (New York: Bonanza Books).Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1916), ‘The Foundations of the General Theory of Relativity’; reprinted in The Principle of Relativity, Lorentz, H.A. Einstein, A. Minkowski, H. Weyl, H. (New York: Dover Publications).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einstein, A. (1934), ‘The Problem of Space, Ether, and the Field in Physics’; reprinted in Ideas and Opinions (New York: Bonanza Books).Google Scholar
Minkowski, (1908), ‘Space and Time’; reprinted in the The Principle of Relativity, Lorentz, H. A. Einstein, A. Minkowski, H. Weyl, H. (New York: Dover Publications).Google Scholar
Newton, I. (1729), The Principles of Natural Philosophy Vol. I (London: Dawsons 1968).Google Scholar
Popper, K. Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics (from the Postscript to the Logic of Scientific Discovery) (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield 1982).Google Scholar
Weyl, H. Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science (New York: Atheneum 1963).Google Scholar