According to McCall and Lowe (2003) interpreting the twins’ paradox reconciles the A-theorist’s notion of temporal passage or flow with the special theory of relativity. Miller, however, recalls that “the B-theorist never denied that there was temporal passage in some sense of the term” (Miller 2004, 204), and argues convincingly that McCall and Lowe stipulate nothing other than this B-theorist’s sense of temporal succession. But, as I want to show, we need in fact the A-theorist’s or even presentist’s account of temporal passage in the sense of a ‘moving now’ in order to preserve the temporal content of the twins’ paradox. It is essential, I think, that for a temporal understanding of the twins’ paradox proper times and coordinate times have to be combined in a way that only the presentists can cope.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Passage, Becoming and the Nature of Temporal Reality.M. Oreste Fiocco - 2007 - Philosophia 35 (1):1-21.
Fine's Mctaggart, Temporal Passage, and the a Versus B‐Debate.Natalja Deng - 2013 - Ratio 26 (1):19-34.
D/4D Equivalence, the Twins Paradox and Absolute Time.Storrs McCall & E. J. Lowe - 2003 - Analysis 63 (278):114-123.
Added to index2010-06-02
Total downloads27 ( #184,777 of 2,151,600 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #397,093 of 2,151,600 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.