Within the framework of general relativity, in some cases at least, it is a delicate and interesting question just what it means to say that an extended body is or is not "rotating". It is so for two reasons. First, one can easily think of different criteria of rotation. Though they agree if the background spacetime structure is sufficiently simple, they do not do so in general. Second, none of the criteria fully answers to our classical intuitions. Each one exhibits some feature or other that violates those intuitions in a significant and interesting way. The principal goal of the paper is to make the second claim precise in the form of a modest no-go theorem.
|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
Is General Relativity Generally Relativistic?Roger Jones - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:363 - 381.
The Relativity of Rotation in the Early Foundations of General Relativity.Pierre Kerszberg - 1987 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 18 (1):53-79.
The Rotating Discs Argument Defeated.J. Butterfield - 2006 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (1):1-45.
Is Prediction Possible in General Relativity?John Byron Manchak - 2008 - Foundations of Physics 38 (4):317-321.
A Modest Remark About Reichenbach, Rotation, and General Relativity.David Malament - 1985 - Philosophy of Science 52 (4):615-620.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #351,692 of 2,163,985 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,017 of 2,163,985 )
How can I increase my downloads?