Definition, convention, and simultaneity: Malament's result and its alleged refutation by Sarkar and Stachel
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S345- (2001)
The question whether distant simultaneity (relativized to an inertial frame) has a factual or a conventional status in special relativity has long been disputed and remains in contention even today. At one point it appeared that Malament (1977) had settled the issue by proving that the only non-trivial equivalence relation definable from (temporally symmetric) causal connectability is the standard simultaneity relation. Recently, though, Sarkar and Stachel (1999) claim to have identified a suspect assumption in the proof by defining a non-standard simultaneity relation from causal connectability. I contend that their critique is based on a misunderstanding of the criteria for the definability of a relation, a misunderstanding that Malement's original treatment helped to foster. There are in fact a variety of notions of definability that can be brought to bear. They all, however, require a condition that suffices to secure Malament's result. The non-standard relation Sarkar and Stachel claim to be definable is not so definable, and, I argue, their proposal to modify the notion of ``causal definability'' is misguided. Finally, I address the relevance of Malament's result to the thesis of conventionalism.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
David Malament (2006). Classical Relativity Theory. In Jeremy N. Butterfield & John Earman (eds.), Philosophy of Physics. Elsevier.
Laurent A. Beauregard (1976). The Sui Generis Conventionality of Simultaneity. Philosophy of Science 43 (4):469-490.
Robert Rynasiewicz, Reichenbach's Epsilon Definition of Simultaneity in Historical and Philosophical Perspective.
David Malament (1977). Causal Theories of Time and the Conventionality of Simultaneity. Noûs 11 (3):293-300.
Domenico Giulini (2001). Uniqueness of Simultaneity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (4):651-670.
Hanoch Ben-Yami (2006). Causality and Temporal Order in Special Relativity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (3):459-479.
Sahotra Sarkar & John Stachel (1999). Did Malament Prove the Non-Conventionality of Simultaneity in the Special Theory of Relativity? Philosophy of Science 66 (2):208-220.
Adolf Grünbaum (2010). David Malament and the Conventionality of Simultaneity: A Reply. [REVIEW] Foundations of Physics 40 (9-10):1285-1297.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads55 ( #88,717 of 1,925,076 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #187,249 of 1,925,076 )
How can I increase my downloads?