Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Spontaneous Collapse Theories and Temporal Primitivism about Time’s Direction.Cristian López - 2022 - Foundations of Physics 52 (5):1-22.
    Two views on the direction of time can be distinguished—primitivism and non-primitivism. According to the former, time’s direction is an in-built, fundamental property of the physical world. According to the latter, time’s direction is a derivative property of a fundamentally directionless reality. In the literature, non-primitivism has been widely supported since most our fundamental dynamical laws are time-reversal invariant. In this paper, I offer a way out to the primitivist. I argue that we do have good grounds to support a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • What Counts as a Newtonian System? The View from Norton’s Dome.Samuel Craig Fletcher - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (3):275-297.
    If the force on a particle fails to satisfy a Lipschitz condition at a point, it relaxes one of the conditions necessary for a locally unique solution to the particle’s equation of motion. I examine the most discussed example of this failure of determinism in classical mechanics—that of Norton’s dome—and the range of current objections against it. Finding there are many different conceptions of classical mechanics appropriate and useful for different purposes, I argue that no single conception is preferred. Instead (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Should physical symmetries guide metaphysics? Two reasons why they should maybe not.Cristian López - 2023 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 13 (2):1-23.
    Symmetry-based inferences have permeated many discussions in philosophy of physics and metaphysics of science. It is claimed that symmetries in our physical theories would allow us to draw metaphysical conclusions about the world, a view that I call ‘symmetry inferentialism’. This paper is critical to this view. I claim that (a) it assumes a philosophically questionable characterization of the relevant validity domain of physical symmetries, and (b) it overlooks a distinction between two opposing ways through which relevant physical symmetries become (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark