Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Kant, Schlick and Friedman on Space, Time and Gravity in Light of Three Lessons from Particle Physics.J. Brian Pitts - 2018 - Erkenntnis 83 (2):135-161.
    Kantian philosophy of space, time and gravity is significantly affected in three ways by particle physics. First, particle physics deflects Schlick’s General Relativity-based critique of synthetic a priori knowledge. Schlick argued that since geometry was not synthetic a priori, nothing was—a key step toward logical empiricism. Particle physics suggests a Kant-friendlier theory of space-time and gravity presumably approximating General Relativity arbitrarily well, massive spin-2 gravity, while retaining a flat space-time geometry that is indirectly observable at large distances. The theory’s roots (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Absolute objects and counterexamples: Jones–Geroch dust, Torretti constant curvature, tetrad-spinor, and scalar density.J. Brian Pitts - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 37 (2):347-371.
    James L. Anderson analyzed the novelty of Einstein's theory of gravity as its lack of "absolute objects." Michael Friedman's related work has been criticized by Roger Jones and Robert Geroch for implausibly admitting as absolute the timelike 4-velocity field of dust in cosmological models in Einstein's theory. Using the Rosen-Sorkin Lagrange multiplier trick, I complete Anna Maidens's argument that the problem is not solved by prohibiting variation of absolute objects in an action principle. Recalling Anderson's proscription of "irrelevant" variables, I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Carnap and logical truth.Willard van Orman Quine - 1954 - Synthese 12 (4):350--74.
    Kant's question 'How are synthetic judgments a priori possible?' pre- cipitated the Critique of Pure Reason. Question and answer notwith- standing, Mill and others persisted in doubting that such judgments were possible at all. At length some of Kant's own clearest purported.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   214 citations  
  • Presentism and relativity. [REVIEW]Yuri Balashov & Michel Janssen - 2003 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (2):327-346.
    In this critical notice we argue against William Craig's recent attempt to reconcile presentism (roughly, the view that only the present is real) with relativity theory. Craig's defense of his position boils down to endorsing a ‘neo-Lorentzian interpretation’ of special relativity. We contend that his reconstruction of Lorentz's theory and its historical development is fatally flawed and that his arguments for reviving this theory fail on many counts. 1 Rival theories of time 2 Relativity and the present 3 Special relativity: (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   90 citations  
  • What price spacetime substantivalism? The hole story.John Earman & John Norton - 1987 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (4):515-525.
    Spacetime substantivalism leads to a radical form of indeterminism within a very broad class of spacetime theories which include our best spacetime theory, general relativity. Extending an argument from Einstein, we show that spacetime substantivalists are committed to very many more distinct physical states than these theories' equations can determine, even with the most extensive boundary conditions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   271 citations  
  • Minkowski spacetime and Lorentz invariance: The cart and the horse or two sides of a single coin.Pablo Acuña - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 55:1-12.
    Michel Janssen and Harvey Brown have driven a prominent recent debate concerning the direction of an alleged arrow of explanation between Minkowski spacetime and Lorentz invariance of dynamical laws in special relativity. In this article, I critically assess this controversy with the aim of clarifying the explanatory foundations of the theory. First, I show that two assumptions shared by the parties—that the dispute is independent of issues concerning spacetime ontology, and that there is an urgent need for a constructive interpretation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • Space-time constructivism vs. modal provincialism: Or, how special relativistic theories needn't show Minkowski chronogeometry.J. Brian Pitts - 2017 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 67:191-198.
    Already in 1835 Lobachevski entertained the possibility of multiple geometries of the same type playing a role. This idea of rival geometries has reappeared from time to time but had yet to become a key idea in space-time philosophy prior to Brown's _Physical Relativity_. Such ideas are emphasized towards the end of Brown's book, which I suggest as the interpretive key. A crucial difference between Brown's constructivist approach to space-time theory and orthodox "space-time realism" pertains to modal scope. Constructivism takes (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Review: Presentism and Relativity. [REVIEW]Yuri Balashov & Michel Janssen - 2003 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (2):327-346.
    In this critical notice we argue against William Craig's recent attempt to reconcile presentism (roughly, the view that only the present is real) with relativity theory. Craig's defense of his position boils down to endorsing a 'neo-Lorentzian interpretation' of special relativity. We contend that his reconstruction of Lorentz's theory and its historical development is fatally flawed and that his arguments for reviving this theory fail on many counts.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   42 citations  
  • Absolute objects and counterexamples: Jones–Geroch dust, Torretti constant curvature, tetrad-spinor, and scalar density.J. Brian Pitts - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 37 (2):347-371.
    James L. Anderson analyzed the novelty of Einstein's theory of gravity as its lack of "absolute objects." Michael Friedman's related work has been criticized by Roger Jones and Robert Geroch for implausibly admitting as absolute the timelike 4-velocity field of dust in cosmological models in Einstein's theory. Using the Rosen-Sorkin Lagrange multiplier trick, I complete Anna Maidens's argument that the problem is not solved by prohibiting variation of absolute objects in an action principle. Recalling Anderson's proscription of "irrelevant" variables, I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • An example relevant to the kretschmann-Einstein debate.Rafael Sorkin - 2001 - Modern Physics Letters A 17:695--700.
    We cast the flat space theory of a scalar field in generally covariant form by introducing an auxiliary field $\lambda$. The resulting theory is couched in terms of an action integral $S$, and all the fields (the scalar, the spacetime metric, and $\lambda$) are dynamical in the sense of being varied freely in $S$. Conservation of energy-momentum emerges as a formal consequence of diffeomorphism invariance, in close analogy with the situation in ordinary general relativity.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • Drawing the line between kinematics and dynamics in special relativity.Michel Janssen - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (1):26-52.
    In his book, Physical Relativity, Harvey Brown challenges the orthodox view that special relativity is preferable to those parts of Lorentz's classical ether theory it replaced because it revealed various phenomena that were given a dynamical explanation in Lorentz's theory to be purely kinematical. I want to defend this orthodoxy. The phenomena most commonly discussed in this context in the philosophical literature are length contraction and time dilation. I consider three other phenomena of this kind that played a role in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   58 citations  
  • Some remarks on the notions of general covariance and background independence.Domenico Giulini - 2007 - Lecture Notes in Physics 721:105--20.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  • COI Stories: Explanation and Evidence in the History of Science.Michel Janssen - 2002 - Perspectives on Science 10 (4):457-522.
    This paper takes as its point of departure two striking incongruities between scientiªc practice and trends in modern history and philosophy of science. (1) Many modern historians of science are so preoccupied with local scientiªc practices that they fail to recognize important non-local elements. (2) Many modern philosophers of science make a sharp distinction between explanation and evidence, whereas in scientiªc practice explanatory power is routinely used as evidence for scientiªc claims. I draw attention to one speciªc way in..
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   42 citations  
  • Drawing the line between kinematics and dynamics in special relativity.Michel Janssen - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (1):26-52.
    In his book, Physical Relativity, Harvey Brown challenges the orthodox view that special relativity is preferable to those parts of Lorentz's classical ether theory it replaced because it revealed various phenomena that were given a dynamical explanation in Lorentz's theory to be purely kinematical. I want to defend this orthodoxy. The phenomena most commonly discussed in this context in the philosophical literature are length contraction and time dilation. I consider three other phenomena of this kind that played a role in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   63 citations  
  • Why Constructive Relativity Fails.John D. Norton - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):821-834.
    Constructivists, such as Harvey Brown, urge that the geometries of Newtonian and special relativistic spacetimes result from the properties of matter. Whatever this may mean, it commits constructivists to the claim that these spacetime geometries can be inferred from the properties of matter without recourse to spatiotemporal presumptions or with few of them. I argue that the construction project only succeeds if constructivists antecedently presume the essential commitments of a realist conception of spacetime. These commitments can be avoided only by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   48 citations