Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-h6jzd Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-02-16T16:31:43.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On The Space-Time Ontology of Physical Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Kenneth L. Manders
Kenneth L. Manders*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh and Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the correspondence with Clarke, Leibniz proposes to construe physical theory in terms of physical (spatio-temporal) relations between physical objects, thus avoiding incorporation of infinite totalities of abstract entities (such as Newtonian space) in physical ontology. It has generally been felt that this proposal cannot be carried out.

I demonstrate an equivalence between formulations postulating space-time as an infinite totality and formulations allowing only possible spatio-temporal relations of physical (point -) objects. The resulting rigorous formulations of physical theory may be seen to follow Leibniz’ suggestion quite closely. On the other hand, physical assumptions implicit in the postulation of space-time totalities are made explicit in the reconstruction of the space-time versions from the physical-relation versions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 49 , Issue 4 , December 1982 , pp. 575 - 590
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Revision of paper supported in part by NSF Grant MCS81-14170.

References

Alexander, H. G. ed. (1956), The Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, Physics.Google Scholar
Bressan, A. and Suppes, P. (1974), “Modality and the Analysis of Scientific Propositions”, symposium in: K. Schaffner, R. S. Cohen, eds., PSA 1972. Dordrecht: D. Reidel: 285–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earman, J., Glymour, C. and Stachel, E. eds. (1977), Foundations of Space-Time Theories. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. VIII. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1905), “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, translation in Perrett and Jeffery (1923).Google Scholar
Field, H. (1980), Science without Numbers. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Henkin, L., Suppes, P., Tarski, A. eds. (1959), The Axiomatic Method. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Krantz, D., Luce, D., Suppes, P., Tversky, A. (1971), Foundations of Measurement vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Luce, D., (1978), “Dimensionally Invariant Physical Laws …”, Philosophy of Science 45: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malament, D. (1975), Does the Causal Structure of Space-Time Determine its Geometry? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rockefeller University.Google Scholar
Molner, N. and Suppes, P. (1968), “Quantifierfree axioms for constructive plane geometry”, Compositio Mathematica 20: 143–152.Google Scholar
Mueller, I. (1969), “Euclid's Elements and the axiomatic method”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 20. (esp. pp. 299–300).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundy, B. (1982), Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Niebel, E. (1959), “Untersuchungen ueber die Bedeuting der geometrische Konstruction in der Antike”, Kant-Studien, Ergaenzungshefte 76. Köln.Google Scholar
Perrett, W. and Jeffery, G. B., translators (1923), The Principle of Relativity. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Plato, Republic.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. (1967), “Mathematics Without Foundations”, Journal of Philosophy 64: 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1969), Axiomatisation of the Theory of Relativity (translation). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Robb, A. (1914), A Theory of Time and Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stein, H. (1967), “Newtonian Space-Time”, Texas Quarterly 10: 174–200.Google Scholar
Stein, H. (1977), “Some Philosophical Prehistory of General Relativity”, in: Earman, Glymour, Stachel (1977).Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1972), “Problems in the Philosophy of Space and Time”, Synthese 24: 298–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarski, A. (1959), “What is Elementary Geometry?”, in: Henkin, Suppes, Tarski: 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, A. (1959), “Axioms for Cosmology”, in: Henkin, Suppes, Tarski: 308–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winnie, J. (1977), “The Causal Theory of Space-Time”, in Earman, Glymour, and Stachel: 134–205.Google Scholar