Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mx8w7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-23T06:30:52.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Essay Review: Physical Relativity and Understanding Space-Time

Review products

BrownHarvey R., Physical Relativity: Space-Time Structure from a Dynamical Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2005), 240 pp., $75.00 (cloth).
DiSalleRobert, Understanding Space-Time: The Philosophical Developments of Physics from Newton to Einstein. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2006), 188 pp., $90.00 (cloth).

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Nick Huggett
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The two books discussed here make important contributions to our understanding of the role of spacetime concepts in physical theories and how that understanding has changed during the evolution of physics. Both emphasize what can be called a ‘dynamical’ account, according to which geometric structures should be understood in terms of their roles in the laws governing matter and force. I explore how the books contribute to such a project; while generally sympathetic, I offer criticisms of some historical claims concerning Newton, and argue that the dynamical account does not undercut ontological issues as the books claim.

Information

Type
Review Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , July 2009 , pp. 404 - 421
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barbour, J. B. (1989), Absolute or Relative Motion? A Study from a Machian Point of View of the Discovery and the Structure of Dynamical Theories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bekenstein, J. D. (2004), “An Alternative to the Dark Matter Paradigm: Relativistic MOND Gravitation”, http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0412652v3.Google Scholar
Bell, J. S. (1976), “How to Teach Special Relativity”, How to Teach Special Relativity 1:1–13.Google Scholar
DiSalle, R. (1991), “Conventionalism and the Origins of the Inertial Frame Concept”, in Fine, A., Forbes, M., and Wessels, L. (eds.), PSA 1990: Proceedings of the 1990 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 2. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, 139–147.Google Scholar
DiSalle, R. (1994), “On Dynamics, Indiscernibility, and Spacetime Ontology”, On Dynamics, Indiscernibility, and Spacetime Ontology 45:265–287.Google Scholar
DiSalle, R. (1995), “Spacetime Theory as Physical Geometry”, Spacetime Theory as Physical Geometry 42:317–337.Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1905), “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies 17:891–921.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (2001), Dynamics of Reason. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Huggett, N. (1999), “Why Manifold Substantivalism Is Probably Not a Consequence of Classical Mechanics”, Why Manifold Substantivalism Is Probably Not a Consequence of Classical Mechanics 13:17–34.Google Scholar
Huggett, N. (2006), “The Regularity Account of Relational Spacetime”, The Regularity Account of Relational Spacetime 115:41–73.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1970), “How to Define Theoretical Terms”, How to Define Theoretical Terms 67:427–446.Google Scholar
Malament, D. (1977), “Causal Theories of Time and the Conventionality of Simultaneity”, Causal Theories of Time and the Conventionality of Simultaneity 11:293–300.Google Scholar
Newton, I. ([1687] 1999), The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated by Cohen, I. B. and Whitman, A. M.. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Norton, J. D. (1992), “Philosophy of Space and Time”, in Salmon, M. H. et al. (eds.), Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 179–231.Google Scholar
Norton, J. D. (2008), “Why Constructive Relativity Fails”, Why Constructive Relativity Fails 59:821–834.Google Scholar
Rynasiewicz, R. (1995), “By Their Properties, Causes, and Effects: Newton's Scholium on Time, Space, Place, and Motion,” Vol. 1, “The Text”, The Text 26:133–153.Google Scholar
Sklar, L. (1977), Space, Time, and Spacetime. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Spirtes, P. L. (1981), Conventionalism in the Philosophy of Henri Poincaré. PhD Dissertation. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Thomson, J. J. (1884), “On the Law of Inertia; the Principle of Chronometry; and the Principle of Absolute Clinural Rest, and of Absolute Rotation”, On the Law of Inertia; the Principle of Chronometry; and the Principle of Absolute Clinural Rest, and of Absolute Rotation 12:568–578.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B. C. (1970), An Introduction to the Philosophy of Time and Space. New York: Random House.Google Scholar