Harvey R. Brown
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275830
- eISBN:
- 9780191603914
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275831.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
This book explores the nature of the distinction at the heart of Einstein's 1905 formulation of his special theory of relativity: that between kinematics and dynamics. Einstein himself became ...
More
This book explores the nature of the distinction at the heart of Einstein's 1905 formulation of his special theory of relativity: that between kinematics and dynamics. Einstein himself became increasingly uncomfortable with this distinction, and with the limitations of what he called the ‘principle theory’ approach inspired by the logic of thermodynamics. A handful of physicists and philosophers have over the last century likewise expressed doubts about Einstein's treatment of the relativistic behaviour of rigid bodies and clocks in motion in the kinematical part of his great paper, and suggested that the dynamical understanding of length contraction and time dilation intimated by the immediate precursors of Einstein is more fundamental. This book both examines and extends these arguments (which support a more ‘constructive’ approach to relativistic effects in Einstein's terminology), after giving a careful analysis of key features of the pre-history of relativity theory. It argues furthermore that the geometrization of the theory by Minkowski in 1908 brought illumination, but not a causal explanation of relativistic effects. Finally, the book tries to show that the dynamical interpretation of special relativity defended in the book is consistent with the role this theory must play as a limiting case of Einstein's 1915 theory of gravity: the general theory of relativity.Less
This book explores the nature of the distinction at the heart of Einstein's 1905 formulation of his special theory of relativity: that between kinematics and dynamics. Einstein himself became increasingly uncomfortable with this distinction, and with the limitations of what he called the ‘principle theory’ approach inspired by the logic of thermodynamics. A handful of physicists and philosophers have over the last century likewise expressed doubts about Einstein's treatment of the relativistic behaviour of rigid bodies and clocks in motion in the kinematical part of his great paper, and suggested that the dynamical understanding of length contraction and time dilation intimated by the immediate precursors of Einstein is more fundamental. This book both examines and extends these arguments (which support a more ‘constructive’ approach to relativistic effects in Einstein's terminology), after giving a careful analysis of key features of the pre-history of relativity theory. It argues furthermore that the geometrization of the theory by Minkowski in 1908 brought illumination, but not a causal explanation of relativistic effects. Finally, the book tries to show that the dynamical interpretation of special relativity defended in the book is consistent with the role this theory must play as a limiting case of Einstein's 1915 theory of gravity: the general theory of relativity.
Harvey R. Brown
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275830
- eISBN:
- 9780191603914
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275831.003.0005
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
This chapter focuses on how Einstein arrived at his special theory of relativity. It discusses Einstein's postulates, his derivation of the Lorentz transformations, and experimental evidence for the ...
More
This chapter focuses on how Einstein arrived at his special theory of relativity. It discusses Einstein's postulates, his derivation of the Lorentz transformations, and experimental evidence for the Lorentz transformations. The chapter then addresses the question of whether Einstein's inertial frames are the same as Newton's.Less
This chapter focuses on how Einstein arrived at his special theory of relativity. It discusses Einstein's postulates, his derivation of the Lorentz transformations, and experimental evidence for the Lorentz transformations. The chapter then addresses the question of whether Einstein's inertial frames are the same as Newton's.
Thomas Ryckman
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780195177176
- eISBN:
- 9780199835324
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195177177.003.0007
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
It is shown how the epistemological thesis that physics can provide knowledge only of the structure of the physical world emerged in Arthur Eddington’s semi-popular, philosophical and technical ...
More
It is shown how the epistemological thesis that physics can provide knowledge only of the structure of the physical world emerged in Arthur Eddington’s semi-popular, philosophical and technical writings on the general theory of relativity. The implicitly Kantian character of Eddington’s conception of “world building” in a geometrized physics is developed through examination of Eddington’s two principal works on general relativity. Eddington’s structuralism is contrasted with that associated with Bertrand Russell, and his conception of the mind’s role in “world building” is linked to earlier views of the mathematician William Kingdom Clifford.Less
It is shown how the epistemological thesis that physics can provide knowledge only of the structure of the physical world emerged in Arthur Eddington’s semi-popular, philosophical and technical writings on the general theory of relativity. The implicitly Kantian character of Eddington’s conception of “world building” in a geometrized physics is developed through examination of Eddington’s two principal works on general relativity. Eddington’s structuralism is contrasted with that associated with Bertrand Russell, and his conception of the mind’s role in “world building” is linked to earlier views of the mathematician William Kingdom Clifford.
Louis A. Girifalco
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780199228966
- eISBN:
- 9780191711183
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228966.003.0016
- Subject:
- Physics, History of Physics
The theory of relativity is unique and is based on very simple ideas. In fact, it has only one fundamental premise and one physical fact. The premise is that the laws of physics must be the same ...
More
The theory of relativity is unique and is based on very simple ideas. In fact, it has only one fundamental premise and one physical fact. The premise is that the laws of physics must be the same everywhere. It does not matter where we are or how we are moving, the laws must be the same. This is just an article of faith in the unity of nature. The physical fact is that the speed of light in a vacuum is the same no matter what. If the light source is stationary, or moving towards us, or moving away from us, we always measure the same speed. This is counterintuitive, but experiment shows it to be true and it must be accepted. Relativity then follows by inexorable logic. This minimalist foundation is part of the beauty of relativity. The structure of the theory is also so beautiful that it compels belief.Less
The theory of relativity is unique and is based on very simple ideas. In fact, it has only one fundamental premise and one physical fact. The premise is that the laws of physics must be the same everywhere. It does not matter where we are or how we are moving, the laws must be the same. This is just an article of faith in the unity of nature. The physical fact is that the speed of light in a vacuum is the same no matter what. If the light source is stationary, or moving towards us, or moving away from us, we always measure the same speed. This is counterintuitive, but experiment shows it to be true and it must be accepted. Relativity then follows by inexorable logic. This minimalist foundation is part of the beauty of relativity. The structure of the theory is also so beautiful that it compels belief.
Michael Tooley
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198250746
- eISBN:
- 9780191598623
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198250746.003.0012
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology
According to the Special Theory of Relativity, there is no such thing as absolute simultaneity, contrary to the view defended in the book. However, this chapter demonstrates that the Special Theory ...
More
According to the Special Theory of Relativity, there is no such thing as absolute simultaneity, contrary to the view defended in the book. However, this chapter demonstrates that the Special Theory of Relativity can be modified so as to allow absolute simultaneity. This modification involves reference to absolute space and the causal relations between space‐time points, and drops the assumption that the one‐way speed of light is constant through all frames of reference. Contrary to the orthodox theory, the modified version has the additional advantage of avoiding a clash with quantum mechanics, such as brought out by the Einstein‐Podolsky‐Rosen thought experiment and Bell's Theorem.Less
According to the Special Theory of Relativity, there is no such thing as absolute simultaneity, contrary to the view defended in the book. However, this chapter demonstrates that the Special Theory of Relativity can be modified so as to allow absolute simultaneity. This modification involves reference to absolute space and the causal relations between space‐time points, and drops the assumption that the one‐way speed of light is constant through all frames of reference. Contrary to the orthodox theory, the modified version has the additional advantage of avoiding a clash with quantum mechanics, such as brought out by the Einstein‐Podolsky‐Rosen thought experiment and Bell's Theorem.
Thomas Ryckman
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780195177176
- eISBN:
- 9780199835324
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195177177.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
Mortiz Schlick’s article of this title was highly influential in convincing several generations of philosophers that GTR outrightly falsified any variety of Kantian epistemology. In fact, the ...
More
Mortiz Schlick’s article of this title was highly influential in convincing several generations of philosophers that GTR outrightly falsified any variety of Kantian epistemology. In fact, the empiricism Schlick countered to transcendental idealism had not yet appeared in his previous writings but was quickly cobbled together from disparate elements: Henri Poincaré’s geometric conventionalism and selective readings of Einstein’s “Geometry and Experience” and earlier texts of Hermann von Helmholtz. The result of Schlick’s improvisation is that the empiricist interpretation of the spacetime metric rests on conventions regarding the behavior of rigid rods and clocks.Less
Mortiz Schlick’s article of this title was highly influential in convincing several generations of philosophers that GTR outrightly falsified any variety of Kantian epistemology. In fact, the empiricism Schlick countered to transcendental idealism had not yet appeared in his previous writings but was quickly cobbled together from disparate elements: Henri Poincaré’s geometric conventionalism and selective readings of Einstein’s “Geometry and Experience” and earlier texts of Hermann von Helmholtz. The result of Schlick’s improvisation is that the empiricist interpretation of the spacetime metric rests on conventions regarding the behavior of rigid rods and clocks.
Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780691175812
- eISBN:
- 9781400865765
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691175812.003.0003
- Subject:
- Physics, History of Physics
This section presents annotations of the manuscript of Albert Einstein's canonical 1916 paper on the general theory of relativity. It begins with a discussion of the foundation of the general theory ...
More
This section presents annotations of the manuscript of Albert Einstein's canonical 1916 paper on the general theory of relativity. It begins with a discussion of the foundation of the general theory of relativity, taking into account Einstein's fundamental considerations on the postulate of relativity, and more specifically why he went beyond the special theory of relativity. It then considers the spacetime continuum, explaining the role of coordinates in the new theory of gravitation. It also describes tensors of the second and higher ranks, multiplication of tensors, the equation of the geodetic line, the formation of tensors by differentiation, equations of motion of a material point in the gravitational field, the general form of the field equations of gravitation, and the laws of conservation in the general case. Finally, the behavior of rods and clocks in the static gravitational field is examined.Less
This section presents annotations of the manuscript of Albert Einstein's canonical 1916 paper on the general theory of relativity. It begins with a discussion of the foundation of the general theory of relativity, taking into account Einstein's fundamental considerations on the postulate of relativity, and more specifically why he went beyond the special theory of relativity. It then considers the spacetime continuum, explaining the role of coordinates in the new theory of gravitation. It also describes tensors of the second and higher ranks, multiplication of tensors, the equation of the geodetic line, the formation of tensors by differentiation, equations of motion of a material point in the gravitational field, the general form of the field equations of gravitation, and the laws of conservation in the general case. Finally, the behavior of rods and clocks in the static gravitational field is examined.
Michael Tooley
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198250746
- eISBN:
- 9780191598623
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198250746.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology
Defends a dynamic, or tensed, conception of time, according to which the past and the present are real while the future is not. This conception differs from traditional tensed views, according to ...
More
Defends a dynamic, or tensed, conception of time, according to which the past and the present are real while the future is not. This conception differs from traditional tensed views, according to which tensed facts are more basic than tenseless ones; on the contrary, tensed facts reduce to tenseless ones.The conception of time defended is supported by arguments from causation: there can be causation only in a world where the past and the present are real, while the future is not.Further, the direction of time can be defined by the direction of causation, and causation can be used to analyse temporal relations such as the relations of simultaneity and temporal priority.The dynamic conception of time developed is contrasted with alternative views and defended against numerous philosophical objections.It is also defended against implications of the Special Theory of Relativity: A modified version of the Special Theory of Relativity that allows for absolute simultaneity is suggested.Less
Defends a dynamic, or tensed, conception of time, according to which the past and the present are real while the future is not. This conception differs from traditional tensed views, according to which tensed facts are more basic than tenseless ones; on the contrary, tensed facts reduce to tenseless ones.
The conception of time defended is supported by arguments from causation: there can be causation only in a world where the past and the present are real, while the future is not.
Further, the direction of time can be defined by the direction of causation, and causation can be used to analyse temporal relations such as the relations of simultaneity and temporal priority.
The dynamic conception of time developed is contrasted with alternative views and defended against numerous philosophical objections.
It is also defended against implications of the Special Theory of Relativity: A modified version of the Special Theory of Relativity that allows for absolute simultaneity is suggested.
Thomas Ryckman
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780195177176
- eISBN:
- 9780199835324
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195177177.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
The general theory of relativity (GTR) brought a revolutionary transformation in philosophical as well as physical outlook. The philosopher Mortiz Schick, student of Max Planck, played a pivotal role ...
More
The general theory of relativity (GTR) brought a revolutionary transformation in philosophical as well as physical outlook. The philosopher Mortiz Schick, student of Max Planck, played a pivotal role in fashioning the received view that GTR implied the untenability of any type of Kantian philosophy. Schlick’s assessment ignored the philosophically motivated contributions to GTR by Hermann Weyl and Arthur Eddington. Paul Dirac in 1931 recognized the significance of a new method of a priori mathematical speculation in theoretical physics, tying it to Eddington (and to Weyl).Less
The general theory of relativity (GTR) brought a revolutionary transformation in philosophical as well as physical outlook. The philosopher Mortiz Schick, student of Max Planck, played a pivotal role in fashioning the received view that GTR implied the untenability of any type of Kantian philosophy. Schlick’s assessment ignored the philosophically motivated contributions to GTR by Hermann Weyl and Arthur Eddington. Paul Dirac in 1931 recognized the significance of a new method of a priori mathematical speculation in theoretical physics, tying it to Eddington (and to Weyl).
Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780691175812
- eISBN:
- 9781400865765
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691175812.003.0002
- Subject:
- Physics, History of Physics
This section discusses the development of Albert Einstein's ideas and attitudes as he struggled for eight years to come up with a general theory of relativity that would meet the physical and ...
More
This section discusses the development of Albert Einstein's ideas and attitudes as he struggled for eight years to come up with a general theory of relativity that would meet the physical and mathematical requirements laid down at the outset. It first considers Einstein's work on gravitation in Prague before analyzing three documents that played a significant role in his search for a theory of general relativity: the Zurich Notebook, the Einstein–Grossmann Entwurf paper, and the Einstein–Besso manuscript. It then looks at Einstein's completion of his general theory of relativity in Berlin in November 1915, along with his development of a new theory of gravitation within the framework of the special theory of relativity. It also examines the formulation of the basic idea that Einstein termed the “equivalence principle,” his Entwurf theory vs. David Hilbert's theory, and the 1916 manuscript of Einstein's work on the general theory of relativity.Less
This section discusses the development of Albert Einstein's ideas and attitudes as he struggled for eight years to come up with a general theory of relativity that would meet the physical and mathematical requirements laid down at the outset. It first considers Einstein's work on gravitation in Prague before analyzing three documents that played a significant role in his search for a theory of general relativity: the Zurich Notebook, the Einstein–Grossmann Entwurf paper, and the Einstein–Besso manuscript. It then looks at Einstein's completion of his general theory of relativity in Berlin in November 1915, along with his development of a new theory of gravitation within the framework of the special theory of relativity. It also examines the formulation of the basic idea that Einstein termed the “equivalence principle,” his Entwurf theory vs. David Hilbert's theory, and the 1916 manuscript of Einstein's work on the general theory of relativity.
Thomas Ryckman
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780195177176
- eISBN:
- 9780199835324
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195177177.003.0005
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
Weyl’s major contributions in the spring of 1918 to the general theory of relativity and to constructive analysis reveal the influence of Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological idealism. The known ...
More
Weyl’s major contributions in the spring of 1918 to the general theory of relativity and to constructive analysis reveal the influence of Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological idealism. The known personal contacts of Weyl and Husserl are summarized, and Husserl’s development of a distinctively transcendental approach to phenomenology is traced. A synopsis is given of the salient methodological aspects of Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology in evidence in Weyl’s “pure infinitesimal geometry”, and in its use as a framework “world geometry” for gravitation and electromagnetism.Less
Weyl’s major contributions in the spring of 1918 to the general theory of relativity and to constructive analysis reveal the influence of Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological idealism. The known personal contacts of Weyl and Husserl are summarized, and Husserl’s development of a distinctively transcendental approach to phenomenology is traced. A synopsis is given of the salient methodological aspects of Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology in evidence in Weyl’s “pure infinitesimal geometry”, and in its use as a framework “world geometry” for gravitation and electromagnetism.
Nicholas Maxwell
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199261550
- eISBN:
- 9780191698750
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199261550.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
This chapter argues that a view called aim-oriented empiricism solves the central problems of what scientific method is. This view is different from the orthodox of view of science which holds that ...
More
This chapter argues that a view called aim-oriented empiricism solves the central problems of what scientific method is. This view is different from the orthodox of view of science which holds that the distinctive feature of science is that laws and theories should be accepted and rejected solely with respect to the justice they do to the evidence. The important role that aim-oriented empiricism has played in scientific progress has been obscured by the fact that standard empiricism has long been the official conception of science. But Einstein’s discovery of general and special relativity has paved the way for the development of something close to aim-oriented empiricism. The chapter uses two doctrines to compare and contrast standard and aim-oriented empiricism: The Principle of Empiricism, and The Principle of Intellectual Integrity.Less
This chapter argues that a view called aim-oriented empiricism solves the central problems of what scientific method is. This view is different from the orthodox of view of science which holds that the distinctive feature of science is that laws and theories should be accepted and rejected solely with respect to the justice they do to the evidence. The important role that aim-oriented empiricism has played in scientific progress has been obscured by the fact that standard empiricism has long been the official conception of science. But Einstein’s discovery of general and special relativity has paved the way for the development of something close to aim-oriented empiricism. The chapter uses two doctrines to compare and contrast standard and aim-oriented empiricism: The Principle of Empiricism, and The Principle of Intellectual Integrity.
Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780691174631
- eISBN:
- 9781400888689
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691174631.003.0019
- Subject:
- Physics, History of Physics
This chapter reproduces the extant text of the two lectures. In these two lectures, Einstein explains very thoroughly the principles and conceptual foundations of, first, special and then general ...
More
This chapter reproduces the extant text of the two lectures. In these two lectures, Einstein explains very thoroughly the principles and conceptual foundations of, first, special and then general relativity with a minimum of mathematical apparatus. He also includes qualitative discussions of the main experiential evidence supporting his theories, such as the Michelson-Morley experiment (which Einstein calls the Michelson experiment) as support for the validity of the relativity principle, and also of the propagation of light. The guiding theme is the principle of relativity, which he begins to explain in basic kinematic terms. In the conclusion of both his lectures, he emphasizes, first, that the most important task of a physical theory is to reduce the number of independent assumptions rooted in experience, and that, second, spatial and temporal aspects of reality are inevitably tied up with all other physical laws.Less
This chapter reproduces the extant text of the two lectures. In these two lectures, Einstein explains very thoroughly the principles and conceptual foundations of, first, special and then general relativity with a minimum of mathematical apparatus. He also includes qualitative discussions of the main experiential evidence supporting his theories, such as the Michelson-Morley experiment (which Einstein calls the Michelson experiment) as support for the validity of the relativity principle, and also of the propagation of light. The guiding theme is the principle of relativity, which he begins to explain in basic kinematic terms. In the conclusion of both his lectures, he emphasizes, first, that the most important task of a physical theory is to reduce the number of independent assumptions rooted in experience, and that, second, spatial and temporal aspects of reality are inevitably tied up with all other physical laws.
Thomas Ryckman
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780195177176
- eISBN:
- 9780199835324
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195177177.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
The transcendental idealist underpinnings of the geometrized field physics proposed by Hermann Weyl and by Arthur Eddington remained largely unrecognized. Èmile Meyerson was a notable exception. It ...
More
The transcendental idealist underpinnings of the geometrized field physics proposed by Hermann Weyl and by Arthur Eddington remained largely unrecognized. Èmile Meyerson was a notable exception. It is argued that Meyerson came closest to comprehending the epistemological motivations of Weyl and Eddington yet was hindered by his failure to understand how transcendental idealism could be supported in the absence of a literal interpretation of the Transcendental Aesthetic. While geometrical unification in physics ostensibly supports a structural realism, the theories of Weyl and Eddington, to the contrary, are explicit attempts to show how the concept of physical object has been transformed within the general theory of relativity.Less
The transcendental idealist underpinnings of the geometrized field physics proposed by Hermann Weyl and by Arthur Eddington remained largely unrecognized. Èmile Meyerson was a notable exception. It is argued that Meyerson came closest to comprehending the epistemological motivations of Weyl and Eddington yet was hindered by his failure to understand how transcendental idealism could be supported in the absence of a literal interpretation of the Transcendental Aesthetic. While geometrical unification in physics ostensibly supports a structural realism, the theories of Weyl and Eddington, to the contrary, are explicit attempts to show how the concept of physical object has been transformed within the general theory of relativity.
Thomas Ryckman
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780195177176
- eISBN:
- 9780199835324
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195177177.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
The general theory of relativity (1915) was also a defining event for 20th century philosophy of science. During the decisive first ten years of the theory’s existence, two main tendencies dominated ...
More
The general theory of relativity (1915) was also a defining event for 20th century philosophy of science. During the decisive first ten years of the theory’s existence, two main tendencies dominated its philosophical reception. It is argued that the path actually taken, which became logical empiricist philosophy of science, greatly contributed to the current impasse over scientific realism. On the other hand, new possibilities are opened in revisiting and reviving the spirit of a more sophisticated tendency, here broadly termed ‘transcendental idealism,’ a cluster of viewpoints principally associated with Ernst Cassirer, Hermann Weyl, and Arthur Eddington. In particular, Weyl’s reformulation of gravitational and electromagnetic theory within the framework of a “pure infinitesimal geometry” under the explicit inspiration of Edmund Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological idealism is traced in detail and further articulated. It is further argued that Einstein, though initially paying lip service to the emerging philosophy of logical empiricism, ended up siding de facto with the broad contours of the transcendental idealist tendency, which is also a significant progenitor of the contemporary point of view misleadingly designated “structural realism”.Less
The general theory of relativity (1915) was also a defining event for 20th century philosophy of science. During the decisive first ten years of the theory’s existence, two main tendencies dominated its philosophical reception. It is argued that the path actually taken, which became logical empiricist philosophy of science, greatly contributed to the current impasse over scientific realism. On the other hand, new possibilities are opened in revisiting and reviving the spirit of a more sophisticated tendency, here broadly termed ‘transcendental idealism,’ a cluster of viewpoints principally associated with Ernst Cassirer, Hermann Weyl, and Arthur Eddington. In particular, Weyl’s reformulation of gravitational and electromagnetic theory within the framework of a “pure infinitesimal geometry” under the explicit inspiration of Edmund Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological idealism is traced in detail and further articulated. It is further argued that Einstein, though initially paying lip service to the emerging philosophy of logical empiricism, ended up siding de facto with the broad contours of the transcendental idealist tendency, which is also a significant progenitor of the contemporary point of view misleadingly designated “structural realism”.
William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith
- Published in print:
- 1995
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198263838
- eISBN:
- 9780191682650
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198263838.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion, Theology
Contemporary science presents us with the remarkable theory that the universe began to exist about fifteen billion years ago with a cataclysmic explosion called ‘the Big Bang’. The question of ...
More
Contemporary science presents us with the remarkable theory that the universe began to exist about fifteen billion years ago with a cataclysmic explosion called ‘the Big Bang’. The question of whether Big Bang cosmology supports theism or atheism has long been a matter of discussion among the general public and in popular science books, but has received scant attention from philosophers. This book sets out to fill this gap by means of a sustained debate between two philosophers, William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith, who defend opposing positions. Craig argues that the Big Bang that began the universe was created by God, while Smith argues that the Big Bang has no cause. The book consists of alternating chapters by Craig and Smith, with each chapter being either a criticism of a preceding chapter or being criticized by a subsequent chapter. Part One consists of Craig's arguments that the past is necessarily finite and that God created the Big Bang, and Smith's criticisms of these arguments. Part Two presents Smith's arguments that Big Bang cosmology is inconsistent with theism and Craig's criticisms of Smith's argument. The authors' arguments are based on Einstein's theory of relativity, and there is also a discussion of Stephen Hawking's new quantum cosmology.Less
Contemporary science presents us with the remarkable theory that the universe began to exist about fifteen billion years ago with a cataclysmic explosion called ‘the Big Bang’. The question of whether Big Bang cosmology supports theism or atheism has long been a matter of discussion among the general public and in popular science books, but has received scant attention from philosophers. This book sets out to fill this gap by means of a sustained debate between two philosophers, William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith, who defend opposing positions. Craig argues that the Big Bang that began the universe was created by God, while Smith argues that the Big Bang has no cause. The book consists of alternating chapters by Craig and Smith, with each chapter being either a criticism of a preceding chapter or being criticized by a subsequent chapter. Part One consists of Craig's arguments that the past is necessarily finite and that God created the Big Bang, and Smith's criticisms of these arguments. Part Two presents Smith's arguments that Big Bang cosmology is inconsistent with theism and Craig's criticisms of Smith's argument. The authors' arguments are based on Einstein's theory of relativity, and there is also a discussion of Stephen Hawking's new quantum cosmology.
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- March 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226327327
- eISBN:
- 9780226327365
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226327365.003.0006
- Subject:
- History, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine
This chapter explores the unstable conceptual field by means of a comparative discussion of two of the most ambitious scholarly projects of the age: James Frazer's Golden Bough and Einstein's special ...
More
This chapter explores the unstable conceptual field by means of a comparative discussion of two of the most ambitious scholarly projects of the age: James Frazer's Golden Bough and Einstein's special theory of relativity. The movement of thought centered upon “the principle of Universal Relativity” had slowly but surely crystallized in the form of positive, sustained intellectual applications. The Golden Bough is the text in which the reconceptualization of anthropology as a thoroughgoing theory of symbolism, and the consequent identification of it with a radical principle of relativity, is most decisively asserted. Thus, the interlocking bodies of work of both Frazer and Einstein overturn the proposition about relativity movement.Less
This chapter explores the unstable conceptual field by means of a comparative discussion of two of the most ambitious scholarly projects of the age: James Frazer's Golden Bough and Einstein's special theory of relativity. The movement of thought centered upon “the principle of Universal Relativity” had slowly but surely crystallized in the form of positive, sustained intellectual applications. The Golden Bough is the text in which the reconceptualization of anthropology as a thoroughgoing theory of symbolism, and the consequent identification of it with a radical principle of relativity, is most decisively asserted. Thus, the interlocking bodies of work of both Frazer and Einstein overturn the proposition about relativity movement.
Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780691174631
- eISBN:
- 9781400888689
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691174631.003.0001
- Subject:
- Physics, History of Physics
This introductory chapter provides a brief background into the development of Albert Einstein's special and general theories of relativity. As a characteristic stage in the development of the theory, ...
More
This introductory chapter provides a brief background into the development of Albert Einstein's special and general theories of relativity. As a characteristic stage in the development of the theory, the chapter focuses on the formative years which have, remarkably, received less attention from historians than subsequent periods. It argues that a “renaissance” of general relativity had begun essentially as the result of a community-building effort turning the theory into a universally applicable framework. This revival was followed by what has been called the “golden age” of relativity, which witnessed new conceptual insights, such as those into the nature of spacetime singularities, and turned the theory into the foundation of modern astrophysics and observational cosmology.Less
This introductory chapter provides a brief background into the development of Albert Einstein's special and general theories of relativity. As a characteristic stage in the development of the theory, the chapter focuses on the formative years which have, remarkably, received less attention from historians than subsequent periods. It argues that a “renaissance” of general relativity had begun essentially as the result of a community-building effort turning the theory into a universally applicable framework. This revival was followed by what has been called the “golden age” of relativity, which witnessed new conceptual insights, such as those into the nature of spacetime singularities, and turned the theory into the foundation of modern astrophysics and observational cosmology.
A. J. Leggett
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199211241
- eISBN:
- 9780191706837
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199211241.003.0001
- Subject:
- Physics, Particle Physics / Astrophysics / Cosmology
This chapter traces the history of physics as we know it from its beginnings in the astronomy and mechanics of the 17th century, through the development of electromagnetism, optics, and mechanics in ...
More
This chapter traces the history of physics as we know it from its beginnings in the astronomy and mechanics of the 17th century, through the development of electromagnetism, optics, and mechanics in the 18th, and the unification of optics with electromagnetism and thermodynamics with molecular theory in the 19th century, up to the two great revolutions of the early 20th century: the special theory of relativity, and quantum mechanics. It ends with a discussion of the relationship of physics to mathematics and philosophy, and of the nature of the fundamental assumptions about the world which underpin the subject.Less
This chapter traces the history of physics as we know it from its beginnings in the astronomy and mechanics of the 17th century, through the development of electromagnetism, optics, and mechanics in the 18th, and the unification of optics with electromagnetism and thermodynamics with molecular theory in the 19th century, up to the two great revolutions of the early 20th century: the special theory of relativity, and quantum mechanics. It ends with a discussion of the relationship of physics to mathematics and philosophy, and of the nature of the fundamental assumptions about the world which underpin the subject.
Marc Lange
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- December 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190269487
- eISBN:
- 9780190269500
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190269487.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, General
This chapter continues to develop an account of non-causal “explanations by constraint.” It studies a longstanding dispute regarding Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity: whether the ...
More
This chapter continues to develop an account of non-causal “explanations by constraint.” It studies a longstanding dispute regarding Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity: whether the coordinate transformations (the Lorentz transformations) are explained as byproducts of the force laws or as consequences of symmetry principles including the principle of relativity. It is argued that in the latter case, they have explanations by constraint; the special theory of relativity is then (what Einstein called) a principle theory rather than a constructive theory. On the basis of James Jeans’s similar remarks, a novel interpretation is offered of Einstein’s famous remarks concerning principle theories, according to which Einstein does regard constructive theories as having explanatory power even though a complete account requires constructive theories. A careful account is given of how an explanation by constraint works by supplying information about the source of the especially strong necessity possessed by the fact being explained.Less
This chapter continues to develop an account of non-causal “explanations by constraint.” It studies a longstanding dispute regarding Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity: whether the coordinate transformations (the Lorentz transformations) are explained as byproducts of the force laws or as consequences of symmetry principles including the principle of relativity. It is argued that in the latter case, they have explanations by constraint; the special theory of relativity is then (what Einstein called) a principle theory rather than a constructive theory. On the basis of James Jeans’s similar remarks, a novel interpretation is offered of Einstein’s famous remarks concerning principle theories, according to which Einstein does regard constructive theories as having explanatory power even though a complete account requires constructive theories. A careful account is given of how an explanation by constraint works by supplying information about the source of the especially strong necessity possessed by the fact being explained.
