Relationalism about mechanics based on a minimalist ontology of matter
Tóm tắt
This paper elaborates on relationalism about space and time as motivated by a minimalist ontology of the physical world: there are only matter points that are individuated by the distance relations among them, with these relations changing. We assess two strategies to combine this ontology with physics, using classical mechanics as an example. The Humean strategy adopts the standard, non-relationalist physical theories as they stand and interprets their formal apparatus as the means of bookkeeping of the change of the distance relations instead of committing us to additional elements of the ontology. The alternative theoretical strategy seeks to combine the relationalist ontology with a relationalist physical theory that reproduces the predictions of the standard theory in the domain where these are empirically tested. We show that, as things stand, this strategy cannot be accomplished without compromising a minimalist relationalist ontology.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Anderson, E. (2013). The problem of time and quantum cosmology in the relational particle mechanics arena. arXiv:1111.1472v3 [gr-qc].
Anderson, E. (2015). Configuration spaces in fundamental physics. arXiv:1503.01507v2 [gr-qc].
Ariew, R. (Ed.) (2000). G. W. Leibniz and S Clarke: correspondence. Hackett: Indianapolis.
Bach, A. (1997). Indistinguishable classical particles. Berlin: Springer.
Barbour, J. (2003). Scale-invariant gravity: particle dynamics. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 20, 1543–1570.
Barbour, J. (2012). Shape dynamics. an introduction. In Finster, F., Müller, O., Nardmann, M., Tolksdorf, J., & Zeidler, E. (Eds.) Quantum field theory and gravity (pp. 257–297). Birkhäuser: Basel.
Barbour, J., & Bertotti, B. (1982). Mach’s principle and the structure of dynamical theories. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 382, 295–306.
Barbour, J., Foster, B., & Ó Murchadha, N. (2002). Relativity without relativity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 19, 3217–3248.
Barrett, J.A. (2014). Entanglement and disentanglement in relativistic quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 48, 168–174.
Belot, G. (1999). Rehabilitating relationalism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 13, 35–52.
Belot, G. (2000). Geometry and motion. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 51(4), 561–595.
Belot, G. (2001). The principle of sufficient reason. Journal of Philosophy, 98, 55–74.
Belot, G. (2011). Geometric possibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bhogal, H., & Perry, Z.R. (2016). What the Humean should say about entanglement. Noûs. doi:10.1111/nous.12095.
Blackburn, S. (1990). Filling in space. Analysis, 50, 62–65.
Callender, C. (2015). One world, one beable. Synthese, 192(10), 3153–3177.
Colin, S., & Struyve, W. (2007). A Dirac sea pilot-wave model for quantum field theory. Journal of Physics A, 40(26), 7309–7341.
Deckert, D. -A. (2010). Electrodynamic absorber theory – a mathematical study. Tönning: Der Andere Verlag.
Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., & Zanghì, N. (2013). Quantum physics without quantum philosophy. Berlin: Springer.
Earman, J. (1989). World enough and space-time. Absolute versus relational theories of spacetime. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Earman, J. (2002). Thoroughly modern mcTaggart or what mcTaggart would have said if he had read the general theory of relativity. Philosopher’s Imprint, 2(3). http://www.philosophersimprint.org/002003/.
Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1949). On the motion of particles in general relativity theory. Canadian Journal of Mathematics, 1, 209–241.
Esfeld, M. (2014). Quantum Humeanism, or: physicalism without properties. The Philosophical Quarterly, 64(256), 453–470.
Esfeld, M., & Lam, V. (2011). Ontic structural realism as a metaphysics of objects. In A., & Bokulich, P. (Eds.) Scientific structuralism (pp. 143–159). Dordrecht: Springer.
Frankel, T. (1997). The geometry of physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
French, S. (2014). The structure of the world metaphysics and representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gerhardt, C.I. (1890). Die philosophischen Schriften von G. W. Leibniz Band 7. Berlin: Weidmannsche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Gryb, S., & Thébault, K. P. Y. (2016). Time remains. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. doi:10.1093/bjps/axv009.
Hacking, I. (1975). The identity of indiscernibles. Journal of Philosophy, 72, 249–256.
Hall, N. (2009). Humean reductionism about laws of nature. Unpublished manuscript. http://philpapers.org/rec/halhra.
Holland, P. (2001a). Hamiltonian theory of wave and particle in quantum mechanics I: Liouville’s theorem and the interpretation of the de broglie-Bohm theory. Il Nuovo Cimento B, 116, 1043–1070.
Holland, P. (2001b). Hamiltonian theory of wave and particle in quantum mechanics II: Hamilton-jacobi theory and particle back-reaction. Il Nuovo Cimento B, 116, 1143–1172.
Huggett, N. (2006). The regularity account of relational spacetime. Mind, 115 (457), 41–73.
Ladyman, J. (2007). On the identity and diversity of objects in a structure. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume, 81(1), 23–43.
Ladyman, J., & Ross, D. (2007). Every thing must go: metaphysics naturalized. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lanczos, C. (1970). The variational principles of mechanics. University of Toronto Press, fourth edition.
Lewis, D. (1986). On the plurality of worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.
Locke, J. (1690). An essay concerning human understanding.
Mach, E. (1919). The science of mechanics: a critical and historical account of its development, 4th edn., Translation by Thomas J. McCormack. Chicago: Open Court.
Maudlin, T. (1993). Buckets of water and waves of space: why spacetime is probably a substance. Philosophy of Science, 60, 183–203.
Maudlin, T. (2002). Thoroughly muddled mcTaggart or how to abuse gauge freedom to create metaphysical monstrosities. Philosopher’s Imprint, 2(4).
Maudlin, T. (2007). The metaphysics within physics. New York: Oxford University Press.
McTaggart, J.E. (1908). The unreality of time. Mind, 17(68), 457–474.
Miller, E. (2014). Quantum entanglement, Bohmian mechanics, and Humean supervenience. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 92, 567–583.
Misner, C.W., Thorne, K.S., & Wheeler, J.A. (1973). Gravitation. Freeman: San Francisco.
Muller, F.A. (2011). How to defeat Wüthrich’s abysmal embarassment argument against space-time structuralism. Philosophy of Science, 78, 1046–1057.
Pooley, O. (2013). Substantivalist and relationalist approaches to spacetime. In Batterman, R. (Ed.) The oxford handbook of philosophy of physics (pp. 522–586). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pooley, O., & Brown, H. (2002). Relationalism rehabilitated? I: classical mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 53, 183–204.
Rovelli, C. (2004). Quantum gravity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Saunders, S. (2006). Are quantum particles objects? Analysis, 66, 52–63.
Saunders, S. (2013). Rethinking newton’s principia. Philosophy of Science, 80 (1), 22–48.
Vassallo, A. (2015). Can Bohmian mechanics be made background independent? Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 52, 242–250.
Vassallo, A., & Esfeld, M. (2016). Leibnizian relationalism for general relativistic physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2016.08.006
Vassallo, A., & Ip, P.H. (2016). On the conceptual issues surrounding the notion of relational Bohmian dynamics. Foundations of Physics, 46, 943–972.
Wheeler, J.A. (1962). Geometrodynamics. New York: Academic Press.
Wüthrich, C. (2009). Challenging the spacetime structuralist. Philosophy of Science, 76, 1039–1051.