Skip to main content

Pitholes in Space-Time: Structure and Ontology of Physical Geometry

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Logic, Mathematics, Philosophy, Vintage Enthusiasms

Part of the book series: The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science ((WONS,volume 75))

Abstract

The philosophy of space and time did not begin with Newton and Leibniz, but there are perfectly good reasons why contemporary discussions see their origin in the controversy between those two. On the one hand, the issues explicitly raised between them—especially, and most obviously, the epistemological and methodological questions surrounding Newton’s theory of absolute space and motion—have never lost their relevance to the continuing evolution of physics. On the other hand, in different but equally unprecedented ways, they saw the question of the nature of space and time as part of a larger set of deeply interconnected questions, not only in the foundations of physics, but also in metaphysics, epistemology, and the foundations of mathematics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Bell, J. L. (1998). A Primer of Infinitesimal Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, J. L. (2005). The Continuous and the Infinitesimal in Mathematics and Philosophy. Polimetrica, Milan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belot, G. and Earman, J. (2001). Pre-Socratic quantum gravity. In Callender, C. and Huggett, N., editors, Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale, pages 213–255. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield, J. (1989). The hole truth. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 40:1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiSalle, R. (1994). On dynamics, indiscernibility, and spacetime ontology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45:265–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiSalle, R. (1995). Spacetime theory as physical geometry. Erkenntnis, 42:317–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiSalle, R. (2002). Newton’s philosophical analysis of space and time. In Cohen, I. and Smith, G., editors, The Cambridge Companion to Newton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiSalle, R. (2006). Understanding Space-Time: The Philosophical Development of Physics from Newton to Einstein. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dorato, M. (2000). Substantivalism, relationalism, and structural spacetime realism. Foundations of Physics, 30:1605–1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorato, M. (2006). Is structural spacetime realism relationalism in disguise? The supererogatory nature of the substantivalism/relationalism debate. In Proceedings of the Second Montreal Conference on the Ontology of Spacetime, Concordia University, June 2006. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00003393/01/struct_spacfin.doc

  • Earman, J. (1989). World Enough and Spacetime: Absolute and Relational Theories of Motion. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earman, J. and Norton, J. (1987). What price spacetime substantivalism? The hole story. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 38:515–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz, G. (1692). Letter to S. Foucher. In Gerhardt, C., editor, Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1960), volume I, pages 415–416. Georg Olms, Hildeshiem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz, G. (1704). Nouveaux essais sur l’entendement. In Gerhardt, C., editor, Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1960), volume V, pages 39–509. Georg Olms, Hildeshiem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz, G. (1705). Letter to B. de Volder. In Gerhardt, C., editor, Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1960), pages 278–279. Georg Olms, Hildeshiem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz, G. (1715). Letter to L. Bourguet. In Gerhardt, C., editor, Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1960), volume III, pages 578–583. Georg Olms, Hildeshiem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz, G. (1716). Correspondence with S. Clarke. In Gerhardt, C., editor, Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1960), volume VII, pages 345–440. Georg Olms, Hildeshiem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maudlin, T. (1990). Substances and space-time: What Aristotle would have said to einstein. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 21:531–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maudlin, T. (1993). Buckets of water and waves of space: Why space-time is probably a substance. Philosophy of Science, 60, 183–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Misner, C., Thorne, K., and Wheeler, J. (1973). Gravitation. W.H. Freeman, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, I. (2005). On the gravity and equilibrium of fluids. In Janiak, A., editor, Newton’s Philosophical Writings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W. (1953). On what there is. In From a Logical Point of View. Harper, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riemann, B. (1867). Ueber die Hypothesen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen. In Weber, H., editor, The Collected Works of Bernhard Riemann, pages 272–287. B.G. Teubner, Leipzig. Published 1902. Reprint, New York: Dover Publications, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. (1903). The Principles of Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rynasiewicz, R. (1992). Rings, holes, and substantivalism: On the program of Leibniz algebras. Philosophy of Science, 59:572–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smolin, L. (2005). The case for background independence. Technical Report 0507235, arXiv: High Energy Physics—Theory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stachel, J. (2002). The relations between things versus the things between relations: The deeper meaning of the hole argument. In Malament, D., editor, Reading Natural Philosophy: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science and Mathematics to Honor Howard Stein on His 70th Birthday, pages 231–266. Open Court Press, Chicago IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stachel, J. (2005). Structure, individuality, and quantum gravity. Technical Report 0507078v2, arXiv: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, H. (1967). Newtonian space-time. Texas Quarterly, 10:174–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyl, H. (1927). Philosophie der Mathematik und der Naturwissenschaften. R. Oldenburg Verlag, Munich and Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert DiSalle .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

DiSalle, R. (2011). Pitholes in Space-Time: Structure and Ontology of Physical Geometry. In: DeVidi, D., Hallett, M., Clarke, P. (eds) Logic, Mathematics, Philosophy, Vintage Enthusiasms. The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, vol 75. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0214-1_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics