Abstract
The claim that distant simultaneity with respect to an inertial observer is conventional arose in the context of a space-and-time rather than a spacetime ontology. Reformulating this problem in terms of a spacetime ontology merely trivializes it. In the context of flat space, flat time, and a linear inertial structure (a purely space-and-time formalism), we prove that the hyperplanes of space for a given inertial observer are determined by a purely spatial criterion that depends for its validity only on the two-way light principle, which is universally regarded as empirically verified. All (empirically determined) “spacetime” entities, such as the conformal structure or light surface equation, are used in a purely mathematical manner that is independent of and hence isneutral with respect to the ontological status that is ascribed to them. In this regard, our criterion is significantly stronger than thespacetime criterion recently advanced by D. Malament, which appeals explicitly to the conformal orthogonality of spacetime vectors and to the invariance of the conformal-orthogonal structure of spacetime under the causal automorphisms of spacetime. Once the hyperplanes of space for a given inertial observer have been determined by our empirical and purely spatial criterion, the following holds: there exists one and only one\(\vec \varepsilon \)-synchronization procedure, namely the standard procedure proposed by Einstein, such that the planes of common time are thesame as the nonconventional hyperplanes of space for the inertial observer. It follows that our criterion provides an empirical even if indirect method for determining that the one-way speed of light is the same as the average two-way speed of light. In addition, two inertial observers that are not at rest with respect to each other necessarily havedifferent hyperplanes of space, and consequently their respective spatial views cannot be encompassed in a single three-dimensional space. Hence, our purely spatial criterion provides an empirical motivation for adopting the more comprehensive spacetime ontology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
M. Castagnino, “Some remarks on the Marzke-Wheeler method of measurement,”Nuovo Cimento B 54, 149–150 (1968).
M. Castagnino, “The Riemannian structure of space-time as a consequence of a measurement method,”J. Math. Phys. 12, 2203–2211 (1971).
R. K. Clifton, “Some recent controversy over the possibility of experimentally determining isotropy in the speed of light,”Philos. Sci. 56, 688–696 (1989).
E. Crapo, “The tetrahedral-octahedral truss,”Struct. Topol. 7, 51–60 (1982).
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “Jet bundles and path structures,”J. Math. Phys. 21, 1340–1351 (1980); erratum,23, 345 (1982).
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “Spacetime G-structures and their prolongations,”J. Math. Phys. 22, 2598–2611 (1981).
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “The status and meaning of the laws of inertia,” inProceedings of the 1982 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. I, P. D. Asquith and T. Nickles, eds. (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, 1982), pp. 257–274.
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “A realist field ontology of the causal-inertial structure (the refutation of geometric conventionalism),” University of Regina preprint (1981), extended version (1984), 192 pp. Final version forthcoming as a volume inSynthese Library.
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “Constraints on the nature of inertial motion arising from the universality of free fall and the conformal causal structure of spacetime,”J. Math. Phys. 25, 3513–3526 (1984).
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “Any physical, monopole equation-of-motion structure uniquely determines a projective inertial structure and an (n−1) force,”J. Math. Phys. 28, 1492–1498 (1987).
R. A. Coleman and H. Korte, “Harmonic analysis of directing fields,”J. Math. Phys. 31, 127–130 (1990).
R. De Ritis and S. Guccione, “Can Einstein's definition of simultaneity be considered a convention?”Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 17, 595–598 (1985).
J. Ehlers, R. A. E. Pirani, and A. Schild, “The geometry of free fall and light propagation,” inGeneral Relativity, Papers in Honour of J. L. Synge, L. O' Raifeartaigh, ed. (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1972), pp. 63–84.
A. Einstein, “On the electrodynamics of moving bodies,” inThe Principle of Relativity, (Dover, New York, 1952), pp. 36–65; translated by W. Perret and G. B. Jeffery from “Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper,”Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 17, 891–921 (1905).
A. Einstein, “Reply to criticisms,” inAlbert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, P. A. Schilpp, ed. (Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1969), pp. 665–688.
E. Feenberg, “Conventionality in distant simultaneity,”Found. Phys. 4, 177–203 (1971).
Shing-Fai Fung and K. C. Hsieh, “Is the isotropy of the speed of light a convention?”Am. J. Phys. 48, 654–657 (1980).
C. Giannoni, “Relativistic mechanics and electrodynamics without one-way velocity assumptions,”Philos. Sci. 45, 17–46 (1978).
A. Grünbaum, Philosophical Problems of Space and Time, 2nd ed. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1973).
P. Havas, “Simultaneity, conventionalism, general covariance, and the special theory of relativity,”Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 19, 435–453 (1987).
M. Jammer, “Some Fundamental Problems in the Special Theory of Relativity,” inProblems in the Foundations of Physics, Proceedings of the International School of Physics, Enrico Fermi, Course LXXII, G. Toraldo di Francia, ed. (North Holland, New York, 1979), pp. 202–236.
L. Karlov, “Clocks in Nonstandard Synchrony,”Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 19, 455–464 (1987).
P. Kolen and D. G. Torr, “An experiment to measure the one-way velocity of propagation of electromagnetic radiation,”Found. Phys. 12, 401–411 (1982).
W. Kundt and B. Hoffmann, “Determination of gravitational standard time,” inRecent Developments in General Relativity (Pergamon, New York, 1962), pp. 303–336.
D. Malament, “Causal theories of time and the conventionality of simultaneity,”Nous 11, 293–300 (1977).
R. Mansouri and R. U. Sexl, “A test theory of special relativity: I. simultaneity and clock synchronisation,”Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 8, 497–513 (1977).
R. Mansouri and R. U. Sexl, “A test theory of special relativity: II. first-order tests,”Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 8, 515–524 (1977).
R. Mansouri and R. U. Sexl, “A test theory of special relativity: III. second-order tests,”Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 8, 809–814 (1977).
R. F. Marzke and J. A. Wheeler, “Gravitation as geometry, I: the geometry of space-time and the geometrical standard meter,” inGravitation and Relativity, Hong-Yee Chiu and W. F. Hoffmann, eds. (Benjamin, Amsterdam, 1964), pp. 40–64.
P. Mittelstaedt,Der Zeitbegriff in der Physik (B. I.-Wissenschaftsverlag, Zürich, 1976).
C. Nissim-Sabat, “A gedankenexperiment to measure the one-way velocity of light,”Br. J. Philos. Sci. 35, 62–64 (1984).
P. Ohrstrom, “Conventionality in distant simultaneity,”Found. Phys. 10, 333–343 (1980).
H. Reichenbach,The Philosophy of Space and Time (Dover, New York, 1958).
H. Reichenbach,Axiomatization of the Theory of Relativity (University of California Press, Los Angeles, 1969).
H. Reichenbach, “The philosophical significance of the theory of relativity,” inAlbert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, P. A. Schilpp, ed. (Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1969), pp. 289–311.
W. C. Salmon, “The conventionality of simultaneity,”Philos. Sci. 36, 44–63 (1969).
W. C. Salmon, “The philosophical significance of the one-way velocity of light,”Noûs 11, 253–292 (1977).
G. Stolakis, “Against conventionalism in physics,”Br. J. Philos. Sci. 37, 229–232 (1986).
H. Weyl, “Zur Infinitesimalgeometrie: Einordnung der projektiven und konformen Auffassung,”Nachr. Königl. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen, Math.-phys. Kl., 99–112 (1921) (reprinted in Ref. 40, Vol. II, 195–207).
H. Weyl,Gesammelte Abhandlungen, 4 Vols., K. Chandrasekharan, ed. (Springer, Berlin, 1968).
H. Weyl, “Mathematische Analyse des Raumproblems,” inDas Kontinuum, H. Weyl, ed. (Chelsea, New York, no date).
W. Whiteley, “Motions of trusses and bipartite frameworks,”Struct. Topol. 7, 61–68 (1982).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Coleman, R.A., Korte, H. An empirical, purely spatial criterion for the planes ofF-simultaneity. Found Phys 21, 417–437 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00733356
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00733356