Friedman׳s thesis

Samaroo, Ryan

doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2015.03.007

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The following challenge is defended in Samaroo (2015). In this and the next section, I develop and refine a few main points.…”

Section: Only Coordinating Principles Are Constitutivementioning

confidence: 98%

“…Friedman also identifies a third level comprised of distinctly philosophical or metatheoretical principles that underlie and motivate discussions of the framework-defining principles, and so the transition from one theory to another. In fact, we find running through Friedman's work a thesis about the nature of revolutionary theory change that I have called "Friedman's thesis"; see Samaroo (2015) for an examination.…”

Section: Friedman's Approach To the Analysis Of Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This account turns on the notion of a criterion of identity and considers its employment in the foundations of space-time theories. Samaroo (2015). I argued that while the equivalence principle motivates the 1907 inertial frame concept, it is the geodesic principle that constitutes this concept by expressing a criterion for its application.…”

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Friedman and Some of His Critics on the Foundations of General Relativity

Samaroo¹

2020

Einstein Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is an examination of Michael Friedman's analysis of the conceptual structure of Einstein's theory of gravitation, with a particular focus on a number of critical reactions to it. Friedman argues that conceptual frameworks in physics are stratified, and that a satisfactory analysis of a framework requires us to recognize the differences in epistemological character of its components. He distinguishes first-level principles that define a framework of empirical investigation from second-level principles that are formulable in that framework. On his account, the theory of Riemannian manifolds and the equivalence principle define the framework of empirical investigation in which Einstein's field equations are an intellectual and empirical possibility. Friedman is a major interpreter of relativity and his view has provoked a number of critical reactions, nearly all of which miss the mark. I aim to free Friedman's analysis of Einsteinian gravitation from a baggage of misconceptions and to defend the notion that physical theories are stratified. But I, too, am a critic and I criticize Friedman's view on several counts, notably his account of a constitutive principle and that of the principle of equivalence.

show abstract

“…The following challenge is defended in Samaroo (2015). In this and the next section, I develop and refine a few main points.…”

Section: Only Coordinating Principles Are Constitutivementioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Friedman's Approach To the Analysis Of Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Friedman and Some of His Critics on the Foundations of General Relativity

Samaroo¹

2020

Einstein Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Less historically, one might ask whether Friedman's approach is viable on its own terms. For example, Samaroo (2015) argues that what Friedman regards as being constitutive principles of the relativised a priori (e.g., the equivalence principle, in the case of general relativity) are in fact not so. (An interesting sufficient criterion for what should count as relativised a priori has been provided by Curiel (2016): kinematical constraints are relativised a priori statements in the precise sense that they are “precondition[s] for the appropriate application of a theory in modeling a kind of system”.…”

Section: Kantian Transcendentalist Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The epistemology of spacetime

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How is it that the basic structures of space and time come to manifest themselves in physical theories and theorising, and in our empirical experience of the world? This question is central to an important field of the philosophy of physics: the epistemology of spacetime. In this article, we survey systematically the various responses which have been offered to this question, highlighting little‐explored connections and open research questions.

show abstract

“…21 Or, if they have been found they have not been recognized as such within the standard science of the GR paradigm. 22 SeeFriedman (2001),Samaroo (2015), andCrowther (2018).© 2021 Stiftelsen Theoria…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirically Incoherent Quantum Gravity

Norton

2021

Theoria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is argued that certain quantum theories of gravitystring theory, loop quantum gravity, non-commutative field theorydo not include spacetime as part of their fundamental ontology. There is a concern in the literature that theories of this kind are physically opaque and empirically incoherent. In this paper, I clarify and amend Huggett and Wüthrich's argument against these claims. Whereas the content of this paper centres on the disappearance and re-emergence of spacetime in quantum gravity, much of the philosophical work centres more generally on issues of (emergent) ontology and how this ontology can be extracted from formal theories, the role of formal derivations in justifying ontological relations, the nature of Kuhnian revolutions, and the application of these revolutions to quantum gravity.

show abstract

Friedman׳s thesis

Cited by 6 publications

References 22 publications

Friedman and Some of His Critics on the Foundations of General Relativity

Friedman and Some of His Critics on the Foundations of General Relativity

The epistemology of spacetime

Empirically Incoherent Quantum Gravity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About