Two dogmas of dynamicism

Weatherall, James Owen

doi:10.1007/s11229-020-02880-0

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A traditional answer has to do with noting the fact that the chrono-geometry of the metric of spacetime is determined through the operations of measuring physical/dynamical systems like rods and clocks. This hint (as Weatherall (2021) notes) is also the original inspiration for the socalled dynamical approach to relativity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Take, for instance, the recent debate concerning the two primary perspectives on the relation between spacetime and dynamics in relativity theory: the geometrical approach (GA) and the dynamical approach (DA). 3 Although some e orts have been made to play down the di erences in this dispute (Weatherall, 2021;Read, 2020), it is often understood in an extremely stylized and highly formalistic fashion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 This is problematic for di erent reasons. Weatherall (2021) mentions the di culty of arriving at a formulation of the SEP that would allow us to identify which are the relevant symmetries of the equations, and also the question of whether this is su cient for us to recover spacetime as we understand it. Without going into too much detail, the problem with this approach can be simply put like this: if the formulation of the SEP is equivalent to the claim that the symmetries of the dynamical laws coincide (locally, if you want) with the symmetries of a metric field, then you have not gained much at all by introducing the SEP; you are still determining the spacetime symmetries of some structures by definition and then justifying their spatio-temporal character by projecting a functional perspective onto this state of a airs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What spacetime does: ideal observers and (Earman's) symmetry principles

Sús¹

2023

THEORIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interpretation and justification of Earman’s symmetry principles (stating that any spacetime symmetry should be a dynamical symmetry and vice-versa) are controversial. This is directly connected to the question of how certain structures in physical theories acquire a spatiotemporal character. In this paper I address these issues from a perspective (arguably functionalist) that relates the classical discussion about the measurement and geometrical determination of space with a characterization of the notion of dynamical symmetry in which its application to subsystems that act as measuring devices plays an essential role. I argue that in order to reformulate and justify Earman’s principles, and to provide a general account of the chronogeometrical character of some structures, the existence of a coordination between two notions of congruence, one mathematical and one dynamical, must be assumed for the interpretation of physical theories. This coordination provides the basis on which we can understand space-time in physical theories as the codification (representation) of certain features of the access ideal observers have to experience.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What spacetime does: ideal observers and (Earman's) symmetry principles

Sús¹

2023

THEORIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Take the constructivist to claim-pace the standard fundamentalist 3 conception of spacetime-2 See, however, Norton (2008) for further critical points; generally, influential critical accounts of the dynamical approach include Janssen (2002), Acuña (2016), andWeatherall (2020).…”

Section: The Problem Of Pregeometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Constructivist's Programme and the Problem of Pregeometry

Linnemann¹,

Salimkhani²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prominently, Norton (2008) argues against constructivism about spacetime theories, the doctrine that spatiotemporal structure in the dynamics only has derivative status. Among other things, he accuses Brown and Pooley's dynamical approach to special relativity of being merely half-way constructivist: setting up relativistic fields as presupposed in the dynamical approach to special relativity already requires spatiotemporal background structure (pregeometry from now on). We first assess a recent solution proposal by Menon and then provide our very own defense of constructivism along two independent lines.

show abstract

“…But this does not go all the way to addressing the concerns raised in e.g. (Dewar 2020;Fletcher 2020;Weatherall 2021): that, however, will have to wait for a future piece.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Newtonian Equivalence Principles

Read

Teh

2022

Erkenn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The equivalence principle has constituted one of the cornerstones of discussions in the foundations of spacetime theories over the past century. However, up to this point the principle has been considered overwhelmingly only within the context of relativistic physics. In this article, we demonstrate that the principle has much broader, super-theoretic significance: to do so, we present a unified framework for understanding the principle in its various guises, applicable to both relativistic and Newtonian contexts. We thereby deepen significantly our understanding of the role played by the equivalence principle in a broad class of spacetime theories.

show abstract

Two dogmas of dynamicism

Cited by 12 publications

References 37 publications

What spacetime does: ideal observers and (Earman's) symmetry principles

What spacetime does: ideal observers and (Earman's) symmetry principles

The Constructivist's Programme and the Problem of Pregeometry

Newtonian Equivalence Principles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About