New Perspectives on the Hole Argument

Roberts, Bryan W.; Weatherall, James Owen

doi:10.1007/s10701-020-00334-8

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The indeterminism cannot be avoided by remaining loftily above the metaphysical affray. [20, end of Section 4] Other earlier papers making the same or similar replies include: (a) Roberts in [47], and [46, especially pp. 255 and 261]; Roberts argues that his condition weak Leibniz equivalence, which is well-nigh synonymous with Fletcher's REME, is irrelevant to, i.e.…”

Section: Against Dissolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hole Argument and Beyond: Part I: The Story so Far

Gomes¹,

Butterfield

2023

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this two-part paper, we review, and then develop, the assessment of the hole argument for general relativity. This first Part reviews the literature hitherto, focussing on the philosophical aspects. It also introduces two main ideas we will need in Part II: which will propose a framework for making comparisons of non-isomorphic spacetimes. In Section 1 of this paper, we recall Einstein’s original argument. Section 2 recalls the argument’s revival by philosophers in the 1980s and 1990s. This includes the first main idea we will need in Part II: namely, that two spacetime points in different possible situations are never strictly identical—they are merely counterparts. In Section 3, we report—and rebut—more recent claims to “dissolve” the argument. Our rebuttal is based on the fact that in differential geometry, and its applications in physics such as general relativity, points are in some cases identified, or correspond with each other, between one context and another, by means other than isometry (or isomorphism). We call such a correspondence a threading of points. This is the second main idea we shall use in Part II.

show abstract

Section: Against Dissolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hole Argument and Beyond: Part I: The Story so Far

Gomes¹,

Butterfield

2023

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For more on contemporary philosophy of physics discussion of the hole argument, see Norton [2019], Pooley [2013], Pooley [2021], Roberts and Weatherall [2020] and references therein.…”

Section: Indeterminism Versus Underdeterminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the mathematics and metaphysics of the hole argument

Pooley¹,

Read²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For up-to-date reviews of metaphysical reactions to the hole argument, seePooley (2013) orNorton (2019) Roberts and Weatherall (2020). discuss the more recent literature.7 For instance, seeMaudlin (1988),Butterfield (1989),Brighouse (1994),Hoefer (1996), or Pooley (2013) and references therein.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%