Element contents
Philosophy of Physical Magnitudes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 February 2024
Summary
Dimensional quantities such as length, mass and charge, i.e., numbers combined with a conventional unit, are essential components of theories in the sciences, especially physics, chemistry and biology. Do they represent a world with absolute physical magnitudes, or are they merely magnitude ratios in disguise? Would we notice a difference if all the distances or charges in the world suddenly doubled? These central questions of this Element are illustrated by imagining how one would convey the meaning of a kilogram to aliens if one were only allowed to communicate via Morse code.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009233705Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 04 April 2024
References
Alexander, H., editor. The Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1956/1717. Originally written by G. W. Leibniz and S. Clarke in 1715–16 and published by S. Clarke in 1717.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D.. A Theory of Universals: Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D.. Are quantities relations? A reply to Bigelow and Pargetter. Philosophical Studies, 54:305–16, 1988.Google Scholar
Baker, D. J.. Some consequences of physics for the comparative metaphysics of quantity. Manuscript, May 2013, later uploaded to http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/12674/.Google Scholar
Bigelow, J. and Pargetter, R.. Science and Necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Bigelow, J., Pargetter, R. and Armstrong, D.. Quantities. Philosophical Studies, 54:287–304, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, S.. Absolutism vs comparativism about quantity. In Bennett, K. and Zimmerman, D. W., editors, Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, volume 8, pages 105–47. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, S.. Inexpressible ignorance. Philosophical Review, 124(4):441–80, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, S.. Symmetry as an epistemic notion (twice over). British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 67(3):837–78, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, S.. How to be a relationalist. In Bennett, K. and Zimmerman, D. W., editors, Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, volume 12, pages 113–163. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192893314.003.0005.Google Scholar
Dees, M.. Physical magnitudes. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 99(4):817–41, 2018. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/papq.12223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewar, N.. Sophistication about symmetries. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 70(2):485–521, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axx021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewar, N.. On absolute units. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 2020. DOI: 10.1086/715236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, B.. Basic Concepts of Measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Field, H. H.. Science without Numbers: A Defence of Nominalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1980.Google Scholar
Funkhouser, E.. The determinable-determinate relation. Noûs, 40(3):548–69, 2006. ISSN 00294624, 14680068. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4093996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, M.. The New Ambidextrous Universe: Symmetry and Asymmetry from Mirror Reflections to Superstrings. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc, 2005 (third edition), 1964/1990. Revised and retitled in 1990.Google Scholar
Jacobs, C.. Gauge and explanation: Can gauge-dependent quantities be explanatory? Master’s thesis, University of Oxford, 2019.Google Scholar
Jacobs, C.. Symmetries as a Guide to the Structure of Physical Quantities. PhD thesis, University of Oxford, 2021.Google Scholar
Jacobs, C.. Comparativist theories or conspiracy theories? The no miracles argument against comparativism. PhilSci Archive, Philosophy of Science Association, University of Pittsburgh, 2023a. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/21948/1/cosmic%20conspiracies.pdf.Google Scholar
Jacobs, C.. The nature of a constant of nature: The case of G. Philosophy of Science, 90(4):797–816, 2023b. https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2022.96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jalloh, M.. The Π-theorem as a guide to quantity symmetries and the argument against absolutism. PhilSci Archive, Philosophy of Science Association, University of Pittsburgh, 2022. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/20743/.Google Scholar
Jammer, M.. Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Physics and Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
König, A. and Richarz, F.. Eine neue Methode zur Bestimmung der Gravitationsconstante. Annalen der Physik, 260(4):664–68, 1885. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/andp.18852600409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krantz, D., Luce, R., Suppes, P. and Tversky, A.. Foundations of Measurement, Volume 1. New York: Academic Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Ladyman, J.. On the identity and diversity of objects in a structure. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 81:23–43, 2007. ISSN 03097013, 14678349. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20619100.Google Scholar
Martens, N. C. M.. Against Comparativism about Mass in Newtonian Gravity: A Case Study in the Metaphysics of Scale. PhD thesis, 2017a. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:3f98e412-2cf7-4810-8a3a-0041f9c1c5df.Google Scholar
Martens, N. C. M.. Regularity comparativism about mass in Newtonian gravity. Philosophy of Science, 84(5):1226–38, 2017b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martens, N. C. M.. Against Laplacian reduction of Newtonian mass to spatiotemporal quantities. Foundations of Physics, 48:591–609, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-018-0149-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martens, N. C. M.. The (un)detectability of absolute Newtonian masses. Synthese, 198:2511–50, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02229-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martens, N. C. M.. Machian comparativism about mass. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 73(2):325–49, 2022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martens, N. C. M. and Read, J.. Sophistry about symmetries? Synthese, 199:315–44, 2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maudlin, T.. Buckets of water and waves of space: Why spacetime is probably a substance. Philosophy of Science, 60:183–203, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Møller-Nielsen, T.. Invariance, interpretation, and motivation. Philosophy of Science, 84(5):1253–64, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1086/694087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundy, B.. The metaphysics of quantity. Philosophical Studies, 51(1):29–54, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, E.. Measurement. Erkenntnis II, pages 313–33, 1932. Reprinted in Danto, A. and Morgenbesser, S., editors, Philosophy of Science, pages 121–140. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
Nerlich, G.. How Euclidean geometry has misled metaphysics. Journal of Philosophy, 88(4):169–89, 1991. ISSN 0022362X. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2026946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacocke, C.. The Primacy of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, Z. R.. Properly extensive quantities. Philosophy of Science, 82(5):833–44, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1086/683323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, Z. R.. On mereology and metricality. Philosophers’ Imprint, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Read, J. and Møller-Nielsen, T.. Redundant epistemic symmetries. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 70:88–97, 2020. ISSN 1355-2198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2020.03.002. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355219819301649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, F.. Measurement Theory, volume 7 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1979.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. T.. A case for comparativism about physical quantities. Paper presented to the second annual conference of the Society for the Metaphysics of Science, Geneva, 2016. https://www.academia.edu/28548115/A_Case_for_Comparativism_about_Physical_Quantities_–_SMS_2016_Geneva.Google Scholar
Saunders, S.. Mirroring as an a priori symmetry. Philosophy of Science, 74:452–80, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, J.. What not to multiply without necessity. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 93(4): 644–64, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2014.992447.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sebens, C. T.. Electron charge density: A clue from quantum chemistry for quantum foundations. Foundations of Physics, 51(75), 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-021-00480-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, D.. Observability, Redundancy, and Modality for Dynamical Symmetry Transformations. In Read, J. and Teh, N. J., editors, The Philosophy and Physics of Noether’s Theorems: A Centenary Volume, 322–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108665445.014.Google Scholar
Weyl, H.. Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1949.Google Scholar
Wolff, J.. The Metaphysics of Quantities. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar