Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T19:53:21.648Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Curvature Intrinsic to Physical Space?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Graham Nerlich
Graham Nerlich*
Affiliation:
University of Adelaide
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wesley C. Salmon (1977) has written a characteristically elegant and ingenious paper The Curvature of Physical Space'. He argues in it that the curvature of a space cannot be intrinsic to it. Salmon relates his view that space is affinely amorphous to Grünbaum's view (Grünbaum 1973, esp. Ch. 16 & 22) that it is metrically amorphous and acknowledges parallels between the arguments which have been offered for each opinion. I wish to dispute these conclusions on philosophical grounds quite as much as on geometrical ones. Although I concentrate most on arguing for a well defined, intrinsic affinity for physical space the arguments extend easily to support a well defined, intrinsic metric.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , September 1979 , pp. 439 - 458
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Demopoulos, W. (1970), “On the relation of topological to metrical structure.” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, IV, (ed.) M. Radner and S. Winokur. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Ehlers, J., Pirani, A. E. and Schild, A. (1972), “The geometry of free fall and light propagation.” In General Relativity, (ed.) Raifeartaigh, L. Oxford: Clarendon, pp. 63–84.Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1953), “Geometry and Experience.” In Readings in the Philosophy of Science, edited by Feigland, H. Brodbeck, M. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1972), “Grünbaum on the conventionality of geometry.” Synthese 24: pp. 219–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, C. (1972), “Physics by Convention.” Philosophy of Science 39: pp. 322–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1973), Philosophical Problems of Space and Time. 2nd Edition, Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Misner, C., Thome, K. and Wheeler, J. (1973), Gravitation. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
Mortensen, C. and Nerlich, G. (1978), “Physical topology” Journal of Philosophical Logic 7: pp. 209–223.Google Scholar
Nerlich, G. (1976), The Shape of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1958), The Philosophy of Space and Time. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. C. (1977), “The Curvature of physical space.” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Schrödinger, E. (1963), Space-time Structures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Synge, J. L. (1956), Relativity: the special theory. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Weyl, H. (1952), Space-Time-Matter. (tr.) Brose, H. L. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar