Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-lrf7s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-29T23:16:39.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A New Look at Simultaneity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Kent A. Peacock
Kent A. Peacock*
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In recent years there has been renewed discussion of the problem of temporal becoming (Maxwell 1985,1988; Dieks 1988; Stein 1991). The theme of this paper is that these discussions, timely and interesting as they are, do not go deeply enough into the question. I would like to suggest that a certain way of thinking about simultaneity, which as far as I know was first sketched in a science fiction novel by Robert A. Heinlein (1956), opens up a set of possibilities that deserve serious consideration.

More precisely, I will address the following question: is there anything in the formal structure of Minkowski spacetime which corresponds to our intuitive albeit imprecise notion of a global “present”? It is generally assumed that because of the relativity of optical simultaneity the answer to this question is, resoundingly, no.

Type
Part XIII. Spacetime
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1992 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1992 , 1992 , pp. 542 - 552
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Footnotes

1

I am very grateful to J.W. Crichton and C. Normore for encouragement in the early stages of development of these ideas, and G. Solomon for useful discussions. This work was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Grant #756-91-0068.

References

Dick, P.K. (1956), The World Jones Made. New York: A.A.Winn.Google Scholar
Dieks, D. (1988), “Discussion: Special Relativity and the Flow of Time”, Philosophy of Science 55: 456-460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinlein, R.A. (1956), Tune for the Stars. New York, Scribners. Reprinted, 1978, New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Marder, L. (1971), Time and the Space Traveller. London: George Allen and Unwin. Reprinted, 1974, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Maxwell, N. (1985), “Are Probabilism and Special Relativity Incompatible?”, Philosophy of Science 52: 23-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, N. (1988), “Discussion: Are Probabilism and Special Relativity Compatible?”, Philosophy of Science 55: 640-645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundy, B. (1986), “The Physical Content of Minkowski Geometry”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37: 25-54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. (1967), ‘Time and Physical Geometry”, The Journal of Philosophy 64: 240-247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rietdijk, C.W. (1985), “On Nonlocal Influences”, in Open Questions in Quantum Physics, Tarozzi, G. and van der Merwe, A. (eds.). Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Rucker, R.v.B. (1977), Geometry, Relativity and the Fourth Dimension. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Stein, H. (1968), “On Einstein-Minkowski Space-Time”, The Journal of Philosophy 65: 5-23.Google Scholar
Stein, H. (1991), “On Relativity Theory and Openness of the Future”, Philosophy of Science 58:147-167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, E.F. and Wheeler, J.A. (1966), Spacetime Physics. San Francisco: W.H.Freeman.Google Scholar