孔洞论证与诺特定理的结合

Henrique Gomes
{"title":"孔洞论证与诺特定理的结合","authors":"Henrique Gomes","doi":"arxiv-2403.10970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The hole argument of general relativity threatens a radical and pernicious\nform of indeterminism. One natural response to the argument is that points\nbelonging to different but isometric models should always be identified, or\n'dragged-along', by the diffeomorphism that relates them. In this paper, I\nfirst criticise this response and its construal of isometry: it stumbles on\ncertain cases, like Noether's second theorem. Then I go on to describe how the\nessential features of Einstein\\rq{}s `point-coincidence' response to the hole\nargument avoid the criticisms of the `drag-along response' and are compatible\nwith Noether's second theorem.","PeriodicalId":501042,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - PHYS - History and Philosophy of Physics","volume":"122 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The hole argument meets Noether's theorem\",\"authors\":\"Henrique Gomes\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2403.10970\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The hole argument of general relativity threatens a radical and pernicious\\nform of indeterminism. One natural response to the argument is that points\\nbelonging to different but isometric models should always be identified, or\\n'dragged-along', by the diffeomorphism that relates them. In this paper, I\\nfirst criticise this response and its construal of isometry: it stumbles on\\ncertain cases, like Noether's second theorem. Then I go on to describe how the\\nessential features of Einstein\\\\rq{}s `point-coincidence' response to the hole\\nargument avoid the criticisms of the `drag-along response' and are compatible\\nwith Noether's second theorem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - PHYS - History and Philosophy of Physics\",\"volume\":\"122 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - PHYS - History and Philosophy of Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2403.10970\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - PHYS - History and Philosophy of Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2403.10970","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

广义相对论的 "洞 "论证威胁着不确定论的激进和有害转变。对这一论证的一个自然反应是,属于不同但等距模型的点,总是应该通过把它们联系起来的差分同构来识别或 "拖长"。在本文中,我首先批评了这种回应及其对等轴性的解释:它在某些情况下,如诺特第二定理,是磕磕绊绊的。然后,我继续描述爱因斯坦对洞论证的 "点-巧合 "回应的基本特征如何避免了 "拖长回应 "的批评,并与诺特第二定理相容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The hole argument meets Noether's theorem
The hole argument of general relativity threatens a radical and pernicious form of indeterminism. One natural response to the argument is that points belonging to different but isometric models should always be identified, or 'dragged-along', by the diffeomorphism that relates them. In this paper, I first criticise this response and its construal of isometry: it stumbles on certain cases, like Noether's second theorem. Then I go on to describe how the essential features of Einstein\rq{}s `point-coincidence' response to the hole argument avoid the criticisms of the `drag-along response' and are compatible with Noether's second theorem.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信