On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 12:14 AM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Jul 24, 12:05 am, Jesse Mazer <laserma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Substantivalism doesn't treat spacetime as a "substance" in the sense of > > necessarily being made up of discrete grainy bits (which is all that the > > gamma ray prediction was meant to test, seehttp:// > www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110630111540.htm), it just > > says that spacetime has physical properties of its own, like the notion > of > > the different curvature at different points in spacetime which is present > in > > general relativity. > > I think that the inferred curvature of space can be explained by > perceptual relativity of physical phenomena rather than any physical > properties of the vacuum between them. Space is the void-continuity > between matter, time is the continuity-void between energy changes. > > Craig > > I think that would be the alternative to spacetime substantivalism known as "relationalism" (discussed in some of the papers I linked to), it's certainly possible as well, I think if we had a complete theory of quantum gravity it might naturally favor one or the other (the way the relativity of simultaneity naturally favors eternalism over presentism) even though it might not totally settle the issue for philosophers. Jesse -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
