Abstract
In their paper How Fundamental Physics Represents Causality Andreas Bartels and Daniel Wohlfarth maintain that there is place for causality in General Relativity. Their argument contains two steps: first they show that there are time-asymmetric models in General Relativity, then they claim to derive that two events are causally connected if and only if there is a time-asymmetric energy flow from one event to the other. In our comment we first give a short summary of their paper followed by a section introducing and pondering different conceptions of causation since Bartels and Wohlfarth don’t explicitly declare which notion of causation they build on in the paper. In order to analyze their argument in detail we formalize their crucial step in logical terms. This helps to pose the question whether their proposed derivation is not just a definition in a more precise way.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
References
Bartels, A., and D. Wohlfarth. 2013. How fundamental physics represents causality. In New directions in the philosophy of science, ed. M.C. Galavotti, et al. New York: Springer.
Castagnino, M., and O. Lombardi. 2009. The global non-entropic arrow of time: From global geometrical asymmetry to local energy flow. Synthese 169(1): 1–25.
Castagnino, M., L. Lara, and O. Lombardi. 2003a. The cosmological origin of time asymmetry. Classical and Quantum Gravity 20(2): 369.
Castagnino, M., L. Lara, and O. Lombardi. 2003b. The direction of time: From the global arrow to the local arrow. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 42: 2487–2504.
Castagnino, M., O. Lombardi, and L. Lara. 2003c. The global arrow of time as a geometrical property of the universe. Foundations of Physics 33: 877–912.
Curiel, E. 2000. The constraints general relativity places on physicalist accounts of causality. Theoria – Segunda Época 15(1): 33–58.
Dowe, P. 2000. Physical causation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Griffiths, D. 1999. Introduction to electrodynamics. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Lam, V. 2005. Causation and space-time. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 27(3–4): 465–478.
Norton, J.D. 2007. Causation as folk science. In Causation, physics and the constitution of reality, ed. H. Price and R. Corry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rueger, A. 1998. Local theories of causation and the a posteriori identification of the causal relation. Erkenntnis 48: 25–38.
Russell, B. 1912. On the notion of cause. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 13: 1–26.
Salmon, W. 1997. Causality and explanation: A reply to two critiques. Philosophy of Science 64: 461–477.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hubert, M., Poellinger, R. (2014). Anchoring Causal Connections in Physical Concepts. In: Galavotti, M., Dieks, D., Gonzalez, W., Hartmann, S., Uebel, T., Weber, M. (eds) New Directions in the Philosophy of Science. The Philosophy of Science in a European Perspective, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04382-1_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04382-1_35
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04381-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04382-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)