Advertisement

The Negation of Instantaneous Space in the Relativistic Physics

  • Milič Čapek
Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science book series (BSPS, volume 7)

Abstract

In various expositions of the special theory of relativity, whether they are technical, popular or semi-popular, we do not frequently find the expression which I placed as the title of this chapter. We do not read about the ‘negation of instantaneous space’. All we read is ‘the negation of absolute simultaneity’. In truth, we read, if not more frequently at least as frequently, about the ‘relativization of the simultaneity of distant events’. In such a formulation the true significance of the revision to which the classical concept of space was subjected is semantically obscured. The most interesting and philosophically most significant implications of such revision are then inevitably notgrasped. This is just another illustration of the fact that radical conceptual revisions require radical revision of the language; otherwise we are pouring a new wine into the old vessels with the familiar result. Though in this case the famous Biblical simile should be slightly modified: the old vessels do notbreak apart, since nothing is more stubbornly resistant than “ordinary language,” whose resistance measures the inertia of the mental habits of which it is a depository. In any case the ‘new wine’ is inevitably spoiled. For if one thing should be clear, it is that the new concepts of physics are notexpressible in the language of homo faber, in the language fashioned by the macroscopic milieu.

Keywords

Distant Event Contemporary Physic Causal Action Absolute Space Absolute Motion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Joseph Louis Lagrange, Oeuvres, Paris, 1867–1892, Vol. IX, p. 357.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Weyl, Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science, Princeton Univ. Press, 1949, p. 95.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pierre Gassendi, Syntagma philosophicum, in Opera omnia, Florence, 1727, I, 198.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Newtoni Opera(ed. Horsley), III, p. 172.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Carnap, ‘Über die Abhängigkeit der Eigenschaften des Raumes von denen der Zeit’, Kant-Studien 30(1925), 339–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    On this problem cf. Jean Wahl, Du rôle de I’idée de I’instant dans la philosophie de Descartes, 2nd Ed. Paris 1953Google Scholar
  7. A. N. Whitehead, The concept of nature, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1920, p. 71Google Scholar
  8. M. Čapek, The Philosophical Impact of Contemporary Physics, Van Nostrand, Princeton, 1961, pp. 49–51, 162.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    E. Whittaker, A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity, Thomas Nelson & Sons, London, 1953, II, p. 30.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    A. E. Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1933, pp. 42–47Google Scholar
  11. A. N. Whitehead, Science and the Modern World, Macmillan, New York, 1926, p. 172.Google Scholar
  12. 10.
    A. Müller, Das Problem des absoluten Raumes und seine Beziehung zum allgemeinen Raumproblem, Braunschweig, 1912, p. 42f.Google Scholar
  13. 11.
    H. Driesch, Relativitätstheorie und Weltanschauung, 2nd Ed., Leipzig, 1930, p. 22Google Scholar
  14. R. Berthelot, Bulletin de la Sociétéfrangaise de philosophie 34No. 5 (1934), pp. 172–183.Google Scholar
  15. 13.
    A. d’Abro, Bergson ou Einstein?, Paris, 1927, pp. 304–305.Google Scholar
  16. 14.
    A. N. Whitehead, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Natural Knowledge, 2nd Ed., Cambridge Univ. Press, 1925, p. 6.Google Scholar
  17. 15.
    P. Langevin, ‘Le temps, l’espace et causalité dans la physique moderne’, Bulletin de la Société frangaise de philosophie(Séance du 19 octobre 1911), p. 37Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    Bergson in C.E., p. 345, But ‘the extensivity of the becoming’ in Arthur Mitchell’s translation is not a very fortunate rendering of “le devenir extens if” of the original.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland 1971

Authors and Affiliations

  • Milič Čapek

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations