Bringing the hole argument back in the loop: a response to Pooley (Q643054): Difference between revisions

@@ Property / DOI @@
-.1016/j.shpsb.2006.01.003
@@ Property / DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsb.2006.01.003 / rank @@
-Normal rank
@@ Property / MaRDI profile type @@
+Publication
@@ Property / MaRDI profile type: Publication / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ Property / full work available at URL @@
+https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2006.01.003
+Normal rank
@@ Property / OpenAlex ID @@
+W2084972962
@@ Property / OpenAlex ID: W2084972962 / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ Property / cites work @@
+A hole revolution, or are we back where we started?
+Normal rank
@@ Property / cites work @@
+Q3434463
@@ Property / cites work: Q3434463 / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ Property / cites work @@
+A new spin on the hole argument
@@ Property / cites work: A new spin on the hole argument / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ Property / cites work @@
+Q4514880
@@ Property / cites work: Q4514880 / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ Property / cites work @@
+Q3410825
@@ Property / cites work: Q3410825 / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ Property / DOI @@
+.1016/J.SHPSB.2006.01.003
@@ Property / DOI: 10.1016/J.SHPSB.2006.01.003 / rank @@
+Normal rank
@@ links / mardi / name / links / mardi / name @@
+Publication:643054