A hole revolution, or are we back where we started?

DOI10.1016/J.SHPSB.2005.11.003MaRDI QIDQ643053zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Oliver Pooley

Publication date 27 October 2011

Published in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. Part B. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2005.11.003

zbMATH Keywords

hole argumentloop quantum gravitysubstantivalismgeneral covariancespin-networksrelationalism

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

General and philosophical questions in quantum theory (81P05) Gravitational interaction in quantum theory (81V17) Quantization of the gravitational field (83C45)

Recommendations

• A new spin on the hole argument
• Bringing the hole argument back in the loop: a response to Pooley
• Regarding the ‘Hole Argument’
• New perspectives on the hole argument
• The hole argument and some physical and philosophical implications

Cites work

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5073459 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5148382 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1530437 (Why is no real title available?)
• A new spin on the hole argument
• Scale-invariant gravity: geometrodynamics

Cited in

(5)

• On representational redundancy, surplus structure, and the hole argument
• New perspectives on the hole argument
• Regarding `Leibniz equivalence'
• A new spin on the hole argument
• Bringing the hole argument back in the loop: a response to Pooley

This page was built for publication: A hole revolution, or are we back where we started?

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q643053)