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

DOI10.1016/J.SHPSB.2005.11.003zbMATH Open1223.83023OpenAlexW2108422108MaRDI QIDQ643053FDOQ643053

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

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

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)

Cites Work

• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Scale-invariant gravity: geometrodynamics
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• A new spin on the hole argument

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)