Bringing the hole argument back in the loop: a response to Pooley

DOI10.1016/J.SHPSB.2006.01.003MaRDI QIDQ643054zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Dean Rickles

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.2006.01.003

zbMATH Keywords

constrained Hamiltonian systemsdiffeomorphism invariancegeneral covariancehole argumentloop quantum gravityspin networks

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

• Regarding the ‘Hole Argument’
• A new spin on the hole argument
• New perspectives on the hole argument
• The hole argument against everything
• The hole argument and some physical and philosophical implications
• The enhanced indispensability argument, the circularity problem, and the interpretability strategy
• The hole argument, take \(n\)
• The rod and hole paradox re-examined
• The hole argument for covariant theories
• Representation and Spacetime: The Hole Argument Revisited

Cites work

• A hole revolution, or are we back where we started?
• A new spin on the hole argument
• 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?)

Cited in

(4)

• Regarding the ‘Hole Argument’
• A new spin on the hole argument
• A hole revolution, or are we back where we started?
• Regarding the `hole argument' and the `problem of time'

This page was built for publication: Bringing the hole argument back in the loop: a response to Pooley

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q643054)