General Relativity Needs No Interpretation.

I argue that, contrary to the recent claims of physicists and philosophers of physics, general relativity requires no interpretation in any substantive sense of the term. I canvass the common reasons given in favor of the alleged need for an interpretation, including the difficulty in coming to grip...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophy of Science Vol. 76; no. 1; pp. 44 - 73
Autor principal: Curiel, Erik
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Cambridge University Press Jan2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=43158026&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 43158026
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318248
        PSC
      jtl: Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00318248
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jan2009
      vid: 76
      iid: 1
      pid: 15979
      pub: Cambridge University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        43158026
        10.1086/599277
      ppf: 44
      ppct: 29
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 1.8MB
      tig:
        atl: General Relativity Needs No Interpretation.
      aug:
        au: Curiel, Erik
        affil: Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, 817 Cathedral of Learning, Pittsburgh, PA
      su:
        General relativity (Physics)
        Interpretation (Philosophy)
        Diffeomorphisms
        Quantum gravity
        Quantum theory
        Physicists
        Philosophers
      sug:
        subj:
          General relativity (Physics)
          Interpretation (Philosophy)
          Diffeomorphisms
          Quantum gravity
          Quantum theory
          Physicists
          Philosophers
      ab: I argue that, contrary to the recent claims of physicists and philosophers of physics, general relativity requires no interpretation in any substantive sense of the term. I canvass the common reasons given in favor of the alleged need for an interpretation, including the difficulty in coming to grips with the physical significance of diffeomorphism invariance and of singular structure, and the problems faced in the search for a theory of quantum gravity. I find that none of them shows any defect in our comprehension of general relativity as a physical theory. I conclude by comparing general relativity with quantum mechanics, a theory that manifestly does stand in need of an interpretation in an important sense. Although many aspects of the conceptual structure of general relativity remain poorly understood, it suffers no incoherence in its formulation as a physical theory that only an 'interpretation' could resolve.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Philosophy of Science
      holder: Cambridge University Press
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2009
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N