more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Special Relativity denies absolute simultaneity, and therefore requires a past and a future, as well as a present. The Presentist, however, only requires the present.
Gist of Idea
Relativity denies simultaneity, so it needs past, present and future (unlike Presentism)
Source
Craig Bourne (A Future for Presentism [2006], 6.VII)
Book Ref
Bourne,Craig: 'A Future for Presentism' [OUP 2006], p.183
A Reaction
It is nice to accuse Relativity of ontological extravagence. When it 'requires' past and future, that may not be a massive commitment, since the whole theory is fairly operationalist, according to Putnam.
Related Ideas
Idea 13993 Special Relativity denies the absolute present which Presentism needs [Markosian]
Idea 7621 Special relativity, unlike general relativity, was operationalist in spirit [Putnam on Einstein]
| 12709 | Motion is not absolute, but consists in relation [Leibniz] |
| 6735 | All motion is relative, so a single body cannot move [Berkeley] |
| 21231 | Assume the speed of light is constant for all observers, and the laws of physics are the same [Einstein, by Farmelo] |
| 21230 | The theory is 'special' because it sticks to observers moving straight, at constant speeds [Einstein, by Farmelo] |
| 14613 | Special relativity won't determine a preferred frame, but we can pick one externally [Smart] |
| 20628 | The electric and magnetic are tightly linked, and viewed according to your own motion [Close] |
| 20622 | All motions are relative and ambiguous, but acceleration is the same in all inertial frames [Close] |
| 21109 | Space itself can expand (and separate its contents) at faster than light speeds [Krauss] |
| 14016 | The idea of simultaneity in Special Relativity is full of verificationist assumptions [Bourne] |
| 14019 | Relativity denies simultaneity, so it needs past, present and future (unlike Presentism) [Bourne] |