more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Though special relativity does not determine a preferred frame of reference, it does not rule out the possibility of a frame being determined from outside the theory. Perhaps we should prefer a frame where background radiation is equal in all directions.
Gist of Idea
Special relativity won't determine a preferred frame, but we can pick one externally
Source
J.J.C. Smart (The Tenseless Theory of Time [2008], 3)
Book Ref
'Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics', ed/tr. Sider/Hawthorne/Zimmerman [Blackwell 2008], p.233
A Reaction
Of course this is a mere philosopher offering the escape clause, and not some Nobel-winning physicist, but I start from the assumption that this idea is plausible, and I am unmoved by the contempt for presentism among relativity geeks.
| 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] |