Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    The Leibnizian-Machian view that all motion must be defin... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The Leibnizian-Machian view that all motion must be defined as motion relative to bodies is self-defeating in the general theory of relativity.

    CausationSkepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.In GR, spacetime itself has degrees of freedom (gravitational waves, vacuum solutions) irreducible to relations among material bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mach's Principle fails in GR because solutions like Gödel's rotating universe and de Sitter space contain inertial effects without a privileged matter distribution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If spacetime can exist and structure inertia independently of bodies, then defining all motion relative to bodies is formally incomplete in GR's framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Einstein's hole argument shows that GR's diffeomorphism invariance requires spacetime points to bear properties not reducible to relational facts about matter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Earman and Norton's analysis of the hole argument demonstrates that a purely Leibnizian relationist ontology generates radical indeterminism in GR.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A view generating indeterminism as a structural consequence of its own ontology is self-defeating by the standard of physical adequacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A stationary, homogeneous elastic sphere set in rotation bulges at the equator and flattens at the poles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This effect is caused by the state of motion of the body with respect to the local inertial-gravitational field, not by the state of motion of the body relative to other bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Weyl's plasticine example demonstrates that the rotational effect cannot be attributed to motion relative to other bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismCausation

    Related

    A stationary, homogeneous elastic sphere set in rotation bulges at the equator a...A view generating indeterminism as a structural consequence of its own ontology ...Earman and Norton's analysis of the hole argument demonstrates that a purely Lei...Einstein's hole argument shows that GR's diffeomorphism invariance requires spac...
    +5 moreShow less
    If spacetime can exist and structure inertia independently of bodies, then defin...In GR, spacetime itself has degrees of freedom (gravitational waves, vacuum solu...Mach's Principle fails in GR because solutions like Gödel's rotating universe an...This effect is caused by the state of motion of the body with respect to the loc...Weyl's plasticine example demonstrates that the rotational effect cannot be attr...

    Similar

    The Leibnizian-Machian relational conception of motion holds that all ...84%Relative motion should be understood only as motion of bodies with res...82%The Leibnizian-Machian relational conception of motion is incoherent w...82%The Leibnizian-Machian relational conception of motion is incoherent w...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: weyl
    View source passageHide passage
    Weyl’s plasticine example shows that the Leibnizian-Machian view of relative motion, namely the view according to which all motion must be defined as motion relative to bodies, is self-defeating in the general theory of relativity. The fact that a stationary, homogeneous elastic sphere will, when set in rotation, bulge at the equator and flatten at the poles is, according to Weyl (1924b), to be accounted for in the following way. The complete physical system consisting of both the body and
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit