On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity
Einstein presented the Hole Argument against General Covariance, understood as invariance with respect to a change in coordinates, as a consequence of his initial failure to obtain covariant equations that, in the weak static limit, contain Newton’s law. Fortunately, about two years later, Einstein...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2024-02-01
|
| Series: | Universe |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1997/10/2/91 |
| _version_ | 1827342664277688320 |
|---|---|
| author | Jaume de Haro |
| author_facet | Jaume de Haro |
| author_sort | Jaume de Haro |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Einstein presented the Hole Argument against General Covariance, understood as invariance with respect to a change in coordinates, as a consequence of his initial failure to obtain covariant equations that, in the weak static limit, contain Newton’s law. Fortunately, about two years later, Einstein returned to General Covariance, and found these famous equations of gravity. However, the rejection of his Hole Argument carries a totally different vision of space-time. Its substantivalism notion, which is an essential ingredient in Newtonian theory and also in his special theory of relativity, has to be replaced, following Descartes and Leibniz’s relationalism, by a set of “point-coincidences”. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T22:10:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-1e73c35f05014028b922ccf11bed0dee |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2218-1997 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T22:10:49Z |
| publishDate | 2024-02-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Universe |
| spelling | doaj.art-1e73c35f05014028b922ccf11bed0dee2024-02-23T15:36:49ZengMDPI AGUniverse2218-19972024-02-011029110.3390/universe10020091On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General RelativityJaume de Haro0Departament de Matemàtiques, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Diagonal 647, 08028 Barcelona, SpainEinstein presented the Hole Argument against General Covariance, understood as invariance with respect to a change in coordinates, as a consequence of his initial failure to obtain covariant equations that, in the weak static limit, contain Newton’s law. Fortunately, about two years later, Einstein returned to General Covariance, and found these famous equations of gravity. However, the rejection of his Hole Argument carries a totally different vision of space-time. Its substantivalism notion, which is an essential ingredient in Newtonian theory and also in his special theory of relativity, has to be replaced, following Descartes and Leibniz’s relationalism, by a set of “point-coincidences”.https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1997/10/2/91hole argumentdiffeomorphismsgauge covarianceADM formalism |
| spellingShingle | Jaume de Haro On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity Universe hole argument diffeomorphisms gauge covariance ADM formalism |
| title | On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity |
| title_full | On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity |
| title_fullStr | On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity |
| title_full_unstemmed | On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity |
| title_short | On the Hole Argument and the Physical Interpretation of General Relativity |
| title_sort | on the hole argument and the physical interpretation of general relativity |
| topic | hole argument diffeomorphisms gauge covariance ADM formalism |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1997/10/2/91 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jaumedeharo ontheholeargumentandthephysicalinterpretationofgeneralrelativity |