시공간 대칭성과 시공간 존재론

Space-Time Symmetry and Space-Time Ontology

  • 투고 : 2015.07.17
  • 심사 : 2015.08.25
  • 발행 : 2015.08.31


In spite of various attempts to characterize the ontological status of space-time, Newtonian substantivalism and Leibnizian relationism, what is really at issue in the controversy between the two parties is by no means clear. This essay argues that from the perspective of space-time symmetries, classical space-time can be unambiguously classified as substantival space-time and relational space-time. The symmetries of space-time theories distinguish the invariant geometric relationships between events. The essential difference between the two space-times stems from whether or not there exists the affine structure that distinguishes the inertial trajectories of a given body.



연구 과제 주관 기관 : National Research Foundation of Korea


  1. H. G. Alexander (ed.), The Leibniz-Clark Correspondence, New York: Barnes and Noble, 1956.
  2. H. R. Brown, Physical Relativity: Space-Time Structure from a Dynamical Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
  3. R. Descartes, Principles of Philosophy, R. P. Miller and V. R. Miller (trans.), Dordrecht, London: Reidel, 1983.
  4. R. DiSalle, On Dynamics, Indisernability, and Spacetime Ontology, British Journal of Philosophy of Science 45 (1994), 265-287.
  5. J. Earman, World Enough and Spacetime: Absolute and Relational Theories of Space and Time, Boston: M.I.T. Press, 1989.
  6. M. Friedman, Foundations of Space-Time Theories: Relativistic Physics and Philosophy of Science, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983.
  7. A. R. Hall, M. B. Hall (ed. and trans.), Unpublished Scientific Papers of Isaac Newton, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.
  8. I. Newton, Mathematical Principle of Natural Philosophy, F. Cajory (trans.), Berkeley: University of California Press, 1729.
  9. S. Shapiro, Philosophy of Mathematics: Structure and Ontology, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1997.
  10. Yang K. E., What is Not the Controversy on the Ontology of Space, Philosophical Analysis 24 (2011), 119-141.