Talk:Absolute time and space
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
WikiProject Time assessment rating comment
What is meant with "existence" in the intro? At first sight the use of that word is in conflict with the topic, as absolute space was assumed in Newtonian mechanics to *exist* but impossible to measure directly. Nothing prohibits the same for simultaneity, contrary to the (unreferenced) claim in the article. Harald88 (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Implicature of SR simultaneity
"The theory of relativity does not allow the existence of absolute time because of nonexistence of absolute simultaneity." should be something like "SR does not assign a coherent physical meaning to absolute universal time." It should also make clear that other well known qualification about the state of Physics ATM and the SM-GR-SR situation in particular. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Relative space and time
Since the Grand Narrative of the article is the replacement of absolute concepts with relative ones, is the title appopriate? Should it be called something like Absolute and Relative Space and Time? 1Z (talk) 13:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Combination of Metaphysical and Physical concepts of Absolute spacetime.
As outlined in , the philosophical and physical concepts of absolute space are different, indeed, in  it is noted that in the philosophical sense, modern physics subscribes to absolute space, even if it is relational in the scientific sense. Might it be better to split this article into two?
The opening section contains these statements: "Unlike relative time, Newton believed absolute time was imperceptible and could only be understood mathematically. According to Newton, humans are only capable of perceiving absolute time, which is a measurement of perceivable objects in motion (like the moon or sun)."
So...absolute time is imperceptible, AND humans are only capable of perceiving absolute time...??? Maybe a scientist can explain this better, because it doesn't make sense to me. Xaxafrad (talk) 08:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
The section on Einstein's later views does not introduce the aether topic sufficiently, nor explain why this is significant to the topic. A reader may wonder what the aether (ether) is and why it pertains to this topic. The quotes are excessively lengthy and are not introduced, which effect is exaggerated since the preamble lacks detail. How were Einstein's (changing) views on aether important in the development of the ideas of absolute time and space? I would remove this section until a suitable alternative is written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:35, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- Alexander, Peter (1984-1985). "The Presidential Address: Incongruent Counterparts and Absolute Space". Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 85: 1–21.
- Earman, John (1971). "Kant, Incongrous Counterparts, and the Nature of Space and Space-Time". from James Van Cleve and Robert E. Frederick (eds.), The Philosophy of Right and Left 131-149, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991