The traditional view, that physics is concerned exclusively with
matter in motion, cannot be maintained, for a number of reasons. In
the first place, the æther, even if it can be said to exist, can
hardly be regarded as having a granular structure, and events in it,
such as the passage of light, cannot be explained as movements of
particles of æther. In the second place, quantum changes, if they
really are sudden, violate the continuity of motion, and thus destroy
its advantages as an imaginative picture. In the third place—and this
is philosophically the most important point—the conception of motion
depends upon that of persistent material substances, which we have seen
reason to regard as merely an approximate empirical generalization.
Before we can say that one piece of matter has moved, we must decide
that two events at different times belong to one "biography," and a
"biography" is defined by certain causal laws, not by persistence of
substance. Consequently motion is something constructed in accordance[Pg 356]
with the laws of physics, or—we might say—as a convenience in stating
them; it cannot be one of the fundamental concepts of physics. Lastly,
there is an argument which is difficult to state precisely, but which
nevertheless has some weight. For Newton, motion was absolute, and a
body in motion might be regarded as in a different state from a body
at rest. But when motion was recognized as merely relative, laws of
motion became laws as to relations to more or less distant bodies.
They thus came to involve something like action at a distance—though
this was disguised by the use of differential equations not always
interpreted according to rigid Weierstrassian methods. If we are to
avoid action at a distance, our fundamental laws must be concerned with
terms having finite spatio-temporal extension, and thus capable of
contact and overlapping—in a word, with events rather than particles
or impenetrable material units. This involves a re-interpretation of
motion as it occurs in physics, which will be considered in a later
chapter. For the present, I am concerned with the materials which will
be required for this purpose as well as for the interpretation of other
physical phenomena.
A "steady event," as I use the term, is anything which is devoid
of physical structure and is compresent with events which are not
compresent with each other, but are one earlier and the other later;
in other words, the steady event is a member of at least two points
which have a time-like interval. When a steady event is contrasted
with a rhythm, it is assumed that the steady event is not part of a
periodic process; but it cannot be taken as certain that there are any
elementary events which are not parts of such processes. It may be that
all non-periodic changes occur by way of transactions; but this must be
an open question in the present state of knowledge.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account