The Temporal Logic of two dimensional Minkowski spacetime is decidable

We consider Minkowski spacetime, the set of all point-events of spacetime under the relation of causal accessibility. That is, ${\sf x}$ can access ${\sf y}$ if an electromagnetic or (slower than light) mechanical signal could be sent from ${\sf x}$ to ${\sf y}$. We use Prior's tense language of ${\bf F}$ and ${\bf P}$ representing causal accessibility and its converse relation. We consider two versions, one where the accessibility relation is reflexive and one where it is irreflexive. In either case it has been an open problem, for decades, whether the logic is decidable or axiomatisable. We make a small step forward by proving, for the case where the accessibility relation is irreflexive, that the set of valid formulas over two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime is decidable, decidability for the reflexive case follows from this. The complexity of either problem is PSPACE-complete. A consequence is that the temporal logic of intervals with real endpoints under either the containment relation or the strict containment relation is PSPACE-complete, the same is true if the interval accessibility relation is "each endpoint is not earlier", or its irreflexive restriction. We provide a temporal formula that distinguishes between three-dimensional and two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime and another temporal formula that distinguishes the two-dimensional case where the underlying field is the real numbers from the case where instead we use the rational numbers.Comment: 30 page

Temporal Logic of Minkowski Spacetime

We present the proof that the temporal logic of two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime is decidable, PSPACE-complete. The proof is based on a type of two-dimensional mosaic. Then we present the modification of the proof so as to work for slower-than-light signals. Finally, a subframe of the slower-than-light Minkowski frame is used to prove the new result that the temporal logic of real intervals with during as the accessibility relation is also PSPACE-complete

The temporal logic of two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime with slower-than-light accessibility is decidable

We work primarily with the Kripke frame consisting of two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime with the irreflexive accessibility relation 'can reach with a slower-than-light signal'. We show that in the basic temporal language, the set of validities over this frame is decidable. We then refine this to PSPACE-complete. In both cases the same result for the corresponding reflexive frame follows immediately. With a little more work we obtain PSPACE-completeness for the validities of the Halpern-Shoham logic of intervals on the real line with two different combinations of modalities.Comment: 20 page

A system of axioms for Minkowski spacetime

We present an elementary system of axioms for the geometry of Minkowski spacetime. It strikes a balance between a simple and streamlined set of axioms and the attempt to give a direct formalization in first-order logic of the standard account of Minkowski spacetime in [Maudlin 2012] and [Malament, unpublished]. It is intended for future use in the formalization of physical theories in Minkowski spacetime. The choice of primitives is in the spirit of [Tarski 1959]: a predicate of betwenness and a four place predicate to compare the square of the relativistic intervals. Minkowski spacetime is described as a four dimensional ‘vector space’ that can be decomposed everywhere into a spacelike hyperplane - which obeys the Euclidean axioms in [Tarski and Givant, 1999] - and an orthogonal timelike line. The length of other ‘vectors’ are calculated according to Pythagora’s theorem. We conclude with a Representation Theorem relating models of our system that satisfy second order continuity to the mathematical structure called ‘Minkowski spacetime’ in physics textbooks

A system of axioms for Minkowski spacetime

We present an elementary system of axioms for the geometry of Minkowski spacetime. It strikes a balance between a simple and streamlined set of axioms and the attempt to give a direct formalization in first-order logic of the standard account of Minkowski spacetime in [Maudlin 2012] and [Malament, unpublished]. It is intended for future use in the formalization of physical theories in Minkowski spacetime. The choice of primitives is in the spirit of [Tarski 1959]: a predicate of betwenness and a four place predicate to compare the square of the relativistic intervals. Minkowski spacetime is described as a four dimensional ‘vector space’ that can be decomposed everywhere into a spacelike hyperplane - which obeys the Euclidean axioms in [Tarski and Givant, 1999] - and an orthogonal timelike line. The length of other ‘vectors’ are calculated according to Pythagora’s theorem. We conclude with a Representation Theorem relating models of our system that satisfy second order continuity to the mathematical structure called ‘Minkowski spacetime’ in physics textbooks

Minkowski Spacetime and Lorentz Invariance: the cart and the horse or two sides of a single coin

Michel Janssen and Harvey Brown have driven a prominent recent debate concerning the direction of an alleged arrow of explanation between Minkowski spacetime and Lorentz invariance of dynamical laws in special relativity. In this article, I critically assess this controversy with the aim of clarifying the explanatory foundations of the theory. First, I show that two assumptions shared by the parties—that the dispute is independent of issues concerning spacetime ontology, and that there is an urgent need for a constructive interpretation of special relativity—are problematic and negatively affect the debate. Second, I argue that the whole discussion relies on a misleading conception of the link between Minkowski spacetime structure and Lorentz invari-ance, a misconception that in turn sheds more shadows than light on our understand-ing of the explanatory nature and power of Einstein’s theory. I state that the arrow connecting Lorentz invariance and Minkowski spacetime is not explanatory and uni-directional, but analytic and bidirectional, and that this analytic arrow grounds the chronogeometric explanations of physical phenomena that special relativity offers