On Identifying Background-Structure in Classical Field Theories

I examine a property of theories called ‘background-independence’ that Einsteinian gravitation is thought to exemplify. This concept has figured in the work of Rovelli (2001; 2004), Smolin (2006), Giulini (2007), and Belot (2011), among others. I propose and evaluate a few candidates for background-independence, and I show that there is something chimaerical about the concept. I argue, however, that there is a proposal that clarifies the feature of Einsteinian gravitation that motivates the concept

The Principle of Equivalence as a Criterion of Identity

In 1907 Einstein had the insight that bodies in free fall do not “feel” their own weight. This has been formalized in what is called “the principle of equivalence.” The principle motivated a critical analysis of the Newtonian and special-relativistic concepts of inertia, and it was indispensable to Einstein’s development of his theory of gravitation. A great deal has been written about the principle. Nearly all of this work has focused on the content of the principle and whether it has any content in Einsteinian gravitation, but more remains to be said about its methodological role in the development of the theory. I argue that the principle should be understood as a kind of foundational principle known as a criterion of identity. This work extends and substantiates a recent account of the notion of a criterion of identity by William Demopoulos. Demopoulos argues that the notion can be employed more widely than in the foundations of arithmetic and that we see this in the development of physical theories, in particular space-time theories. This new account forms the basis of a general framework for applying a number of mathematical theories and for distinguishing between applied mathematical theories that are and are not empirically constrained

Effects of an LGBTQ identity and support systems on mental health: a study of 4 theories

Sexual minority adolescents (LGBTQ) are at a higher risk of depression, suicidal ideation, and suicidal execution than are their heterosexual counterparts. This study aims to explain four theories – minority stress theory, social ties theory, interpersonal theory of suicide, and structuration theory – and their impact on identity and support systems for LGBTQ youth. Four members of the LGBTQ community at an elite university in the Northeastern United States were interviewed one-on-one for this study (25% lesbian, 50% queer females, and 25% bisexual female; mean age 20 years) and shared their experiences. Without support, LGBTQ youth are victims of harassment, bullying, microaggressions, and other types of victimization that can result in deteriorating mental health

Friedman and Some of his Critics on the Foundations of General Relativity

This paper is an examination of Michael Friedman’s analysis of the conceptual structure of Einstein’s theory of gravitation, with a particular focus on a number of critical reactions to it. Friedman argues that conceptual frameworks in physics are stratified, and that a satisfactory analysis of a framework requires us to recognize the differences in epistemological character of its components. He distinguishes first-level principles that define a framework of empirical investigation from second-level principles that are formulable in that framework. On his account, the theory of Riemannian manifolds and the equivalence principle define the framework of empirical investigation in which Einstein’s field equations are an intellectual and empirical possibility. Friedman is a major interpreter of relativity and his view has provoked a number of critical reactions, nearly all of which miss the mark. I aim to free Friedman’s analysis of Einsteinian gravitation from a baggage of misconceptions and to defend the notion that physical theories are stratified. But I, too, am a critic and I criticize Friedman’s view on several counts, notably his account of a constitutive principle and that of the principle of equivalence

On Identifying Background-Structure in Classical Field Theories

I examine a property of theories called ‘background-independence’ that Einsteinian gravitation is thought to exemplify. This concept has figured in the work of Rovelli (2001; 2004), Smolin (2006), Giulini (2007), and Belot (2011), among others. I propose and evaluate a few candidates for background-independence, and I show that there is something chimaerical about the concept. I argue, however, that there is a proposal that clarifies the feature of Einsteinian gravitation that motivates the concept

The Principle of Equivalence as a Criterion of Identity

In 1907 Einstein had the insight that bodies in free fall do not “feel” their own weight. This has been formalized in what is called “the principle of equivalence.” The principle motivated a critical analysis of the Newtonian and special-relativistic concepts of inertia, and it was indispensable to Einstein’s development of his theory of gravitation. A great deal has been written about the principle. Nearly all of this work has focused on the content of the principle and whether it has any content in Einsteinian gravitation, but more remains to be said about its methodological role in the development of the theory. I argue that the principle should be understood as a kind of foundational principle known as a criterion of identity. This work extends and substantiates a recent account of the notion of a criterion of identity by William Demopoulos. Demopoulos argues that the notion can be employed more widely than in the foundations of arithmetic and that we see this in the development of physical theories, in particular space-time theories. This new account forms the basis of a general framework for applying a number of mathematical theories and for distinguishing between applied mathematical theories that are and are not empirically constrained

An Exploration into the Psychotic Symptoms Associated with Schizophrenia and Major Depressive Disorder

This research examines the neurological similarities between schizophrenia and major depressive disorder with psychotic features to compare the manifestations of psychosis in each disorder. Both disorders often involve symptoms of psychosis, although the disorders overall are very different. We hypothesize that the neurological similarities between schizophrenia and major depressive disorder with psychotic features will provide researchers with the strategies needed to develop a treatment for psychotic symptoms. In order to test this hypothesis, five related studies were gathered for each disorder, and three studies were gathered for psychosis. These studies were then analyzed to pinpoint any similarities among factors for psychosis, and this analysis allowed for the determination of whether the hypothesis would be rejected. The results indicated that many of the similarities between the two disorders cannot be verified because of the lack of substantial research

Some disputed aspects of inertia, with particular reference to the equivalence principle

This thesis is a contribution to the foundations of space-time theories. It examines the proper understanding of the Newtonian and 1905 inertial frame concepts and the critical analysis of these concepts that was motivated by the equivalence principle. This is the hypothesis that it is impossible to distinguish locally between a homogeneous gravitational field and a uniformly accelerated frame. The three essays that comprise this thesis address, in one way or another, the criteria through which the inertial frame concepts are articulated. They address the place of these concepts in the conceptual framework of physics and their significance for our understanding of space and time. In Chapter 2, I examine two claims that arise in Brown’s (2005) account of inertia. Brown claims there is something objectionable about the way in which the motions of free particles in Newtonian theory and special relativity are coordinated. Brown also claims that since a geodesic principle can be derived in Einsteinian gravitation the objectionable feature is explained away. I argue that there is nothing objectionable about inertia and that, while the theorems that motivate Brown’s claim can be said to figure in a deductive-nomological explanation, their main contribution lies in their explication rather than their explanation of inertial motion. In Chapter 3, I examine Friedman’s recent approach to the analysis of physical theories (2001; 2010a; 2010b; 2011). Friedman argues that the identification of certain principles as ‘constitutive’ is essential to the correct methodological analysis of physics. I explicate Friedman’s characterisation of a constitutive principle and his account of the constitutive principles that Newtonian and Einsteinian gravitation presuppose for their formulation. I argue that something very close to Friedman’s view is defensible. In Chapter 4, I examine the so-called background-independence that Einsteinian gravitation is said to exemplify. This concept has figured in the work of Rovelli (2001; 2004), Smolin (2006), Giulini (2007), and Belot (2011), among others. I propose three ways of fixing the extension of background-independence, and I argue that there is something chimaerical about the concept. I argue, however, that there is a proposal that clarifies the feature of Einsteinian gravitation that motivates the concept