Srinivasan, Radhakrishnan (2003) Comment on "On the logical consistency of special relativity theory and non-Euclidean geometries: Platonism versus formalism". [Preprint]

Preview	PDF srneg2.pdf Download (177kB)
Preview	Postscript srneg2.ps Download (154kB)
	Tex/LaTeX srneg2.tex Download (37kB)

Abstract

As observed in the PhilSci preprint ID Code 1255 [1], consistency in the author's proposed non-Aristotelian finitary logic (NAFL) demands that Euclid's fifth postulate must necessarily be provable from the first four, and that diagrammatic reasoning with Euclidean concepts must necessarily be admitted into the rules of inference for plane neutral geometry in order to argue for the said provability. Two important consequences, namely, the indispensable role of diagrams as formal objects of Euclidean geometry in NAFL and the resulting NAFL concept of `line' as an infinite proper class of line segments are highlighted and elaborated upon. A misleading comment in Remark 6 of [1], regarding negation for undecidable propositions in the theory of special relativity (SR), is corrected. This comment is unrelated to the main argument in [1] and the resulting analysis reinforces the conclusions of [1] that negation and implication are problematic concepts for undecidable propositions in SR.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Preprint
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Srinivasan, Radhakrishnan
Commentary on:	Srinivasan, Radhakrishnan (2003) On the logical consistency of special relativity theory and non-Euclidean geometries: Platonism versus formalism. [Preprint]
Keywords:	special theory of relativity, undecidable propositions, relativistic determinism, relativity of simultaneity, consistency, inconsistency, Euclidean geometry, Euclid's fifth postulate, classical logic, non-Aristotelian finitary logic, Platonism, formalism, non-constructive existence, decidability, diagrammatic reasoning
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Mathematics Specific Sciences > Physics > Relativity Theory General Issues > Determinism/Indeterminism
Depositing User:	Dr. Radhakrishnan Srinivasan
Date Deposited:	29 Sep 2003
Last Modified:	07 Oct 2010 15:12
Item ID:	1397
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Mathematics Specific Sciences > Physics > Relativity Theory General Issues > Determinism/Indeterminism
Date:	September 2003
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/1397

Commentary/Response Threads

• Srinivasan, Radhakrishnan On the logical consistency of special relativity theory and non-Euclidean geometries: Platonism versus formalism. (deposited 14 Jul 2003)
  • Srinivasan, Radhakrishnan Comment on "On the logical consistency of special relativity theory and non-Euclidean geometries: Platonism versus formalism". (deposited 29 Sep 2003) [Currently Displayed]

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item