Absolute versus Relational Debate: a Modern Global Version
Edward Anderson

TL;DR
This paper compares absolute and relational approaches in geometry and physics, proposing a new perspective that avoids stratification issues and discusses the implications for shape theory and general relativity.
Contribution
It introduces a novel approach with a generic absolute space that eliminates stratification, and extends the discussion to Kendall-type Shape Theory, which is a new contribution.
Findings
Stratification arises in quotienting absolute space, complicating relational theories.
A generic absolute space with no Killing vectors simplifies shape and scale theories.
Relational and absolute strategies have distinct technical advantages and limitations.
Abstract
Suppose one seeks to free oneself from a symmetric absolute space by quotienting out its symmetry group. This in general however fails to erase all memory of this absolute space's symmetry properties. Stratification is one major reason for this, which is present in both a) Kendall-type Shape Theory and subsequent Relational Mechanics, and b) General Relativity configuration spaces. We consider the alternative starting point with a generic absolute space, meaning with no nontrivial generalized Killing vectors whatsoever. In this approach, generically Shape-and-Scale Theory is but trivially realized, there is no separate Shape Theory and indeed no stratification. While the GR configuration space version of these considerations was already expounded in 1996 by Fischer and Moncrief, the Kendall-type shape theory version is new to the current article. In each case, this amounts to admitting…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsPost-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics
