Governing Without A Fundamental Direction of Time: Minimal Primitivism about Laws of Nature
Eddy Keming Chen, Sheldon Goldstein

TL;DR
This paper introduces a minimal primitivism about laws of nature that does not require laws to be dynamical or time-directed, allowing for a broader range of fundamental laws constrained by physical possibilities.
Contribution
It proposes a novel primitivist account of laws that avoids assumptions about the fundamental direction of time and does not reduce laws to universals or powers.
Findings
Captures governing as constraining without time direction assumptions
Accommodates various candidate fundamental laws including least action and Einstein's equations
Allows non-Humean theories to freely consider diverse fundamental laws
Abstract
The Great Divide in metaphysical debates about laws of nature is between Humeans, who think that laws merely describe the distribution of matter, and non-Humeans, who think that laws govern it. The metaphysics can place demands on the proper formulations of physical theories. It is sometimes assumed that the governing view requires a fundamental / intrinsic direction of time: to govern, laws must be dynamical, producing later states of the world from earlier ones, in accord with the fundamental direction of time in the universe. In this paper, we propose a minimal primitivism about laws of nature (MinP) according to which there is no such requirement. On our view, laws govern by constraining the physical possibilities. Our view captures the essence of the governing view without taking on extraneous commitments about the direction of time or dynamic production. Moreover, as a version of…
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.
