Abstract
The idea that motion or change is an inconsistent process has, as is well known, a long history. Recent nice work by Graham Priest [46] suggests that an inconsistent account of motion and change is at least possible. It is a further matter whether it is true; and despite Priest’s arguments, there does not seem to be a compelling reason for rejecting the existing consistent account from classical physics, which is mathematically both simple and elegant. Priest argues that the classical account has it that motion is being in different places at different times; whereas what he wants is an intrinsic account of motion according to which an instantaneous state ought to be unambiguously change or nonchange, independently of its (distance) relations to other states. Against this, one is inclined to argue that the relations are nonetheless present; that an account in which the relations alone carry the change is therefore inevitably simpler; and that being in different places at different times is surely necessary for motion, and more importantly (at least given a positive definite metric) sufficient as well.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mortensen, C. (1995). Inconsistent Continuous Functions. In: Inconsistent Mathematics. Mathematics and Its Applications, vol 312. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8453-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8453-1_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4480-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8453-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive