Cited by 50Philosophy and History of ScienceRelativity and Gravitational TheoryPhilosophy, Science, and History

Motivating dualities

Open access
Read, James, Møller-Nielsen, Thomas·2020·Synthese

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11229-018-1817-5

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Choosing a Killing vector field is making a choice of a model among all the possible dynamical models.

    “As Read (2020: p. 222) mentions, choosing a Killing vector field is making a choice of a model among all the possible dynamical models.”

    From Noether's Theorems and Energy in General Relativity (2021) · cites this paper as Read (2020: p. 222)

    The Introduction defines dynamically possible models as models whose geometrical objects satisfy a theory’s dynamical equations. Section 3.2.1 includes a vector field in its account of Newtonian models, but neither passage says that choosing a Killing vector field selects one dynamically possible model. Searches for “Killing vector” and for that proposed selection relationship found no passage addressing it. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Expressions involving Killing vectors are background-independent.

    “I agreed with Read's (2020) defence of the background-independence of expressions involving Killing vectors”

    From Noether's Theorems and Energy in General Relativity (2021) · cites this paper as Read's (2020)

    The passages on spacetime structure and symmetries (§§3.2.1 and 3.2.4; page numbers unavailable) do not discuss Killing vectors or whether expressions involving them are background-independent. Searches for “Killing vectors” and related terms found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Sebastian De Haro, Nicholas Teh and Jeremy N. Butterfield, "Comparing Dualities and Gauge Symmetries", Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 59, pp. 68- 80, 2017.
  2. Michael Esfeld and Vincent Lam, "Moderate Structural Realism About Spacetime", Syn- these 160(1), pp. 27-46, 2011.
  3. Nick Huggett, Space from Zeno to Einstein, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
  4. Tim Maudlin, "Buckets of Water and Waves of Space", Philosophy of Science 60(2), pp. 183-203, 1993.
  5. David Wallace, "Fields As Bodies: A Unified Presentation of Spacetime and Internal Gauge Symmetry", 2015. arXiv:1502.06539. · arXiv
  6. James Owen Weatherall, "Maxwell-Huygens, Newton-Cartan, and Saunders-Knox Spacetimes", Philosophy of Science 83(1), pp. 82-92, 2016.
  7. Hermann Weyl, Symmetry, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1952.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Read, J., & Møller-Nielsen, T.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Read, James
Venue
Synthese
Published
2018-05-29
Volume
197
Issue
1
Pages
263-291
ISSN
  • 0039-7857 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0964
OpenAlex
W4238321884
Cited by
49
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5
FWCI
32.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Synthese (publishedVersion)
  • PhilSci-Archive (University of Pittsburgh) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Arts and Humanities Research Council
  • Oriel College, University of Oxford
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy, Science, and History
Keywords
duality, dual model, motivational approach, symmetry, physical theories, possible worlds, philosophy of physics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review