What in the World Are 4D Shapes?

ABSTRACT It is often said that in special relativity, 4D shapes can be used to explain 3D shape projections onto frames of reference. Perdurantists have frequently used this as a motivation for their view of persistence. Despite this, philosophers never clearly state what 4D shapes are. We take a foundational approach toward this issue, first getting clear on the nature of 4D shapes and then using our analysis of 4D shapes to question the explanatory connection between 4D shapes and 3D shapes. We begin by considering some accounts of 4D shapes that seem implicit in philosophers' remarks, finding them deficient. We then discuss what it takes for two objects to have the same 4D shape, working backward to an account of what 4D shapes are. This leads us to argue that 4D shapes should be understood in terms of the isometries of Minkowski spacetime. Subsequently, we use this analysis to show that 4D shapes do not explain 3D projections onto frames in the way that perdurantists have suggested.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Noûs
Published
2026-08-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.70063
Primary Topic
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What in the World Are 4D Shapes?

Sebastián Murgueitio Ramírez, Jack Himelright
Noûs
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
article

What in the World Are 4D Shapes?

Sebastián Murgueitio Ramírez, Jack Himelright
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT It is often said that in special relativity, 4D shapes can be used to explain 3D shape projections onto frames of reference. Perdurantists have frequently used this as a motivation for their view of persistence. Despite this, philosophers never clearly state what 4D shapes are. We take a foundational approach toward this issue, first getting clear on the nature of 4D shapes and then using our analysis of 4D shapes to question the explanatory connection between 4D shapes and 3D shapes. We begin by considering some accounts of 4D shapes that seem implicit in philosophers' remarks, finding them deficient. We then discuss what it takes for two objects to have the same 4D shape, working backward to an account of what 4D shapes are. This leads us to argue that 4D shapes should be understood in terms of the isometries of Minkowski spacetime. Subsequently, we use this analysis to show that 4D shapes do not explain 3D projections onto frames in the way that perdurantists have suggested.

Noûs
Kansas State University (US), Princeton University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.