I don't know what Lanczos had in mind, but Norton's dome is an example of nonuniqueness. There is a large literature on this system and its philosophical implications (or lack thereof). Norton, "Causation as Folk Science," http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1214/ Korolev, "Indete...
- Repository URL:
I deny that the world is fundamentally causal, deriving the skepticism on non-Humean grounds from our enduring failures to find a contingent, universal principle of causality that holds true of our science. I explain the prevalence and fertility of causal notions in science by arguing that a causal character for many sciences can be recovered, when they are restricted to appropriately hospitable domains. There they conform to a loose collection of causal notions that form a folk science of causation. This recovery of causation exploits the same generative power of reduction relations that allows us to recover gravity as a force from Einstein's general relativity and heat as a conserved fluid, the caloric, from modern thermal physics, when each theory is restricted to appropriate domains. Causes are real in science to the same degree as caloric and gravitational forces.