How Scientific Theories Are and Early History of Science: Invented

How scientific theories are invented
and
Early history of Science
IFEL 8000
Part 1
by
Per Arne Bjrkum *
Spring 2010
NTNU
*Dean at the Faculty of
Science
and Technology,
University of Stavanger
per.a.bjorkum@uis.no
Litterature
A Selected Hisotory of Science
TAPIR, 165 pages
100 NOK
By
Per Arne Bjrkum
For those of you who

read norwegian
Annerledestenkerne
Kreativitet i vitenskapens historie
av
Per Arne Bjrkum
Universitetsforlaget,
2009.
3. utgave
439 NOK
420 pages
Why history of Science?
History of science is used to illustrate how theories are

constructed and tested
Philosophy of science is in these lectures integrated with history of
natural science.
History of science also illustrates the dynamic aspect of

knowledge and introduces us to scientific debates how
they evolvedand ended including discussions between
paradigms
Current debate.
The climate debate

A discussion between
paradigms
Why history of Science? contin.

Although the Scientific Method is basically unchanged since 1600 AD,
the philosophy of science has changed.
The philosophy of science is more than the Scientific Method,
It also includes metaphysical/speculative aspects (philosophical
paradigms).
The philosophy/metaphysics (paradigm) put some constrains to the
starting point (i.e. the basic assumptions and concepts) in search for
new knowledge.
The philosophy/metaphysics is strongly influenced by the
(i.e. tradition/ideology/religion) and it
has changed with time!
culture
(as will be shown).
Why study the early history of science

(prior to 1600AD) the ancient
Greek philosophers?
-Their contribution are decisive (as we see it) for the
development of the Scientific Method (and our current view on
how nature works)
- They gave us some of the mental tools (concepts), and
provided us with an philosophical/metaphysical approach to
understand nature that has proven decisive
- This approach (philosophy) did not fully develop in other
cultures.
Contribution to natural science. up to 1950

1400-1600 AD
1600-1800 AD
1800-1950 AD
72% of the significant people in science from 1400 -1950 are from Britain,
France, Germnany and Italy (four countries!)
Whether meassured in people or events, 97% of accomplishment in scientific
inventories occured in Europe and North America
8
Human Accomplishment, C.Murry, 2003
9
Human Accomplishment, C.Murry, 2003
The enigma is:
Why did the Chinese, the Arabs (Muslims..600 AD), and the Indians
not make any significant contribution to science up until 1900 AD?
There were sufficient interaction.
What is the role of
entangled
Religion
Philosophy
Metaphysics
Mystics..
Goverment.?
genius
..and the
..people that make a
difference
10
About science and genius.

No one is born a genius!
Genius is created
(by themselves)
by spending more time (~3 x)

than others
cultivating and developing their
Talent(s)
"nerds"
much more selfstudy (not on the
syllabus)
..fascinated by
alternative
reading
11
On being talented
Maxwell
was flabbergasted by the fact
that so
many talented or learned
individuals
did NOT (!!)
contribute to something new in
science.
12
An enigma
The history of science (.) has to
explain unsuccessful inquiries, and
why some of the ablest men have
failed to find the key to (new)
knowledge
J. C. Maxwell
Science is about developing new knowledge,

new theories, but..
How are new theories received?
14
A new theory
Ohms Law (1826)
U = R I
15
Ohm's conclusions were poorly received by the

intellectual elite who sent a letter to the
Ministry ...
A physicist who preaches

such heresy is not worthy
of teaching science"
He was fired and lost his job in "lower secondary school"
NOTE: This had nothing to do with the Church.
16
What is new knowledge and what do we

mean by growth in science..?
New knowledge (growth in science) happens when different
phenomena (like electricity and magnetism), at a certain
separate
related*
point in the development considered to be

fenomena (non-connected), become
*Defined by Leibniz and named: relationalism
17
Deeper/underlying
relations
Magnetism
Electricity
Electromagnetism
This relationship points to an underlying not so

obvious property (electromagnetism)
18
New knowledge and relations in mathematics

Cartesian coordinates 1637
The idea:
Looking at a fly
in the room
Descartes
1596-1650
Leibniz (1646-1716)
Space becomes related to numbers!

19
The scientific method

The modern scientific method (17th century) is
- mathematical description (Galileo) of hypotheses
that can be
- tested by experimentation/experience (Galileo) in
such a manner so that others can test/check,
which requires
- detailed description (Boyle,1660, but also Gilbert,1600!)
De Magnete, 1600
20
On the scientific method

There is no scientific method for
how to come up with new ideas or
for how to solve the problem!!
The scientific method is only for
for testing the invented (by the
scientists way of thinking!)
proposals/hypotheses/theories
21
Developments after 1600

The theories we have abandoned today:
A mechanical
invisible
something!
- The phlogiston theory (air as an inert element)

- The theory of PxV = k (and the springness of the air)
- Daltons theory of atoms (quantitative theory!)
- The theory of heat (caloric: a fluid-like substance)
- Newtons theory of gravitation (not totally free of ether and God)
- Bohrs theory of atoms (hybrid: Newtons physics +
quantum theory)
were all well justified/reasoned (for their time)

- they were logical
- they were based on supporting observations (evidence)
- hence, they were considered to be correct (proven)
How is this possible?
- they were no less intelligent 400 years ago, and they worked
22
in accordance with the modern scientific method ...
Knowledge and Technology development

Technoloogy
Science
Sadi Carnot
1796-1832
Emipircal approach
Theory driven development

23
What is
the status of
scientific facts?
On facts in science..
"When great breakthroughs are made, a
truly great discovery, it means that the
experts were wrong and that the facts,
the objective facts, were different
from what the experts believed they
were.
K. Popper, A World of Propensities, 1995
Facts are theorybiased,
and theory is a
temporary
"truth".
Theory determines
what one can see
25
(Einstein)
Atom
Electron,
Mass
Pressure
Velocity
Acceleration
Gravitation
Space
Proton (particle)
Neutrino
Ions
Air
Viscosity
Current
Resistance
Heat
Energy quantum
EM wave
Photon
Electromagnetism
Quarks
Superstrings
Ether
Crystalline shell
Epicircles/cycles
Natural habitat
Centre of the
Universe
Dark energy
Concepts
Ball
Stone
House
Water
New knowledge requires
new concepts!
How do (new) concepts

arise?
What comes first?
The Concepts?
The Observations?
How do we get started?
26
Atom
Electron,
Mass
Pressure
Velocity
Acceleration
Gravitation
Space
Proton (particle)
Neutrino
Ions
Air
Viscosity
Current
Resistance
Heat
Energy quantum
EM wave
Photon
Electromagnetism
Quarks
Superstrings
Ether
Crystalline shell
Epicircles/cycles
Natural habitat
Centre of the
universe
Ball
Stone
House
Water
Close to
our
senses
How do concepts arise?

We are free to choose all concepts,
even those that are closest to our
experience, and there "is no inductive
method that can lead to the
fundamental concepts used in
natural science".
(Einstein, Autobiographical Notes, 1953)
More
abstract
and not
supported
by the
senses
The way they (the concepts) are

created is unexplained, and thus
there is "no method that can be
learned.
(Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, 1954)
27
The origin of concepts

The concepts that arise in our
thoughts and our forms of
expression are all, logically, free
creation of thoughts that cannot be
attained through inductive thinking
or observations."
Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, 1954
Even the concepts that are closest to what we sense,

come about in this way (Einstein)
We are free to choose the concepts (Einstein)
28
The "illegitimate" authority of the concepts

A warning from Einstein ..
"Concepts that have proven

useful to keep things in order
may easily gain so much
authority over us that we
forget their earthly origin and
accept them as immutable
facts"
Because they
are part of the
logical
structure
which is
empirically
supported
(from Einstein's article: Ernst Mach, 1916).

29
On the need for logical order

Man (us) is driven by an intense logical need
to create (logical) order in the part of
nature/life we have been interested in
and
Man has always managed this
i.e. different solutions
In different ways
30
The Aristotelian physics and the

Aristotelian view of the world
were..
logical (= reasonable = true = real)
but
nevertheless wrong
on all counts!
31
Logic versus observation

Logic gives 100% certain knowledge, but it does not
state anything about reality (cf. mathematics, proof)
Observations give information about reality,
but they are not 100% certain (cf. theories of nature,
evidence)
32
Euclid
Non-Euclid
Euclids mathematics is logical, but not logically nessesary
33
"What is genuinely new cannot be

deducted from logics,
only (first) grasped
intuitively."
K. Popper
34
Logical circle argumentation

The logic based on
the premises (and concepts),
and is taken
from theories which in turn
determine what becomes fact !
Einstein, Popper
All points of view are logical

and thus well founded.
35
Scientific publications
"Make it appear unavoidable
Pasteur
This statement covers up the speculative foundation

And it has become a model for how to write scientific papers
36
"Theories can never be (logically) deducted

from observation statements,
nor justified rationally
by these." Popper
37
New knowledge does not arise

"through observations or experiments"
but when a
"critical examination of our theories"
is undertaken.
Popper, Conjectures and Refutations, 1989
38
The island of knowledge

A Knowledge Metaphor
Paradigm
logics
Value choice
Controlling principles
Metaphysics
39

logics
Metaphysical values
(the foundation of the paradigm):

nature is understandable/rational, symmetry, harmony, continuity (no
jumps!?), causality, simplicity etc., mathematical description,
geometries (circles?), jumps (quantum mechanics)?
God is a geometer (Platon/Ptolemaios, Copernicus; Galilei, Kepler,

Einstein)
Nature
is about number/relationships (Phytagoras)
40

Paradigm
The transition is not an act

of logic, - it is a choice a
private choice inspired
(determnined?) by
metaphysical values
logics
?
New island (paradigm)
Value choice
Metaphysics
41

Paradigm
logics
The inner structure of

a theory opens for an
another metaphor
(to be shown later)
Value choice
Metaphysics
42
The paradigm
information
irrelevant
information
logics
It is a filter on information/data
43
The paradigm (what you see)

It is the theory that
detemnines what we
can se Einstein
information
irrelevant
information
?
logics
It is a filter on information/data and

it determines what you see (read: understand)
44
Arthur C. Clarkes Law (1923):

When a distinguished but
elderly scientist
states that
something is possible,
he is almost certainly right.
When he states that something is
impossible,
he is very probably wrong
45
Model for constructing a scientific theory (short introduction)
A Theory
elements and its structure
46
You know the elements involved:

Concepts,
definisjonion,
matemathics/logic,
observations/experiments
and
its structure
but
what about the
routes of thought
and
the activities involved?
47
and
is a
theory
Discovered?
or
Invented?
48
Einsteins letter to a friend
May 7, 1952
A theory is invented.
Because there is no logical
route from observation to a
theory
49
Einstein: and the role of logic in creating

new theories (invention of theories)
Invention
is not the product
of logical thought,
even though the final product
is tied to a logical structure
Einstein, Autobiographische Skitzze, 1956
(8 pages, an additional to his Autobiographical
Notes, 1953)
50
May 7, 1952
Where he explain with reference to this figure (in black) how scientific theories are inventet.
This outline is based on G. Holtons The Advancement of Science, and Its Burdens, 1998, p. 28-56).
A theory is invented.
51
Einsteins letter to a friend May 7, 1952

Where he explain with reference to this figure (in black) how scientific theories are inventet.
This outline is based on G. Holtons The Advancement of Science, and Its Burdens, 1998, p. 28-56).
The model (its dynamic structure)

(To be explained in detail - later)
(axioms)
A, assumptions (concepts and definitions)

D, The logical deductive path
P ( predictions)
(a-logical/creative jump)
E (experience)
Einstein. Inner perfection(the structure and elements in the theory),
and external validation (observations)
52
May 7, 1952
Einsteins two main perspectives
(inner perfection and external validation)
Inner perfection
(the structure and
elements in the
theory),
external validation (observations)

53
A Theory: Elements and structure
?
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
Einstein: It starts with experience, and ends with it
54

Einstein on observations/experiencewhat is it?
It Contains/includes::
Mutliplicity of immediate sense experience
experience given to us
totality of emipirical facts
totality of sense experience
a labyrint of sense impressions
that can be
the result of illusions or hallicunations(!)
For Einstein
Science is the attempt to make the chaotic diversity of our

sense-experience to a logical uniform (unified) system of thought
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
55
A-logical
step
(a jump)
A1
A2
An
A3
Assumptions (concepts, definitions)
Filter
(personal)
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
56
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
Filter
(personal)
A2
An
A3
Einstein:
We pay attention on certain repetedly occuring complexes of sense
impressions and relating them to a concept , mental knots or mental
connections between sense impressions, and is primary if close to sense
experience. But we select the concepts without some logical necessity.
All concepts,even those which are closest to our experience, are (from a
the point of wiev of) logical freely chosen conventions
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
57
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
A2
An
A3
Basic elements
NB:There is no logical
relation between
the basic elements!
?
Filter (personal)
Basis:
Metaphysical
Philosophical
(Paradigm)
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
58
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
?
Filter (personal)
Basis:
Metaphysical
Philosophical
(Paradigm)
A2
An
A3

Consists of the greatest possible
sparsity of the of logically independent
elements (basic concepts and axioms)
Basic elements
relation between
the basic elements!
Assumptions
it is the grand object to all theory to make these irreducable

elements as simple and as few in numbers as possible
Ideas and Opinions,
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
59
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
A2
An
Basic elements
A3
Logical/analytical/
mathematical
deductions
?
Filter (personal)
relation between
the basic elements!
P1
P3
P2
Predictions (to be tested)
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
60
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
A2
An
A3

Logical/analytical/
mathematical
deductions
?
Filter (personal)
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
Logical thinking is nessesarily deductive

which requires
much intens, hard thinking
The structure of the system is the work
of reason (which can be learned at
school).
61
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
A2
An
A3

Logical/analytical/
mathematical
deductions
?
Filter (personal)
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
E4
Predictions or Statements about nature
the relations between the

concepts appearing in P
(predictions) and E (experience)
are not of a logical nature.
Experience
The theory must not contradict empirical facts (external validation).
62
Einstein: It starts with experience, and ends with it
Theory
Experience
A Theory: Elements and structure.. If prections are not verified
A1
A2
An
A3
If NO!!!,
-one solutions could be to add the number
of assumptions,
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
E3 = NO!!!
64
A Theory: Elements and structure.. If prections are not verified

(ugly)
A1
A2
An
A3
a1
a2 a3
But it increases the

number of assumption
and goes against
keep it simple-principle

If NO!!!,
-one solutions could be to add the number
of assumptions,
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
E3: NO!!!
65
A*1
A*2
An
a1
A3
a3
a2

A better (?) alternative
If NO!!!,
evaluate the whole set of
assumptions and definitions
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
E3: NO!!!
66

Keep it simple Explain as much as possible with as little as possible
A2
A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
An
A3
?
Filter (personal)
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
Popper: this is a good theory
Pn
Predictions of
unseen/unobserved
fenomena (relations).
67
About the logical routes in a theory

-There no logical route from one assumptions to one observation
-There is a logical link from the wholde set of assumptions to the observations
-If the theory fails, it is the whole set of assumptions (as a whole) that fail.
-It is not possible to identify which of the assumptions that has to
be replaced, - or modified.
Logical routes
Yes
No
68
Summary: A Theory: Elements and structure

A1
A-logical step
(a jump)
A2
An
a1
A3
Basic elements
relation between
the basic elements!
Logical/analytical/
mathematical
deductions
?
Filter (personal)
a2
P1
P3
P2
Predidictions or Statments about nature
Pn
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
Preditions of
unseen/unobserved
fenomena
69
Concepts and sensory proximity

The (mathematical/logical) distance
between
(abstract concepts) and
Teoriene blir mer og mer abstrakt og
kompakt, noe som er synlig i den
observations
(what we sense) is
matematiske formalismen. Det blir
stadig vekk en lengre (matematisk)
increasing,
as Einstein claimed.
vei mellom begrepene og
observasjonene, slik Einstein selv
var inne p.
70
The basic assumptions are logically islolated from each other.
A1
A2
An
A3
Implications:
It is therefore not possible to present a logical justification for
neither each assumption/definition nor the whole set of
assumptions/definition (why these and not others)
Note: there is no knowledge in a definitions, it serves in combination
with other definitions and assumptions as a starting point for possible
knowledge
71
The assumptions (and definitions) become logically related

A2
A1
An
NB:
A3
The (initally) logically independent

assumptions (and definitions)
become logically related/connected
in this part og the structure.
Also here, the cause

and effect
relationships emerge!
logic
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
This can give the (wrong)

impression that the cause and
effect relationships emerging
in in the deductive step are logically connected (from the
start)!!
72

Paradigim
logics
The inner structure of

a theory opens for an
another metaphor
(to be shown later)
Value choice
Metaphysics
73
The Inner Structure of Knowledge?

What do we mean by increased knowledge?
The trunk
Methaphysical foundations
74
The Inner Structure of Knowledge?

What do we mean by increased knowledge?
Trunk
Early stage: the knowledge

was isolated knowlegde,
that is: not related
Methaphysical foundations
75
And how will the final tree look like?
76
Observations
You cannot watch
the world and move
(logically) down the
braches and down
to the trunk
- and discover the
connected branches
that way..
77
Observations
Concepts
Definition
You have to remember

the observation, and make a
jump to the lower part of the
tree and try to invent concepts
and a way og thinking that
by deductive thinking leads
you up the brache and
hopefully connect well
to the observation.
Then you have made a
new brach to the tree,
a branch that may
not survive. is may have
been scion...
(norsk: en podet grein)
78
Observations
A scion?
There is no way to tell

a priori because you
do not know how the
tree eventually
will look like!
79
And is it one tree (the theory of everything)?
The metaphysical hope is that we will end up with one tree

(superstring theory?)
80
Paradigm shifts
New basic assumptions and definitionst (the roots)
Einstein
Newton
A1, A2,.
A*1, A*2, .
81
(Different property of space and time)
Observations (with filter)
logic
Value choice
Metaphysics
82
Einstein:
a theory is invented
and
Invention
is not the product
of logical thought,
even though the final product
is tied to a logical structure
Einstein, Autobiographische Skitzze, 1956
(8 pages, an additional to his Autobiographical
Notes, 1953)
83
Einsteins figure and the tree metaphor
84
A basic conpsept
What about the
cause and effect
(causality)
relationships
in science?
Cause and effect relationsCausal relations
Hume (and Mach) saw causal relations as "necessities only

existing in consciousness but not in objects".
We depend on cause-effect relations in our endeavour to
understand.
According to Kant we have no choice.

We must ensure that our perception of the world is "causally
arranged" (regardless whether nature is or not).
These choices may easily be the wrong ones ...
86
Cause and effect realtionships..example

Case 1 Blood and feaver
Galen ca. 150 AD
Treatment with bleeding becasue according to Galen (ca. 150 AD),
who had it from Empedokles, the body heat stems from the blood,
hence the only(?) sensible thing to do was to bleed oncetwice
87
Cause and effect realtionships..example

Galen ca. 150 AD
Treatment with bleeeding becasue according to Galen (ca. 150 AD),
hence the only? sensible thing to do was to bleed oncetwice
Case 2 Feaver and bacteria
Semmelweiss ca. 1850
The doctors were not willing to clean their hands properly and the death rates
during birth at hospitals could reach up to 30% (and only ca. 1% at home!)
Why did they not wash their hand with clorine as suggested by Semmelweiss?
Well, they had god reasons.
bacteria were thought to be an effect of being sick, and not
the cause of it and besides: how could the small bacteria kill a big man?
So why should the doctors have to wash their hands thoroughly?
88
Cause and effect realtionships..

Galen ca. 150 AD
Treatment with bleeeding becasue according to Galen (ca. 150 AD),
hence the only? sensible thing to do was to bleed oncetwice
Case 2 Feaver and bacteria
Semmelweiss ca. 1850
The doctors were not willing to clean their hands properly and the death rates
during birth at hospitals could reach up to 30% (and only ca. 1% at home!)
Why did they not wash their hand with clorine as suggested by Semmelweiss?
Well, they had god reasons.
bacteria were thought to be an effect of being sick, and not
the cause of it and besides: how could the small bacteria kill a big man?
So why should the doctors have to wash their hands thoroughly?
89
Cause and effect relationships

It is "the theory or the law that establishes the
logical relation between cause and effect"
Popper, Objective Knowledge, 1979.
How things are connected, i.e. the causal (meaningful) relations, is

determined by theory.
What we find reasonable and thus believe depends on the prevailing
theories or ideas we have on nature at any time.
There is logical circularity in our reasoning, and we should bear
this in mind.
It is not only "the others" that are in such a (closed) logical circle
of thinking.
90
The paradigm
informmation
logics
It is a filter on information/data
and what you can see (with the theory)
91
Symmetry..cause and effect
See page 146-161 in the compendium
How could electrisity be

affected by
magnetisme? And as
later shown by Faraday
vice versa?
92
A breif look at the properties of

cause and effect
relations i natural science
Examples
Cause and effect: A deeper/underlying connection
Magnetism
Electricity
Electromagnetism
94
Causal relationships and concepts
"Concepts we must consider

essential, for example causal
relations, cannot be achieved based
on the information provided
by our senses"
Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, 1954.
95
The assumptions (and definitions) become logically related
A1
A2
An
A3
The cause and effect

relationships emerge
here!
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
E4
Experience
96
To remind you..
It is the theory or the law that constitutes the
logical link
between cause and effect
Popper, Objective Knowledge, 1968
Causal relationships do not have an

independent outside the theory (scientific)
justufication
other than that it
-according to theory
make sense
(i.e. pleases the reasonable mind)
97
Cause and effect

Friction (the fenomenon)
produces
heat! (the fenomenon)
So: What is heat?
98
Thompson, 1798
Drilling on metal
The caloric theory (the heat was a substance - with some mas - hidden within
the body, by ut was liberated upon agitation. But Thompson saw that the energy
liberated appearde to be unlimited. As long as agitation continued,
heat was produced.
He writes:
Experimental Enquiry Concerning

the Source of the Heat which is
Excited by Friction, 1798
1753-1814
99
Vison: light- from the eye -
or towards the eye?
The light that is emitted from the eye, moves in a straight line
Euklid, Optica)
HENCE: Speed of light must be extremely fast because when we open our
eyes, far away objects like the stars - are seen at the same time as the
100
closer objects!!
Creativity
Leonardo da Vinci
(1452 -1519)
Lateral thinking
101
Innovative combination
(of explanations and drawings)
New relations.
Leonardo da Vinci
(1452 -1519)
102
How it started
103
How it started seventh century BC)

It stared with
Thales
(the first natural philosopher)
This culture believed it was possible

for man to understand nature. It was
their paradigm.
They established what we call rationalism (the trust in the faculty of
reason)
radical
This was what was

about this culture. This pre-Socratic
culture was the source of inspiration for the scientists who rebelled
against Aristotelian physics in the 17th century.
104
How it started
Perhaps an even more important and lasting
feature of the culture Thales introduced, also
called the Ionic culture, was that the pupils
were encouraged to critique what the master
had presented.
Thales: flat earth
Flat Earth (a drum)
Floating on water
105
The flat Earth myth..

The flat earth myth was introduced i 1828 by
the essayist and novelist Irving Washingtons:
A History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher
Columbus
It was a fiction
It was misconceived by many to be historically correct!!

In 1945 the Historical Association listed "Columbus and the
Flat Earth Conception" second of twenty in its first-published
pamphlet on common errors in history!
106
Eratosthenes (276 BC-194 BC)
107
On the earths place in the world..

Anaximanders explanation simply removed the
need for anything to keep the earth in place
because
"the Earth is held up by nothing, but remains
stationary owing to the fact that it is equally
distant removed from all other objects".
Popper felt this was "one of the boldest, most revolutionary, and most portentous
ideas in the whole history of human thoughts." (Conjectures and Refutations, 1989).
108
The problem of
change.
Tha basic question
was:
can we
trust
our
senses?
109
The problem of
change.
Heraclitus maintained that everything in
nature keeps changing (panta rei, i.e.

everything flows or is in flux), but we do
not see it (for example that material objects
are also undergoing continual change).
According to Heraclitus (he is unclear, and is often called "the

obscure"), nature hides its true self ("nature loves to hide"), and the
changes we observe are not nature's real changes.
Changes due to ageing are not change at all to (the obscure) Heraclitus,
because: "As the same thing in us is living and dead, waking and
sleeping, young and old ... all is the same".
A paradoxial logic!
110
The problem of
change.
Parmenides went to the opposite extreme. He
rejected
all change, including what we see.
What we sense or see are not real changes,

according to Parmenides. They are illusions.
(Zenons paradox)
111
The problem of
change.
A Solution: Unification of both perspectives:

Changes do occur, but something remains unchanged
Empedocles believed that nature consisted of a fixed
amount of each of the four immutable elements air, fire, water

and earth, which in different mixtures made up everything in
nature.
112
The problem of change.

.an alternative solution
The atomists (Leucippus/Democritus) attacked
Parmenides hypotheses and asserted that we actually do

see things moving, ergo denying it must be wrong.
They thus chose to trust
their senses.
Hence by introducing something immutable in what is
changeable (the atoms) and by allowing empty spaces in

nature, they laid the foundation for modern science.
113
The problem of
change.
Aristotle added a fifth (strange) element:

the ether (aether)
only present beyond the moon
The ether (concept) was

important for Newton, and also for scientist during
19th century
It was removed from science by Einstein (1905)
114
The problem of change. and mathematics..
Pythagoreans
(lived at the same time as Pre-Socrates)
Pythagoreans had geometrical pictures of numbers (the

numeral 1 was a dot, numeral 2 was lines, numeral 3 was
triangles, numeral 4 was pyramids and so on).
This same geometrical aspect of mathematics also inspired
Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler, Galileo and also Newton en
even Einstein! Newtons main work, Principia, (1687) used
Euclidian mathematics, i.e. geometrical mathematics, to
prove his hypotheses in physics (gravitation).
Pythagoras was looked upon as a God. Rumours (after his death) had it he was
able to walk on water, still the wind, rise from the dead (from a cave), his
mother was named Parthenis which means virgin.
115
The problem of change and modern science

That something is constant/conserved in
nature, and are the foundation on which all
science is built (i.e. the conservation laws).
(the unchangeable in everything that changes)
On the other hand, if nothing changes (as

Parmenides claimed), there would be no need
for natural science whatsoever.
116
The pre-Socrates.and impact on

modern science
Their contribution
the 1400s AD)
(NB: forgotten from around 300 AD, and re-surfaced in
Nature was ruled by laws

The laws could be understood by the faculty of reason
They believed in and were looking for simple answeres
They encuraged and valued critisism
They observed nature
(They were trying to apply mathematics to nature)
What they did not do, was to perform experiments
117
The role of the circle paradigm in the
conception of time in early philosphy

This circle was the time paradigm. Aristotle shared
this belief, "because even time is assumed to be a
circle" (Physics). The circle was the ideal.
It has a perfect shape, and has no start or end!
The circle also explained natural movement

"There is a circle in everything that has natural
movement", (Physics), and this circle has no start or
end.
Hence, a planet can be in a movement without change
place in the universe.
NB: In the Christian tradition, the prevalent perception was that time
was linear in natural consequence of the birth of Christ.
118
Aristotle: circular time and implication for his thinking

- According to Plato, and later Aristotle, the best
period was just now ("The Golden Age"). The world
could not be better than it was just now (when
Aristotle lived).
- When it came to devices that made for a good life
"almost any requirement for comfort and social

improvement has already been ensured" because
"everything of such a nature has already been
produced" (Aristotle, Metaphysics).
119
Aristotle: circular time and implication for his thinking

Cont
Because time was circular/cyclical, everything would repeat
itself. Including thought.
"The same ideas, one must believe, recur in men's

minds not once or twice but again and again"
(Aristotle, On the Heavens).
Every object/technology had already been
"invented many times, and again in the course of time,

in numbers beyond counting" (Aristotle, Politics).
Golden age
Now one was leaving this the best period of the cycle
This was a development (i.e. decay) nobody could prevent.
decay
120
Pre-Socratic philosophers (in Greece "before" Socrates, Plato and Aristotle)
Belong to the same school of philosophy
1)
Thales ( 640-540)
Anaximander (611-540)
2) Parmenides (540480)
Heraclitus (540-470)
3a) Empedocles (495- 435)

3b) Democritus (470-380)
4) Pythagoras (560-480)
To be read
Nature is comprehensible for human thought.

Sought the immutable in the changeable and what
everything had been made from (primary matter)
This primary matter was water (Thales), or something
unknown we cannot observe (Anaximander)
Reject Thales and Anaximander by asserting that nothing
changes, it is senses that deceive us (Parmenides), or
everything, absolutely everything, is in continual change,
nothing remains the same ("you cannot step into the same
river twice"), thus there is nothing immutable no primary
matter (Heraclitus)
Sought to unite 1) and 2) by accepting change, but
believed that nature was built of four primary matters:
earth, water, air and fire, which in different mixtures made
up everything we can sense
Changes are real, but something immutable exists that
builds nature and which is invisible: (indivisible) atoms
(made from a a primary matter) in various forms that
always move in a vacuum
A special "religious" school which believed that the
primary matter of nature is not material elements, but
abstract mathematical relations (everything was the
relation between integers)
These philosophers were "the first"(?) rationalists, i.e. the first to believe in the feasibility of thought being able to
121
understand nature (it was not seen as mystical), and they sought the simple answers (as modern science does).
18.01.2006
Modern natural science builds on these philosophers of nature in addition to Plato, but not Aristotle!
Plato and Aristotle (brief summary with emphasis on what is important for knowledge on nature)
Plato (427-347)
Aristotle (384-322)
To be read
The actual substance, primary matter", what is immutable/eternal, is not material, or relations between
integers, but ideas. What we sense is merely a pale and fleeting shadow of the ideas. Knowledge is insight
into the ideas, and they can be viewed through thinking/contemplation. Prior to birth the soul has knowledge
about everything (i.e. the ideas, because the soul was one with the ideas before birth). This knowledge is lost
at birth when the soul is divorced from the ideas and dwells in the perishable body. Recognition of thoughts is
proof of new contact with "the forgotten" ideas. Learning therefore concerns recognition through intuition.
Examples of ideas are perfect geometrical shapes (triangle, circle, cube etc. which we can only make or
draw approximations of). Knowledge about what is true is thus insight into the perfect and immutable ideas,
and we seek this knowledge because we have inherent yearning causing us to seek what is ideal and
valuable. Only a few, however, are able to achieve true knowledge. Plato was not interested in the material
and sensory world. Plato was important for Augustine's teachings (400s) , but was "forgotten" from around
the 13th century (Aristotle gained importance due to Aquinas)), but he had his renaissance in the 16th
century and was important for the emergence of modern science.
Aristotle, Plato's student, rejects Plato's teaching about ideas, and claims that only individual objects (matter)
exist. The important thing is the shape of objects (not what they are made from). The idea of a horse as an
abstract phenomenon arises after many sensory impressions of individual horses (what is common, the
essence of horse, becomes its shape). We abstract what is general (the shape of the horse) from what is
incidental (the colour of the horse). Knowledge is insight into what is general. Aristotle observed parts of
nature (animals), but did not carry out physical experiments (that would be forcing motion on nature, and
would give no information about natural motions). He rejected the idea that mathematics (numbers) had
anything to do with the material world (hence mathematical physics as introduced by Galileo was impossible
for him). He rejected the existence of a vacuum ("nature abhors a vacuum"), thus he rejected Democritus'
idea of atoms which required a vacuum. Aristotle believed that the material/sensory world consisted of
different mixes of the elements (he had this idea from Empedocles) earth, water, air and fire (on earth), and
what was outside the moon's sphere consisted of a substance he called ether (without mass!). The material
world was animist, i.e. it had properties such as eagerness (a stone would be urged toward earth because
this was its natural habitat). Time was cyclical (circular idea of time, everybody would be born again and live
the same life again forever). According to Aristotle his period was "the Golden Age", the peak of
technology. Further development was impossible! Thus knowledge was not sought to exploit nature (more
than what was already the case). The world was not created, but had always existed, and had been put into
motion (but was not created) by a prime mover" (an "impersonal" God). He believed that the earth was the
centre of the world and at rest (did not spin around its own axis) and that the planets and the sun travelled at
constant speeds and in circles (an idea from Plato!) around the earth. Aristotle replaces Plato from122
the 13th
to the 17th century as the authority on natural philosophy (Aristotle's writings were studied to gain knowledge
about nature).
An important fruitful guiding principle in natural science
Explain as much as possible

with as little as possible
Ockhams razor - but used since Thales; the first natural philosoper
wate
r
"It is vain to do with more what can be done with less

after William Ockham, c. 12851349, English logician and Franciscan friar
What appears to be complicated does not require a

complicated starting point (i.e many basic concepts, definitions)
123
There is no scientific rationale for this principle, but it has been a very useful principle.
Aristotle: the universe
Earth
Ether
Platons order
to Aristotle:
Use circles and
constant speed
for the plantes
Keep it simple
Planets, sun and stars

124
Aristotles sublunar world

(place for degeneration,change)
fire
air
water
Earth/stone
Moon
(made of
ether and
it was a perfect
Sphere).
Vertical movement
aiming at the
geometrical centre of
the world was the natural
125
movement
Aristotle: the universe

Simple version
NB!
Immutable universe: beyond
the moon (made of ether)
A dual
universe
Change: only below the moon
Earth
Ether
Sublunar
spheres:
The four
Elements:
(Earth, water
Air, fire)
The earth was the

imperfect part of the
universe,where constant
change was taking place
That is why the perfect
(equilibrium)
distribution/layering of
the four elemnts was not
seen on earth
126
Complications
Earth
stars
Aristotle: his complicated (real) universe

Simple version
A dual
universe
Dual universe
Ether
Earth
Sublunar
spheres:
Made of
the four
elements
Ca 50
circles in total
(some in opposite direction - in

order to explain the retrograde
movments of the planets!
Earth
Heaven
Immutable universe: beyond

the moon
128
Retrograde
movements
Were explained in
a (ad hoc) complicated
way
Planet Mars
129
Aristotle on motion
"Everything
that is in motion must be moved by something",

(F = k x v)
Fn = k x v
Aristotle
Aristotle
Fn = k x
VS.
Physics
Newton
on motion and why vacuum was impossible in nature:
"As air resists motion, a body will either be left standing still
when the air is removed because there is nothing
or if it is put into motion, it must

continue to move at the same speed forever.
As this is absurd, no vacuum can exist " (Physics).130
to move against (! ?),
Aristotle on free falls, and forced motions

Speed = (Weigth/Resistance of the medium)
Implications: the speed was infinite i vacuum
(zero resistance) implyng vacuum was
Impossible!!
(The concept of infinity was not accepted,

it was considered absurd)
Explanation for free fall:
A stone falls to the ground

(straight down) because this is its "natural habitat" and
therefore it eagerly struggles to get there.
The heavier the stone, the higher the urge, the faster
it would fall!
131
Aristotle
on free falls, and forced motions
Drawing from ca. 1400 AD

Could not have vertical and
horizontal motion
at the same time!
Only one force acting at the same

time (paradigm).
A forced force, would control the
movment 100% until it was used up,
then the stone would seek its natural
place, the surface of the earth,
though a vertical path.
132
A paradigm.
5th to 14th century
Gods perspective
on the world
Augustine
354-430
Notice the
absence of
a depth
perspective
WHY?
The world must be drawn as God saw it,
and He saw everything equally well ! 133
A new paradigm.
15th century
Individual perspective
on the world
Aquinas
13th century
opened for the idea that an
individual
might recognise God's truth
by studying nature
as it was perceived personally,
i.e. using
Senses and Reason
Aquinas
1225-1270
Individualism!!
1413
If one (you!9discovered laws

of nature, one (you) found
proof of God's order 134
Aquinas ~ 1200 AD
Each person might make his or her
own attempt to understand the laws,
which meant that there was a culture
encouraging the role of the
individual. With Aquinas we see the
individualism
dawn of
,
a new phenomenon which came into
full bloom in Galileo's time.
135
The important role of Natural philosophy

Natural philosophy is viewed as the mother of all
sciences
Without a developing natural philosophy, as seen during
the late Middle Ages and with its broad (robust)
metaphysical basis, it is not easy to see how modern
science could have developed around 1600 and onwards.
The culture became pregnant with the Scientific method
in the late Middle Ages)
136
A fruitful metaphore
The world as a machine
became a commonly used
metaphor
from 1200 AD and onwards.
A mechanical metaphor
(only to be found in the western culture)
137
Universities in West (1200 AD

The studentsin the Middle Ages:
- They came from (very) rich families
- They were men only
- They hired their own teachers
Sometimes they hired two teachers for
the same course, and made them lecture
at the same time (in two different rooms)!
The one that ended up having most students
attending, was given a permanint position.
A summary ..in light of the

structure of and elements
in a Scientific Theory
(the next four ppts
139
The pre-Sorcates
A1
A2
A3
They questioned the basic assumptions

and suggested different basic
elements, they did observe nature but
did not perform experiments.
An
Also, their approach was qualitative,

and not quantitative.
logic
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
They also proposed many different

solutions to the same problem, but had
no way to discriminate- other than
between metaphycical preferences (and
they were - and still are - private).
E4
Experience
140
Aristotles followers (late Middle Ages,

A1
A2
An
ca 1200 - ca1600 AD)
They accepted the basic

assumptions
provided Aristotles
A3
and were (like Aristotle) not concerned

with experiments/observations, hence
they were lost in a closed logical circle.
logic
P1
P3
P2
E1
E2
E3
Experience
E4
They proposed many differnet solutions

to the same problem, but had not
measure to discriminate between them
except logical arguments.
Thought experiments (experiments
without observations) where considered
as real as we today look at
experiments.
The value and the meaning of thought
experiments were different from oursl
141
Aristotles followers and the Church,
ca 1200 - ca1600 AD)
Also their final conclusions had to comply

with the Scripture, but they were in an
aristotelian style (ref. his logic) - allowed
to discuss other possible solutions in
detail, hence they could as mentioned
earlier - present their opinions and
arguments freely and in full (like: that the
earth circled the sun, that vacuum did not
exsist) ans a mental exercise.
142
Scientific revolution.. embraced the whole iterative-circle!

Questions the basic assumptions!!
A2
A1
- Observe nature, and performe

experiments.
A3
- The approach is
- Proposed many different

solutions to the same problem,
and had a way to discriminate
between them (but not prove
any of them!!).
logic
P1
E1
P3
P2
E2
E3
quantitative.
E4
Experience
143
The Universe
From
Aristotle
to
Copernicus
Aristotle: his Universe

Keep it simple
Simple version
A dual
universe
Platon to Aristotle:
Use circles and
constant speed
Dual universe
The Island knowledge metaphore
Ether
Earth
Sublunar
spheres:
The four
elements
Earth
Heaven
Immutable universer: a beyond

the moon
Ca 50 circles in total!
145
Retrograde
movements
Planet Mars
Not so well
explained by
Aristotle
146
Ptolemey (Ptolemaios)
New ad hoc circles were added to get a more precise model
(a 100% match was not required! - why?)
+1500
+150
Ptolemy
(100-178)
more
epicycles
arth
A new invention
Ad hoc solutions
Around ca. 1500) many different

versions of the model were around, some
147
with as much as 54 circles.
The Middle Age

New ad hoc circles were added to get a more precise model
(a 100% match was not required! - why?)
+150
+1500
Ptolemy
(100-178)
Around ca. 1500) many different

versions of themodel were around, some
148
with as much as 54 circles.
Ad hoc solutions
More epicycles (circles)
149
From: A New Astronomy, Kepler, Chapter 1, (1609).
150
Aristotles model was challanged (immutable heaven?).
Comets
+
new
stars?
(supernova)
Shining brightly a few weeks

only (and then dissaperes)151
Comets
Kometer
152
The nature (origin/role) of the comets was not easy to understand.
Earth
153
Aristotles sublunar world
(place for degeneration and change)

Solution:
fire
Comets were fenomena

taking place within
the sublunar
sphere.
air
water
Moon
It had to be so
because the
heaven was immutabel
Earth/stone
v
Ad-hoc assumption
154
The neked eye paradigm
T. Brahe
Before 1600
The eyes
only,
and
mechanical
equipment
155
The
naked
eye
156
A new paradigm
1800
1670
157
1700
158
Ptolemaios : the impossible implications of a

roating earth the role of logic.
A rotating Earth
wold have made it
impossible for the
birds to get back to
their nests!
The earth rotets
with a speed of ca.
2000km/hour
From
Almagest
159
Copernicus..
He made the Sun the
centre of the Universe
Copernicus
1473-1543
Why did he do it?

How did he do it?
Was is simpler?
Did he have acess to new and better data?
The way he solved it

Copernicus
addressed the problem based on
mathematical objections
to Ptolemaios model,
and ended
reluctantly
with a solution that the earth
(it followed from the assumptions)
is a rotation
planet
orbiting the sun.
161
With reference to Ptolemaios and Copernicus:

The role of new data?
You do not need

new or better
data to invent/construct a
new theory!
Copernucus did not (!) have better
data than Ptolemaios
162
Simpler.?
The system was built on

aristotelian concepts of
circles (around 50!).
The planets travelled in crystalline
shells
(made of. ether!),
and
he thought partly like Aristotle
when it came to physics
163
Copernicus' (simplified) model
Copernicus made this figure in the

introduction to his book, and this
simplified picture of the model
remains with many. Only a few read
the whole book it was too
complicated.
Galileo was one of those who
obviously (?) had noticed the
simplified model and this is what he
defended (he was, however,
probably aware of the more complex
model)
The Sun was not in the (true)

geometrical centre in
Copernicus modell.
164
Copernicus true model
A nest of circles
impossible to follow
and to draw,
but here is a hint
165
Retrograde
movements in
Copernicus
model
Elegantly explained by
166
The retrograde movement of the planets were explained as due

to relative movment. It was not real - as in the Ptolemaios
earth centered model - but due to the perspective
167
Arguments against a Sun-centered

univers
If the earth orbited the Sun,

i.e. it moved, we would expect
to observe the stars at
different angels during a year.
This was not observed,

(they did not have good
enough resolution)!, and this was
an good argument used against
168
a sun centered universer
About reality
Some questions are more

fundamental than others.
Leibniz.
Leibniz
1646-1716
Why is there something

instead of nothing?
Or a modern question (The Big Bang): where does the energy come from?
The answere is??. from nothing ?? because everything

is (in sum total) nothing! (quantum physics opens for this)
169
Some of the most important natural scientists and their contributions

(1300 to around 2000)
To be read only
Read: to be discussedin this couse
Ockham
Buridian
Oresme,...
1400
Suggestion that
the earth turned on
its axis and around
the sun.
Modern ideas of
motion. Attempts
to link
mathematics and
physics (in
a "primitive"
coordinate system
(Oresme)
Extensive use of
thought
experiments, ie.
experiemts
without
observations.
Copernicus
1500
Copernicus
made a system
for celestial
bodies with the
sun in the
centre.
Inspired by
previous ideas
of the same.
The first to
make a
mathematical
model based
on this idea.
Seen as not
harmful by the
Catholic
church.
Brahe
Galileo
Kepler
Descartes
1600
New
observations
of planets
(Brahe)
Theory of
motion
(Galileo)
Planets
travelling in
ellipses
(Kepler)
The modern
coordinate
system
(Descartes)
Boyle
Huygens
Hooke
Leibniz
Newton
Bernoulli
Euler
Laplace
Linne
Lavoisier
Priestley
1700
Law of gases
(Boyle).
Newton's
three laws of
motion
plus
gravitation
(Newton).
Mathematics
:
dx/dy, ,
(Newton/
Leibniz).
Light
consists of
particles
(Newton).
Light
consists of
waves
Developmen
t of Newton's
physics via
dx/dy
(Euler;
Laplace,
etc.)
Biology is
systematized
(Linne)
Modern
chemistry
(Lavoisier
Priestley)
X-rays
SuperBequerell
string
Dalton
Thomson
theory
rsted, Joule
Planck
("unifies
Faraday, Mendel
M. Curie
everyOhm,
Mendeleev Einstein
thing")
Young, Maxwell
Rutherford
Fresnel Darwin
Bohr
Human
Schrdinger genome
Heisenberg mapped
1800
1900
Modern
atomic
theory
(Dalton)
Law of
electricity
(Ohm).
Relation
between
magnetism
and
electricity
(rsted)
Induction
(Faraday)
Light has
wave nature
(Young/
Fresnel)
Law of heat
(Joule),
laws of
inheritance
(Mendel),
periodic
system
(Mendeleev),
Evolution of
species
(Darwin)
Electrodynamics
(Maxwell)
X-rays
(Rntgen),
Electrons
(Thomson)
Radioactivity/
splitting atoms
(Becquerel, Curie),
Energy is quantized
(Planck)
Photoelectric effect
and theories of
relativity
(Einstein)
Atoms have cores
(Rutherford)
Structure of atoms
(Bohr)
170
Quantum mechanics
Schrdinger/Heisenberg
On Western cultural ideas/thoughts to the development of the

scientific method
To be read only
The Greeks
A culture that
revolted against
the mystical
ideas about
nature and
applied reason
The Roman Empire
The Roman Empire collapsed, communications

The Roman Empire was
established in 510 BC, and was collapsed, cultural centres moved north
to Germanic peoples. Church as an institution
gradually divided into an
eastern and a western part from grew in importance due to the absence of
a strong central power. The light was gradually
the 400s. The western part
collapsed just before AD 500. turned on around 1000 AD
-500
1000
Augustine (around 400)
PreSocratics
(Rational
world)
Plato
(Theory of
ideas)
Aristotle
(Theory of
matter)
Archimedes
Pab.19.08.2008
Modern science
("The dark) Middle Ages
Focus on spiritual matters. Knowledge about

truth, i.e. God, through revelation. Attracted to
Plato's theory of ideas (actually: Plotin: i.e.
neo-Platonists ). One "must believe to
understand"). One must also use one's reason
(logical/analytical thinking) to understand God
and seek true insight via the Bible. He
nevertheless believed that those who wrote
down the Bible may have misunderstood
things (he discouraged literal interpretations of
the Bible). God can never be fully understood,
but one must do as much as one can. The
material world was unimportant, being only a
place where the body was due to original sin,
hence one must seek to distance oneself from
the sensible world to be saved (which Stoics also
tried in their search for happiness in this life, on this
earth).
Discovery/invention of
the scientific method
formed the basis for
explosive development
of science,- and from
around 1850 also of
technology.
1600
Aquinas (around 1250)

God was a rational being.
Hence the nature he had
created was controlled by laws
and could be understood
through reason and senses.
One was obliged to seek
knowledge about God by trying
to understand nature. Aquinas
"Christened" Aristotle by
unifying his philosophy with
Christian teaching (Aristotle's
writings were rediscovered
through Arabic culture in the
13th c). Faith ranked above
reason if there was a conflict
between these approaches.
Galileo (around 1600)

Established (early attempts
previously) a new and fertile
way of studying nature by
carrying out controlled
experiments, and by
combining mathematics
and physics. Boyle was
the first to document what
he had done, thus enabling
others to undertake
independent assessment
of the results. Together
this became modern
science.
171
To be looked at
Arkimedes, Demokrit,
Euklid, Platon and
Phytagoreerne
rediscovered
Kopernikus
Kepler,
Galilei,
Descartes,
Newton
Ny-platonisme
Pre-sokratene
-500
Tales
Anaximander
Empedokles
Heraklit(es)
Parmenides
Demokrit
Pyhtagoreerne
etc.
Platon
Aristoteles
Augustin
0
400
Ptolemaios
(Heliosentriske modell)
1200
Aquinas
1600
aristotelismen
172

How Scientific Theories Are and Early History of Science: Invented

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

How Scientific Theories Are and Early History of Science: Invented

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

How scientific theories are invented

For those of you who

Why history of Science?

History of science is used to illustrate how theories are

History of science also illustrates the dynamic aspect of

The climate debate

Why history of Science? contin.

has changed with time!

(as will be shown).

Why study the early history of science

Contribution to natural science. up to 1950

The enigma is:

What is the role of

About science and genius.

by spending more time (~3 x)

Science is about developing new knowledge,

How are new theories received?

Ohm's conclusions were poorly received by the

A physicist who preaches

What is new knowledge and what do we

point in the development considered to be

*Defined by Leibniz and named: relationalism

This relationship points to an underlying not so

New knowledge and relations in mathematics

Space becomes related to numbers!

The scientific method

On the scientific method

Developments after 1600

- The phlogiston theory (air as an inert element)

were all well justified/reasoned (for their time)

How is this possible?

Knowledge and Technology development

Theory driven development

New knowledge requires

How do (new) concepts

How do concepts arise?

The way they (the concepts) are

The origin of concepts

Even the concepts that are closest to what we sense,

We are free to choose the concepts (Einstein)

The "illegitimate" authority of the concepts

"Concepts that have proven

(from Einstein's article: Ernst Mach, 1916).

On the need for logical order

The Aristotelian physics and the

Logic versus observation

Euclids mathematics is logical, but not logically nessesary

"What is genuinely new cannot be

Logical circle argumentation

All points of view are logical

This statement covers up the speculative foundation

"Theories can never be (logically) deducted

New knowledge does not arise

The island of knowledge

The island of knowledge

(the foundation of the paradigm):

God is a geometer (Platon/Ptolemaios, Copernicus; Galilei, Kepler,

is about number/relationships (Phytagoras)

The island of knowledge

The transition is not an act

The island of knowledge

The inner structure of