Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
I 80
Relativity Theory/Feyerabend: E.g. Mercury perihelion: the famous deviation is explained by the relativity theory. The explanation shows that the prerequisite for derivation is not the general theory of relativity, but, apart from relativistic assumptions, always contains classical physics! In addition, the relativistic calculation ("blackboard solution") does not refer to the planetary system in the real world, but to the completely fictitious case of a centrally asymmetric universe that contains nothing apart from its singularity in the middle. Why are such strange assumptions made?
Usual answer: we are dealing with approximations. Classical physics does not occur here, because the theory of relativity would be incomplete. Both schemes result from the general theory of relativity. You just have to neglect the sizes that are all too small. So the theory of relativity is applied consistently and in the correct way.
I 81
FeyerabendVs: this is a useful representation of the approximation method, but it does not reflect the real situation in the general theory of relativity! The classical theory is not used because it was proved to be correct, but in the hope that it will be useful! The approximations do not arise from relativistic calculations, but are introduced to be able to apply the theory of relativity to the case!
(I 82), heliocentric theory at the time of Galileo, ad-hoc approximations to many quantitative results of the theories are not correct and surprisingly qualitatively inadequate. E.g. von Neumann: replaced the semi-intuitive concepts of Dirac and Bohr with incredibly complicated concepts. The relationship to experience becomes more obscure than ever.

Fe I
P. Feyerabend
Wider den Methodenzwang Frankfurt 1997

Fe II
P. Feyerabend
Erkenntnis für freie Menschen Frankfurt 1979


> Counter arguments against Feyerabend



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-28