Herbert Dingle and "Science at the Crossroads"
Fuente:
arXiv
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866913435547074560 |
|---|---|
| author | Sochi, Taha |
| author_facet | Sochi, Taha |
| contents | In this article we pay tribute to Herbert Dingle for his early call to re-assess special relativity from philosophical and logical perspectives. However, we disagree with Dingle about a number of issues particularly his failure to distinguish between the scientific essence of special relativity (as represented by the experimentally-supported Lorentz transformations and their formal implications and consequences which we call "the mechanics of Lorentz transformations") and the logically inconsistent interpretation of Einstein (which is largely based on the philosophical and epistemological views of Poincare). We also disagree with him about his manner and attitude which he adopted in his campaign against special relativity although we generally agree with him about the necessity of impartiality of the scientific community and the scientific press towards scientific theories and opinions as well as the necessity of total respect to the ethics of science and the rules of moral conduct in general. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2407_13697 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Herbert Dingle and "Science at the Crossroads" Sochi, Taha Popular Physics History and Philosophy of Physics In this article we pay tribute to Herbert Dingle for his early call to re-assess special relativity from philosophical and logical perspectives. However, we disagree with Dingle about a number of issues particularly his failure to distinguish between the scientific essence of special relativity (as represented by the experimentally-supported Lorentz transformations and their formal implications and consequences which we call "the mechanics of Lorentz transformations") and the logically inconsistent interpretation of Einstein (which is largely based on the philosophical and epistemological views of Poincare). We also disagree with him about his manner and attitude which he adopted in his campaign against special relativity although we generally agree with him about the necessity of impartiality of the scientific community and the scientific press towards scientific theories and opinions as well as the necessity of total respect to the ethics of science and the rules of moral conduct in general. |
| title | Herbert Dingle and "Science at the Crossroads" |
| topic | Popular Physics History and Philosophy of Physics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.13697 |