Ueber die wissenschaftliche Fassung des Galilei’schen Beharrungsgesetzes

Lange, Ludwig

doi:10.1007/978-3-211-49300-7_4

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some critical remarks can be found earlier (Jacobi 1996;Riemann 1876). Neumann's proposal to solve the law of inertia problem was criticized by Mach (1872) and gave rise to the idea of an inertial reference frame (Lange 1885). Lange (1902) reported on the discussion on the law in his paper.…”

Section: Problems Of the Laws And The Constructivist Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comment on Solari and Natiello’s Constructivist View of Newton’s Mechanics

Coelho

2020

Found Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present comment on Solari and Natiello's paper (Found. Sci. 2019) values their constructivist approach to Newtonian Mechanics. My critical point concerns only the link between the concept of force and phenomena. It will be shown that the idealised form of the law of inertia created by the authors avoids criticism of the law and that this law (idealised or not) leads to the concept of force as the cause of acceleration. This concept appears in the authors' reconstruction as an assumption. They add that this assumption must be contrasted with experiments. Following this, I address an experiment, in which the force that is taken as the cause of acceleration, is not present in the phenomenon at stake. As it thus does not satisfy the property of locality, which any cause has to, force cannot be a cause. Keywords Law of inertia • Force • Cause • Foundations of mechanicsSolari and Natiello (2019) address Newton's Mechanics as it is presented nowadays in physics textbooks. Their point of view is, however, radically different from any textbook approach. The idea that Newton's genius discovered three laws of nature, is replaced by the idea that 'there are no laws of Nature but rather laws for the understanding of Nature' (Solari and Natiello 2019, p. 320). The authors go through the important topics of mechanics-time, space, law of inertia, force-but also speed of light, which has been related with the relativity theory. My comment on their paper focuses on two points: law of inertia and force.

show abstract

Section: Problems Of the Laws And The Constructivist Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comment on Solari and Natiello’s Constructivist View of Newton’s Mechanics

Coelho

2020

Found Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of late-nineteenth-and early-twentieth-century physicists were gripped by the notion that we need to have an empirical determination of the concept of inertial frame or a way of tying this concept to a concrete system of bodies (see, for example, Lange 1885Lange , 1886Lange , 1902. Apart fr om the seductive though mistaken idea that legitimate scientific concepts must admit operational definitions, the determination notion seems to be legiti mated by the commons en se observation that Newtonian mechanics cannot be applied until we first determine an inertial frame.…”

Section: Instrumentalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

World Enough and Space-Time: Absolute Versus Relational Theories of Space and Time.

Earman¹

1992

The Philosophical Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I am grateful to the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation and to the National Science Foundation (grant no. SES-8701534) fo r their support of this project. Many colleagues unselfishly offered their advice on earlier drafts of this book; to one and all I offer in return my sincere appreciation, but I must especially thank Mike Friedman, Al Janis, David Malament, Tim Maudlin, John Norton, Robert Rynasiewicz, and Paul Teller. Thanks are also due to Michael Wright, whose generous support of the �-Club made it possible to travel to England, where I received both encouragement and helpful criticism from Harvey Brown, Jeremy Butterfield, Michael Redhead, Simon Saunders, and other members of the Oxbridge mob. Other colleagues could have, but didn't, offer help; here I would like especially to mention Larry Sklar. However, his superb selec tions in Chinese restaurants more than make up for this lapse. Section 5.1 relies on "Remarks on Relational Theories of Motion,"

show abstract

“… 30 Applied to mechanics, there is a list of German and French authors using it: Lange (1885), Duhem (1892), Hertz (1894), Milhaud (1896), etc.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

From Jurisprudence to Mechanics: Jacobi, Reech, and Poincaré on Convention

Paz¹

2018

Sci Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ArgumentThis paper aims at understanding the concept of convention in mechanics as a notion transferred from the field of jurisprudence. This enables us to clarify it as a new epistemic category having a pertinent role in the transformation of mechanics in the nineteenth century. Such understanding permits a separation from linguistic and arbitrary conventions, thus highlighting its epistemic features and not transforming fundamental principles into mere arbitrary agreements. After addressing the main references in the literature discussing the role of convention in mechanics, we analyze its classical use as a concept originating from law. Then we explain its use by Carl G. Jacobi, Ferdinand F. Reech, and J. Henri Poincaré. Here we also show how their uses conform to the features analyzed regarding conventions in jurisprudence. Finally, we try to explain how the use of this concept, among other factors, contributed to the transformation of mechanics.

show abstract

Ueber die wissenschaftliche Fassung des Galilei’schen Beharrungsgesetzes

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

A Comment on Solari and Natiello’s Constructivist View of Newton’s Mechanics

A Comment on Solari and Natiello’s Constructivist View of Newton’s Mechanics

World Enough and Space-Time: Absolute Versus Relational Theories of Space and Time.

From Jurisprudence to Mechanics: Jacobi, Reech, and Poincaré on Convention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About