Aesthetic Comparison of Einstein's and Whitehead's Theories of Gravity
This article addresses both philosophers of science and process philosophers. It shows that the acceptance of Einstein's general theory of relativity by British physicists in the early 1920s, and their rejection of Whitehead's experimentally indistinguishable theory of gravity, was a matte...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Imprimé Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Process Studies
[2016]
|
| Dans: |
Process studies
Année: 2016, Volume: 45, Numéro: 1, Pages: 33-46 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Einstein, Albert 1879-1955
/ Théorie de la relativité
/ Whitehead, Alfred North 1861-1947
/ Théorie de la gravitation
/ Esthétique
|
| RelBib Classification: | TK Époque contemporaine VA Philosophie |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
EINSTEIN, Albert, 1879-1955
B Gravitation B philosophy of science B Process Philosophy B Whitehead, Alfred North, 1861-1947 B Aesthetics B General relativity (Physics) |
| Résumé: | This article addresses both philosophers of science and process philosophers. It shows that the acceptance of Einstein's general theory of relativity by British physicists in the early 1920s, and their rejection of Whitehead's experimentally indistinguishable theory of gravity, was a matter not only of empirical evaluation but also of aesthetic preference. To philosophers of science it offers a historical case study illustrating the entangled roles of empirical and aesthetic criteria in theory evaluation. To process philosophers it offers an answer to the question of why Whitehead's alternative rendering of Einstein's general relativity has been neglected both by the majority of physicists, and by the majority of philosophers. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0360-6503 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Process studies
|