Herbert Dingle and "Science at the Crossroads"

Taha Sochi
{"title":"Herbert Dingle and \"Science at the Crossroads\"","authors":"Taha Sochi","doi":"arxiv-2407.13697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article we pay tribute to Herbert Dingle for his early call to\nre-assess special relativity from philosophical and logical perspectives.\nHowever, we disagree with Dingle about a number of issues particularly his\nfailure to distinguish between the scientific essence of special relativity (as\nrepresented by the experimentally-supported Lorentz transformations and their\nformal implications and consequences which we call \"the mechanics of Lorentz\ntransformations\") and the logically inconsistent interpretation of Einstein\n(which is largely based on the philosophical and epistemological views of\nPoincare). We also disagree with him about his manner and attitude which he\nadopted in his campaign against special relativity although we generally agree\nwith him about the necessity of impartiality of the scientific community and\nthe scientific press towards scientific theories and opinions as well as the\nnecessity of total respect to the ethics of science and the rules of moral\nconduct in general.","PeriodicalId":501348,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - PHYS - Popular Physics","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - PHYS - Popular Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2407.13697","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.
赫伯特-丁格尔与 "十字路口上的科学"
在这篇文章中,我们向赫伯特-丁格尔(Herbert Dingle)致敬,因为他很早就呼吁从哲学和逻辑的角度重新评估狭义相对论。然而,我们在许多问题上与丁格尔意见相左,特别是他未能区分狭义相对论的科学本质(由实验支持的洛伦兹变换及其形式含义和后果所代表,我们称之为 "洛伦兹变换力学")与爱因斯坦逻辑上不一致的解释(主要基于平卡雷的哲学和认识论观点)。我们也不同意他在反对狭义相对论的运动中所采取的方式和态度,尽管我们总体上同意他的观点,即科学界和科学新闻界必须公正地对待科学理论和观点,以及必须完全尊重科学伦理和一般道德行为规则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信