{"title":"论自然科学发展的多流模型","authors":"E. Mamchur","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2021-33-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A model of the knowledge development in natural sciences named \"multi-flow model” is analyzed, and two examples of this model are examined. One of them has been formulated in the article of two domestic physicists M. I. Podgoretsky and Ya. A. Smorodinsky, who have explored the applicability of the axiomatic method in physics and concluded that the construction of such axiomatic structures as in mathematics is impossible in natural sciences because, unlike mathematical theories, physical theories are incomplete. The concepts of «meeting» and «contradictions of the meeting» are formulated.\nIt is shown how in the process of analyzing the capabilities of the axiomatic method, the authors develop the mechanism of creating a new model. This mechanism consists of building a hierarchical series of \"directions\", which are the vertically stacked layers of knowledge. One could hope that the emergence of such directions would enrich modern natural sciences with new opportunities and results. However, the second example developed by a prominent physicist and brilliant methodologist Carl Rovelli, reveals that everything is not so simple. In some cases, newly created non-linear models may lead to a misinterpretation of the development of scientific cognition.\nIt is shown that the terminology used by the authors of the first example is not quite adequate to the content of the model: the main term used by them — \"direction\" — is not sufficiently defined. In addition, the term changes the meaning of the analysis that has been done. In this regard, it is proposed to introduce a new term \"flow\" and call the model itself a \"multi-flow model\". Not multi-directional model, but multi-flow model.\nIn the second example of the multi-flow model, C. Rovelli uses this model to restore the unity and integrity of scientific knowledge that has been destroyed in the post-classical period of science development. This attempt to implement the new synthesis has been made by Rovelli within the framework of the quantum gravity theory.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Multi-Flow Model of the Development in Natural Sciences\",\"authors\":\"E. Mamchur\",\"doi\":\"10.37769/2077-6608-2021-33-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A model of the knowledge development in natural sciences named \\\"multi-flow model” is analyzed, and two examples of this model are examined. One of them has been formulated in the article of two domestic physicists M. I. Podgoretsky and Ya. A. Smorodinsky, who have explored the applicability of the axiomatic method in physics and concluded that the construction of such axiomatic structures as in mathematics is impossible in natural sciences because, unlike mathematical theories, physical theories are incomplete. The concepts of «meeting» and «contradictions of the meeting» are formulated.\\nIt is shown how in the process of analyzing the capabilities of the axiomatic method, the authors develop the mechanism of creating a new model. This mechanism consists of building a hierarchical series of \\\"directions\\\", which are the vertically stacked layers of knowledge. One could hope that the emergence of such directions would enrich modern natural sciences with new opportunities and results. However, the second example developed by a prominent physicist and brilliant methodologist Carl Rovelli, reveals that everything is not so simple. In some cases, newly created non-linear models may lead to a misinterpretation of the development of scientific cognition.\\nIt is shown that the terminology used by the authors of the first example is not quite adequate to the content of the model: the main term used by them — \\\"direction\\\" — is not sufficiently defined. In addition, the term changes the meaning of the analysis that has been done. In this regard, it is proposed to introduce a new term \\\"flow\\\" and call the model itself a \\\"multi-flow model\\\". Not multi-directional model, but multi-flow model.\\nIn the second example of the multi-flow model, C. Rovelli uses this model to restore the unity and integrity of scientific knowledge that has been destroyed in the post-classical period of science development. This attempt to implement the new synthesis has been made by Rovelli within the framework of the quantum gravity theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":328399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vox. Philosophical journal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vox. Philosophical journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2021-33-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vox. Philosophical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2021-33-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
分析了自然科学知识发展的“多流模型”,并给出了该模型的两个实例。其中一个已经在两位国内物理学家M. I. Podgoretsky和Ya的文章中公式化了。A.斯莫罗金斯基,他们探索了公理方法在物理学中的适用性,并得出结论,在自然科学中不可能建立数学中的公理结构,因为与数学理论不同,物理理论是不完整的。提出了“会议”和“会议的矛盾”的概念。在分析公理化方法的能力的过程中,揭示了作者是如何建立新模型的机制的。这种机制包括建立一系列分层的“方向”,这些“方向”是垂直堆叠的知识层。人们可以希望,这些方向的出现将以新的机会和成果丰富现代自然科学。然而,由著名物理学家和杰出的方法学家卡尔·罗维利(Carl Rovelli)提出的第二个例子表明,事情并非如此简单。在某些情况下,新创建的非线性模型可能导致对科学认知发展的误解。第一个例子的作者所使用的术语并不完全适合于模型的内容:他们使用的主要术语- -“方向”- -没有得到充分的定义。此外,这个术语改变了已经完成的分析的含义。对此,建议引入一个新的术语“流”,并将模型本身称为“多流模型”。不是多向模型,而是多流模型。在多流模型的第二个例子中,C. Rovelli用这个模型恢复了在后古典科学发展时期被破坏的科学知识的统一性和完整性。罗维利在量子引力理论的框架内尝试实现新的综合。
On Multi-Flow Model of the Development in Natural Sciences
A model of the knowledge development in natural sciences named "multi-flow model” is analyzed, and two examples of this model are examined. One of them has been formulated in the article of two domestic physicists M. I. Podgoretsky and Ya. A. Smorodinsky, who have explored the applicability of the axiomatic method in physics and concluded that the construction of such axiomatic structures as in mathematics is impossible in natural sciences because, unlike mathematical theories, physical theories are incomplete. The concepts of «meeting» and «contradictions of the meeting» are formulated.
It is shown how in the process of analyzing the capabilities of the axiomatic method, the authors develop the mechanism of creating a new model. This mechanism consists of building a hierarchical series of "directions", which are the vertically stacked layers of knowledge. One could hope that the emergence of such directions would enrich modern natural sciences with new opportunities and results. However, the second example developed by a prominent physicist and brilliant methodologist Carl Rovelli, reveals that everything is not so simple. In some cases, newly created non-linear models may lead to a misinterpretation of the development of scientific cognition.
It is shown that the terminology used by the authors of the first example is not quite adequate to the content of the model: the main term used by them — "direction" — is not sufficiently defined. In addition, the term changes the meaning of the analysis that has been done. In this regard, it is proposed to introduce a new term "flow" and call the model itself a "multi-flow model". Not multi-directional model, but multi-flow model.
In the second example of the multi-flow model, C. Rovelli uses this model to restore the unity and integrity of scientific knowledge that has been destroyed in the post-classical period of science development. This attempt to implement the new synthesis has been made by Rovelli within the framework of the quantum gravity theory.