From The Principle Of Least Action To The Conservation Of Quantum Information In Chemistry: Can One Generalize The Periodic Table?

Chemistry: Bulgarian Journal of Science Education 28 (4):525-539 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The success of a few theories in statistical thermodynamics can be correlated with their selectivity to reality. These are the theories of Boltzmann, Gibbs, end Einstein. The starting point is Carnot’s theory, which defines implicitly the general selection of reality relevant to thermodynamics. The three other theories share this selection, but specify it further in detail. Each of them separates a few main aspects within the scope of the implicit thermodynamic reality. Their success grounds on that selection. Those aspects can be represented by corresponding oppositions. These are: macroscopic – microscopic; elements – states; relational – non-relational; and observable – theoretical. They can be interpreted as axes of independent qualities constituting a common qualitative reference frame shared by those theories. Each of them can be situated in this reference frame occupying a different place. This reference frame can be interpreted as an additional selection of reality within Carnot’s initial selection describable as macroscopic and both observable and theoretical. The deduced reference frame refers implicitly to many scientific theories independent of their subject therefore defining a general and common space or subspace for scientific theories (not for all). The immediate conclusion is: The examples of a few statistical thermodynamic theories demonstrate that the concept of “reality” is changed or generalized, or even exemplified (i.e. “de-generalized”) from a theory to another. Still a few more general suggestions referring the scientific realism debate can be added: One can admit that reality in scientific theories is some partially shared common qualitative space or subspace describable by relevant oppositions and rather independent of their subject quite different in general. Many or maybe all theories can be situated in that space of reality, which should develop adding new dimensions in it for still newer and newer theories. Its division of independent subspaces can represent the many-realities conception. The subject of a theory determines some relevant subspace of reality. This represents a selection within reality, relevant to the theory in question. The success of that theory correlates essentially with the selection within reality, relevant to its subject

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Dynamical Reduction Theories: Changing Quantum Theory so the Statevector Represents Reality.GianCarlo Ghirardi & Philip Pearle - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:19 - 33.
Reality in science.Emma Ruttkamp - 1999 - South African Journal of Philosophy 18 (2):149-191.
A Model-Theoretic Interpretation of Science.Emma Ruttkamp - 1997 - South African Journal of Philosophy 16 (1):31-36.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-05-18

Downloads
552 (#49,977)

6 months
104 (#57,877)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Vasil Penchev
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences