Atom's Empirical Eve: Methodological Disputes and How to Evaluate Them

dc.contributor.authorPeter Achinstein
dc.contributor.otherMichela Massimi
dc.creatorpeter.achinstein@jhu.edu
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-29T16:20:13Z
dc.date.available2021-01-29T16:20:13Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines the debate in the late 19th and early 20th centuries over the acceptability of atomic and molecular physics. It focuses on three prominent figures: Maxwell, who defended atomic physics, Ostwald, who initially rejected it but changed his mind as a result of experiments by Thomson and Perrin, and Duhem, who never accepted it. Each scientist defended the position he did in the light of strongly held methodological views concerning empirical evidence. The paper critically evaluates each of these methodological positions.
dc.formattalk
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1162/posc.2007.15.3.359
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2022/26122
dc.relation.ispartofseries1; Thematic: Evidence in Theory and Practice
dc.relation.isversionofDownstream publication: Achinstein, Peter. (2007) "Atom's Empirical Eve: Methodological Disputes and How to Evaluate Them." Perspective on Science, 15(3).
dc.subjectmodern
dc.subjectempiricism, methodology
dc.subjectphysics, atomic physics, chemistry
dc.subjectDifferences over what objective methdological standars should be in evaluating evidence for a theory postulating atoms and molecules
dc.titleAtom's Empirical Eve: Methodological Disputes and How to Evaluate Them

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ATOM’S EMPIRICAL EVE.pdf
Size:
77.1 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:

Collections

Can’t use the file because of accessibility barriers? Contact us