• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Physics International >CRITERIA FOR THE COMPLEXITY OF SUCCESSIVE ASTRONOMICAL PARADIGMS | Science Publications
【24h】

CRITERIA FOR THE COMPLEXITY OF SUCCESSIVE ASTRONOMICAL PARADIGMS | Science Publications

机译：连续天文学范式的复杂性科学出版物

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

> We investigate the complexity of three successive astronomical paradigms in the science of Physics, namely the Ptolemaic paradigm, the Copernican paradigm and the Keplerian paradigm and mention briefly some characteristic facts about the colossal Newtonian paradigm. This complexity can be understood according to five criteria, as proposed by Thomas Kuhn, the father of the epistemological notion of the paradigm, as well as the founder of an important epistemological school within the realm of the 20th century. We propose that there does not exists an overall formal criterion for deciding among these rival paradigms, that is of the existing astronomical paradigms at the age Johannes Kepler formulated its own breakthrough within the science of Astronomy. The further evolution of the science of Astronomy, as well as the advent of the telescope era for investigating the celestial phenomena surely decided for the Newtonian paradigm, which can be understood as the epitome of all past astronomical and cosmological paradigms, yet the advance of the scientific study of the celestial phenomena did not evolved within a linear fashion, on the other hand, it has undergone many changes, subject to the great historical turns, that is the eras of the mentioned astronomical paradigms, during their evolution and their abandonment from the scientific community of the astronomers, the scholars and the polymaths of their age, respectively. We propose that each of Thomas Kuhn criteria imposes its own ?complexity measure? of these paradigms, while the overall complexity criterion has to be regarded as the accumulating, overwhelming, empirical evidence, for finally deciding the new way of evolution and the novel turn within the science of Astronomy, especially in the post-Keplerian and surely in the post-Newtonian era.
机译： >我们研究了物理科学中三个连续的天文学范式的复杂性，即托勒密范式，哥白尼范式和开普勒范式，并简要提及了有关牛顿范式的一些典型事实。可以按照五个标准来理解这种复杂性，这是范式的认识论概念之父，也是二十世纪一个重要的认识论学派的创始人托马斯·库恩（Thomas Kuhn）提出的。我们建议，在这些竞争范式之间没有一个总体的正式标准来决定，即约翰内斯·开普勒（Johannes Kepler）时代在天文学科学领域提出自己的突破时的现有天文学范式。天文学科学的进一步发展，以及用于研究天象的望远镜时代的到来，无疑决定了牛顿范式，可以将其理解为过去所有天文学和宇宙学范式的缩影，然而，另一方面，对天象的科学研究并没有以线性的方式演变，它经历了许多变化，但经历了巨大的历史转折，即上述天文学范式的时代，在其演变过程中以及从天体范式的放弃分别是天文学家，学者和同龄人的科学界。我们建议，托马斯·库恩（Thomas Kuhn）的每个标准都施加自己的“复杂性度量”在这些范式中，整体复杂性标准必须被视为积累，压倒性的经验证据，以便最终确定天文学科学中的新的进化方式和新颖的转向，尤其是在后吉普勒人时期，当然在后牛顿时代。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号