Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Approximation and Idealization: Why the Difference Matters.John D. Norton - 2012 - Philosophy of Science 79 (2):207-232.
    It is proposed that we use the term “approximation” for inexact description of a target system and “idealization” for another system whose properties also provide an inexact description of the target system. Since systems generated by a limiting process can often have quite unexpected, even inconsistent properties, familiar limit systems used in statistical physics can fail to provide idealizations, but are merely approximations. A dominance argument suggests that the limiting idealizations of statistical physics should be demoted to approximations.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   118 citations  
  • Why Zeno’s Paradoxes of Motion are Actually About Immobility.Bathfield Maël - 2018 - Foundations of Science 23 (4):649-679.
    Zeno’s paradoxes of motion, allegedly denying motion, have been conceived to reinforce the Parmenidean vision of an immutable world. The aim of this article is to demonstrate that these famous logical paradoxes should be seen instead as paradoxes of immobility. From this new point of view, motion is therefore no longer logically problematic, while immobility is. This is convenient since it is easy to conceive that immobility can actually conceal motion, and thus the proposition “immobility is mere illusion of the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Infinity and Newton’s Three Laws of Motion.Chunghyoung Lee - 2011 - Foundations of Physics 41 (12):1810-1828.
    It is shown that the following three common understandings of Newton’s laws of motion do not hold for systems of infinitely many components. First, Newton’s third law, or the law of action and reaction, is universally believed to imply that the total sum of internal forces in a system is always zero. Several examples are presented to show that this belief fails to hold for infinite systems. Second, two of these examples are of an infinitely divisible continuous body with finite (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • On the Atkinson–Johnson Homogeneous Solution for Infinite Systems.Jon Pérez Laraudogoitia - 2015 - Foundations of Physics 45 (5):496-506.
    This paper shows that the general homogeneous solution to equations of evolution for some infinite systems of particles subject to mutual binary collisions does not depend on a single arbitrary constant but on a potentially infinite number of such constants. This is because, as I demonstrate, a single self-excitation of a system of particles can depend on a potentially infinite number of parameters. The recent homogeneous solution obtained by Atkinson and Johnson, which depends on a single arbitrary constant, is only (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation