22
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
Mechanism of Compatibility (view source)
Revision as of 16:11, 29 November 2018
, 16:11, 29 November 2018no edit summary
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan, Rory Harder,
|Formulated Year=2015
|Prehistory=There are several historical episodes that appear to explicate the mechanism of theory and method incompatibility. For instance, Aristotelian physics appears to contradict some aspects of Catholic scripture in cases, one of which was regarding the status of God’s power. Scripture asserted God as an omnipotent entity, however Aristotelian physics appeared to limit some physical phenomena such as the existence of empty space. The question arose: could God create empty space? In this case, these two elements of the mosaic were inconsistent with eachother and considered incompatible as condemnation came from the church to force natural philosophers to accept the concept of empty space in the name of God’s omnipotence [[CiteRef::Thijssen(2013)|:Thijssen]]. The Aristotelian theory of empty space was removed from the mosaic and replaced with the absolute theological declaration. This seems to show that when incompatibility is discovered, certain theories can push out or force change in others.
The theories of general relativity and quantum physics generally deal with separate aspects of physics, however on the matter of singularities in black holes, they differ [[CiteRef::Barseghyan(2015)|p. 159-160]]. However, this inconsistency is tolerated, and the modern scientific community appears to accept both theories as the best description of what happens in the singularity of a black hole. Potentially, this situation shows that when two theories deal with different domains that are each considered the best possible description for their respective domains, inconsistency in singular propositions is tolerated differ [[CiteRef::Barseghyan(2015)|p. 160]].
Another example of incompatibility appears to be between Newtonian physics and Descartes’ physical theories. This appears to be a historical case of two inconsistent theories that both potentially satisfied the vague methods of the time, and illuminates a case of incompatibility that leads to a separation within the scientific community differ [[CiteRef::Barseghyan(2015)|p. 212-213]].
|History=The zeroth law, in answer to the question of the mechanism of compatibility, was originally proposed in 2012 as forbidding inconsistency in the mosaic1. In 2013, Rory Harder argued that inconsistency-intolerance was a practical impossibility and unsupported by the historical record, resulting the current formulation of the zeroth law.
|Page Status=Stub
