2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>PSA</strong> Abstracts<br />
critique is based on a misunderstanding <strong>of</strong> the criteria for the definability <strong>of</strong> a<br />
relation, a misunderstanding that Malement’s original treatment helped to foster.<br />
There are in fact a variety <strong>of</strong> notions <strong>of</strong> definability that can be brought to<br />
bear. They all, however, require a condition that suffices to secure Malament’s<br />
result. The non-standard relation Sarkar and Stachel claim to be definable is<br />
not so definable, and, I argue, their proposal to modify the notion <strong>of</strong> “causal<br />
definability” is misguided. Finally, I address the relevance <strong>of</strong> Malament’s result<br />
to the thesis <strong>of</strong> conventionalism.<br />
Eric␣ R. Scerri University <strong>of</strong> California Los Angeles<br />
The recently claimed observation <strong>of</strong> atomic orbitals and some related<br />
philosophical issues<br />
The main thrust <strong>of</strong> the paper concerns a theoretical and philosophical analysis<br />
<strong>of</strong> the claim made in September 1999 that atomic orbitals have been directly<br />
imaged for the first time. After a brief account <strong>of</strong> the recent claims the paper<br />
reviews the development <strong>of</strong> the orbit and later orbital concepts and analyzes<br />
the theoretical status <strong>of</strong> atomic orbitals. The conclusion is that contrary to<br />
these claims, atomic orbitals have not in fact been observed. The non referring<br />
nature <strong>of</strong> modern atomic orbitals is discussed in the context <strong>of</strong> Laudan’s writings<br />
on realism, the success <strong>of</strong> theories and whether or not scientific terms refer. I<br />
conclude that the failure to observe orbitals is a good prima facia case for<br />
divorcing the success <strong>of</strong> theories from the question <strong>of</strong> whether their central<br />
terms refer. The added relevance <strong>of</strong> this case is that it concerns a current and<br />
highly successful theory.<br />
P<br />
S<br />
A<br />
Oliver Schulte University <strong>of</strong> Alberta<br />
Inferring Conservation Principles in Particle Physics: A Case Study in<br />
Reliable and Efficient Inquiry<br />
This paper applies learning-theoretic analysis to an inductive problem that<br />
arises in particle physics: how to infer from observed reactions conservation<br />
principles that govern all reactions among elementary particles. I describe a<br />
reliable inference procedure that is guaranteed to arrive at an empirically<br />
adequate set <strong>of</strong> conservation principles as more and more evidence is gathered.<br />
In certain circumstances, finding an empirically adequate conservation theory<br />
requires positing hidden particles. The paper describes learning-theoretic<br />
conceptions <strong>of</strong> empirical success in addition to reliable convergence to a correct<br />
theory, which determine an essential unique optimal inductive procedure for<br />
the particle dynamics problem.<br />
239