Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

EINSTEIN VERSUS LORENTZ: RESEARCH PROGRAMMES AND THE LOGIC OF COMPARATIVE THEORY EVALUATION

1974; Oxford University Press; Volume: 25; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1093/bjps/25.1.45

1464-3537

Kenneth F. Schaffner,

Planetary Science and Exploration

Previous articleNext article No AccessDiscussionsEINSTEIN VERSUS LORENTZ: RESEARCH PROGRAMMES AND THE LOGIC OF COMPARATIVE THEORY EVALUATION*KENNETH F. SCHAFFNERKENNETH F. SCHAFFNERUniversity of Pittsburgh Search for more articles by this author * Grateful acknowledgement is made to the U.S. National Science Foundation for earlier support of research on late-aether theories and the special theory of relativity.PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Volume 25, Number 1March 1974 Society: The British Society for the Philosophy of Science Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 11Citations are reported from Crossref Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 11Citations are reported from Crossref Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/25.1.45 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 11Citations are reported from Crossref © 1974 by The Author. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:NEIL THOMASON Could Lakatos, Even With Zahar's Criterion for Novel Fact, Evaluate the Copernican Research Programme?, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43, no.22 (Dec 2020): 161–200.https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/43.2.161 Harvey R. Brown Does the Principle of Relativity Imply Winnie's (1970) Equal Passage Times Principle?, Philosophy of Science 57, no.22 (Oct 2015): 313–324.https://doi.org/10.1086/289551Jeremiah E. McCarthy Campbell and Vinci on Novel Confirmation, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37, no.22 (Dec 2020): 216–220.https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/37.2.216 R. M. Nugayev The History of Quantum Mechanics as a Decisive Argument Favoring Einstein over Lorentz, Philosophy of Science 52, no.11 (Oct 2015): 44–63.https://doi.org/10.1086/289221 Kenneth F. Schaffner The Historiography of Special Relativity: Comments on the Papers by John Earman, Clark Glymour, and Robert Rynasiewicz and by Arthur Miller, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982, no.22 (Oct 2015): 417–428.https://doi.org/10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1982.2.192434 Ronald Laymon Independent Testability: The Michelson-Morley and Kennedy-Thorndike Experiments, Philosophy of Science 47, no.11 (Oct 2015): 1–37.https://doi.org/10.1086/288907M. REDHEAD AD HOCNESS AND THE APPRAISAL OF THEORIES, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 29, no.44 (Dec 2020): 355–361.https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/29.4.355ARTHUR I. MILLER A REPLY TO 'SOME NEW ASPECTS OF RELATIVITY: COMMENTS ON ZAHAR'S PAPER', The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 29, no.33 (Dec 2020): 252–256.https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/29.3.252-b Evan Fales Theoretical Simplicity and Defeasibility, Philosophy of Science 45, no.22 (Oct 2015): 273–288.https://doi.org/10.1086/288800 Richard M. Burian More than a Marriage of Convenience: On the Inextricability of History and Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Science 44, no.11 (Oct 2015): 1–42.https://doi.org/10.1086/288722ADOLF GRÜNBAUM Ad Hoc Auxiliary Hypotheses and Falsificationism, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27, no.44 (Dec 2020): 329–362.https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/27.4.329