David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 79 (3):89 - 100 (1989)
It is not possible to dismiss the atomistic paradigm because the proposed elementary particles are too many (and, hence, it is claimed, they do not provide a simple account of nature) or because it is not possible to observe quarks in an isolated manner. The developments in particle physics have brought about radical changes to our notions of simplicity and observability, and in this paper we elaborate on these changes. It is as a result of these changes that the present situation in elementary particle physics justify us to claim that we have indeed reached a level of explanation where the constituent particles (quarks, leptons, gluons, and intermediate bosons) used for the explanation of the various phenomena considered to be delineating a particular level in the descriptive framework of the physical phenomena and a specific stratum in the organization of nature, can be regarded as elementary.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
P. W. Anderson (1994). More is Different. In H. Gutfreund & G. Toulouse (eds.), Biology and Computation: A Physicist's Choice. World Scientific. 3--21.
James T. Cushing (1982). Models and Methodologies in Current Theoretical High-Energy Physics. Synthese 50 (1):5 - 101.
Kostas Gavroglu (1985). Popper's Tetradic Schema, Progressive Research Programs, and the Case of Parity Violation in Elementary Particle Physics 1953–1958. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 16 (2):261-286.
Ian Hacking (1983). Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge University Press.
Werner Heisenberg (1958/1970). The Physicist's Conception of Nature. Westport, Conn.,Greenwood Press.
Citations of this work BETA
John R. Welch (2013). New Tools for Theory Choice and Theory Diagosis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44 (3):318-329.
Similar books and articles
Tobias Fox (2008). Haunted by the Spectre of Virtual Particles: A Philosophical Reconsideration. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 39 (1):35 - 51.
I. V. Kuznet͡sov & M. E. Omelʹi͡anovsʹkyĭ (eds.) (1965). Philosophical Problems of Elementary Particle Physics. Jerusalem, Israel Program for Scientific Translations.
K. Gavroglu (1976). Research Guiding Principles in Modern Physics: Case Studies in Elementary Particle Physics. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 7 (2):223-248.
Sheldon Goldstein, James Taylor, Roderich Tumulka & Nino Zanghi (2005). Are All Particles Real? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 36 (1):103-112.
Simon Saunders (2006). Are Quantum Particles Objects? Analysis 66 (289):52–63.
Thomas Brückner (2008). A Structuralist Reconstruction of the Theory of Elementary Particles. Erkenntnis 68 (2):169 - 186.
Shaughan Lavine (1991). Is Quantum Mechanics an Atomistic Theory? Synthese 89 (2):253 - 271.
K. S. Shrader-Frechette (1980). Recent Changes in the Concept of Matter: How Does 'Elementary Particle' Mean? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:302 - 316.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #237,968 of 1,692,428 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #184,284 of 1,692,428 )
How can I increase my downloads?