Why did the new physics force out the old?

INTERNATIONAL STUDIES IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Vol. 10, number 2, 1996, pp. 127-140. R.M. Nugayev. Why did the new physics force out the old ? Abstract. The aim of my paper is to demonstrate that special relativity and the early quantum theory were created within the same programme of statistical mechanics, thermodynamics and Maxwellian electrodynamics reconciliation. I’ll try to explain why classical mechanics and classical electrodynamics were “refuted” almost simultaneously or, in other words, why the quantum revolution and the relativistic one both took place at the beginning of the 20th century. I’ll argue that the quantum and relativistic revolutions were simultaneous since they had a common origin – the clash beyween the mature theories of the second half of the 19th century that constituted the “body” of classical physics. The revolution’s most dramatic point was Einstein’s 1905 photon paper that laid the foundations of both special relativity and the old quantum theory. Hence the dialectic of the old theories is crucial for theory change. Later, classical physics was forced out by the joint development of quantum and relativistic subprogrammes. The title of my paper can be reformulated in Bruno Latour’s terms: The Einstein Revolution or Drawing Models Together.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/02698599608573534
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive Rinat M. Nugayev, Why did the new physics force out the old?
External links
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
Thomas S. Kuhn (1981). Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity, 1894-1912. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32 (1):71-85.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

25 ( #120,994 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

17 ( #45,081 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.