Search results for 'Physical laws' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Ecological Laws, Ecological Laws.score: 340.0
    The question of whether there are laws in ecology is important for a number of reasons. If, as some have suggested, there are no ecological laws, this would seem to distinguish ecology from other branches of science, such as physics. It could also make a difference to the methodology of ecology. If there are no laws to be discovered, ecologists would seem to be in the business of merely supplying a suite of useful models. These models would (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jean E. Burns (1999). Volition and Physical Laws. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (10):27-47.score: 210.0
  3. David Brooks (1980). The Impossibility of Psycho-Physical Laws. Philosophical Papers 9 (October):21-45.score: 198.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. John T. Roberts (2005). Measurability and Physical Laws. Synthese 144 (3):433Ð447.score: 180.0
    I propose and motivate a new account of fundamental physical laws, the Measurability Account of Laws (MAL). This account has a distinctive logical form, in that it takes the primary nomological concept to be that of a law relative to a given theory, and defines a law simpliciter as a law relative to some true theory. What makes a proposition a law relative to a theory is that it plays an indispensable role in demonstrating that some quantity (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Marcel Weber (2008). Causes Without Mechanisms: Experimental Regularities, Physical Laws, and Neuroscientific Explanation. Philosophy of Science 75 (5):995-1007.score: 180.0
    This article examines the role of experimental generalizations and physical laws in neuroscientific explanations, using Hodgkin and Huxley’s electrophysiological model from 1952 as a test case. I show that the fact that the model was partly fitted to experimental data did not affect its explanatory status, nor did the false mechanistic assumptions made by Hodgkin and Huxley. The model satisfies two important criteria of explanatory status: it contains invariant generalizations and it is modular (both in James Woodward’s sense). (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. J. T. Whyte (1990). The Psycho-Physical Laws of Intentionality. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (3):295 – 304.score: 180.0
    Abstract Intentional mental states have causes and effects. Davidson has shown that this fact alone does not entail the existence of psycho?physical laws, but his anomalism makes the connection between the content and causation of intentional states utterly mysterious. By defining intentional states in terms of their causes and effects, functionalism promises to explain this connection. If intentional states have their causes and effects in virtue of their contents, then there must be intrinsic states (of the people who (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. E. Schmutzer (1971). Symmetries in the Physical Laws of Nature. Scientia 106:66-76.score: 174.0
    According to the great discovery by e. noether in 1918 there exists an intrinsic connection between the mathematical symmetries of the laws of nature and the conservation laws. the two kinds of symmetries, namely the continuous and the discrete ones, are discussed. the physical background of these symmetries is illustrated. finally, we sketch some topical conservation problems in elementary particle physics.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. George Johnson, Physical Laws Collide in a Black Hole Bet.score: 162.0
    o an outsider, nothing might seem more ridiculous than the spectacle of grown men and women sitting around a conference table soberly discussing what would happen if a volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica were dropped down a black hole. Yet this very question lies at the heart of the "information paradox," a seeming contradiction to the laws of physics that is causing scientists to re-examine some of their most basic assumptions about how the universe is made.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. John D. Norton (2000). What Can We Learn About Physical Laws From the Fact That We Have Memories Only of the Past? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (1):11 – 23.score: 162.0
    Not much. I demonstrate this by constructing a model of a memory system governed by deterministic, time reversible laws only, thereby showing that the mere fact of our having memories solely of the past does not necessitate an indeterministic, time asymmetric or stochastic physics, essentially thermodynamic processes or a primitive notion of time asymmetric causation.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. R. Eugene Collins (2005). The Mathematical Basis for Physical Laws. Foundations of Physics 35 (5):743-785.score: 158.0
    Laws of mechanics, quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, gravitation and relativity are derived as “related mathematical identities” based solely on the existence of a joint probability distribution for the position and velocity of a particle moving on a Riemannian manifold. This probability formalism is necessary because continuous variables are not precisely observable. These demonstrations explain why these laws must have the forms previously discovered through experiment and empirical deduction. Indeed, the very existence of electric, magnetic and gravitational fields is predicted (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Asher Peres (1980). The Physicist's Role in Physical Laws. Foundations of Physics 10 (7-8):631-634.score: 158.0
    The physicist not only observes phenomena, but he also has an active role in the formulation of some laws. For instance, laws involving irreversibility refer explicitly to what can or cannot be done by physicists. As the abilities of the latter may vary, we obtain sequences of laws, the convergence of which is discussed.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Janet Broughton (forthcoming). Necessity and Physical Laws in Descartes's Philosophy. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly.score: 156.0
    I argue that although in his earlier work descartes thought of the laws of motion as "eternal truths," he later came to think of them as truths whose necessity is of a different type.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Francesco Lacquaniti & Mirka Zago (2001). Internalization of Physical Laws as Revealed by the Study of Action Instead of Perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (4):684-685.score: 152.0
    We review studies on catching that reveal internalization of physics for action control. In catching free-falling balls, an internal model of gravity is used by the brain to time anticipatory muscle activation, modulation of reflex responses, and tuning of limb impedance. An internal model of the expected momentum of the ball at impact is used to scale the amplitude of anticipatory muscle activity. [Barlow; Hecht; Shepard].
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. D. L. Wilson (1999). Mind-Brain Interactionism and the Violation of Physical Laws. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (8-9):8-9.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. L. L. Whyte (1957). On the Relation of Physical Laws to the Processes of Organisms. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 7 (28):347-350.score: 150.0
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Jeff Yoshimi (2010). Husserl on Psycho-Physical Laws. New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy 10 (1):25-42.score: 150.0
  17. Arthur Fine (1964). Physical Geometry and Physical Laws. Philosophy of Science 31 (2):156-162.score: 150.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Michael Ruse (1988). Rigorous Regularism: Physical Laws Without Necessity. Dialogue 27 (03):523-.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. James A. McWilliams (1935). Contingency in Physical Laws. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 11:37-61.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Veit Pittioni (1988). Kant's Theory of Physical Laws. Philosophy and History 21 (2):160-160.score: 150.0
  21. Hilary Lawton (1935). The Foundations of Physical Laws. Thought 10 (3):453-467.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Ludvig Lövestad (1945). The Structure of Physical Laws. Theoria 11 (1):40-70.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Franklin Boyle (1990). Algorithms and Physical Laws. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (4):656-657.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. G. Galeczki (1994). Physical Laws and the Theory of Special Relativity. Apeiron 20:27.score: 150.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. E. Kaeser (1977). Physical Laws, Physical Entities and Ontology. Dialectica 31 (3‐4):273-299.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Pat Langley (1981). Data‐Driven Discovery of Physical Laws. Cognitive Science 5 (1):31-54.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. G. H. von Wright (1948). Review: Ludvig Lovestad, The Structure of Physical Laws. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 13 (3):157-157.score: 150.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Ilya Prigogine (1971). Unity of Physical Laws and Levels of Description. In Marjorie Glicksman Grene & I. Prigogine (eds.), Interpretations of Life and Mind. New York,Humanities Press.score: 150.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. M. Scriven (1961). The Key Property of Physical Laws: Inaccuracy. In H. Feigl & G. Maxwell (eds.), Current Issues in the Philosophy of Science. New York. 91Ð101.score: 150.0
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Susan G. Sterrett (2002). Physical Models and Fundamental Laws: Using One Piece of the World to Tell About Another. [REVIEW] Mind and Society 3 (1):51-66.score: 148.0
    In this paper I discuss the relationship between model, theories, and laws in the practice of experimental scale modeling. The methodology of experimental scale modeling, also known as physical similarity, differs markedly from that of other kinds of models in ways that are important to issues in philosophy of science. Scale models are not discussed in much depth in mainstream philosophy of science. In this paper, I examine how scale models are used in making inferences. The main question (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Joel Press (2009). Physical Explanations and Biological Explanations, Empirical Laws and a Priori Laws. Biology and Philosophy 24 (3):359-374.score: 144.0
    Philosophers intent upon characterizing the difference between physics and biology often seize upon the purported fact that physical explanations conform more closely to the covering law model than biological explanations. Central to this purported difference is the role of laws of nature in the explanations of these two sciences. However, I argue that, although certain important differences between physics and biology can be highlighted by differences between physical and biological explanations, these differences are not differences in the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Victor J. Stenger (2006). The Comprehensible Cosmos: Where Do the Laws of Physics Come From? Prometheus Books.score: 132.0
    What are the laws of physics? -- The stuff that kicks back -- Point-of-view invariance -- Gauging the laws of physics -- Forces and broken symmetries -- Playing dice -- After the bang -- Out of the void -- The comprehensible cosmos -- Models of reality.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. D. Goldstick (1993). Laws of Nature and Physical Existents. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (3):255 – 265.score: 122.0
    Abstract Nominalists, denying the reality of anything over and above concreta, are committed to a reductive account of any law of nature, explaining its necessity?the fact that it not only holds for all actual instances, but would hold for any additional ones?in, for example, epistemic terms (its likelihood/certainty of holding beyond the already observed instances). Nominalists argue that the world would be no different without irreducible modalities. ?Modal realists? often object that this parallels a common phenomenalist argument against believing in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. John F. Halpin (1994). Legitimizing Chance: The Best-System Approach to Probabilistic Laws in Physical Theory. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 72 (3):317 – 338.score: 120.0
  35. Peter Mittelstaedt (forthcoming). Explanation of Physical Phenomena by Laws of Nature. Epistemologia.score: 120.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. C. F. Presley (1954). Laws and Theories in the Physical Sciences. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 32 (2):79 – 103.score: 120.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Paul Davies (2010). The Nature of the Laws of Physics and Their Mysterious Bio-Friendliness. In Science and Religion in Dialogue. Wiley-Blackwell. 767--788.score: 120.0
    This chapter contains sections titled: * 1 The Universe Is Weirdly Fine-Tuned for Life * 2 The Cosmic Code * 3 The Concept of Laws * 4 Are the Laws Real? * 5 Does a Multiverse Explain the Goldilocks Enigma? * 6 Many Scientists Hate the Multiverse Idea * 7 Who Designed the Multiverse? * 8 If There Were a Unique Final Theory, God Would Be Redundant * 9 What Exists and What Doesn’t: Who or What Gets to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. H. H. Pattee (2013). Epistemic, Evolutionary, and Physical Conditions for Biological Information. Biosemiotics 6 (1):9-31.score: 114.0
    The necessary but not sufficient conditions for biological informational concepts like signs, symbols, memories, instructions, and messages are (1) an object or referent that the information is about, (2) a physical embodiment or vehicle that stands for what the information is about (the object), and (3) an interpreter or agent that separates the referent information from the vehicle’s material structure, and that establishes the stands-for relation. This separation is named the epistemic cut, and explaining clearly how the stands-for relation (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Carl F. Craver (2008). Physical Law and Mechanistic Explanation in the Hodgkin and Huxley Model of the Action Potential. Philosophy of Science 75 (5):1022-1033.score: 100.0
    Hodgkin and Huxley’s model of the action potential is an apparent dream case of covering‐law explanation in biology. The model includes laws of physics and chemistry that, coupled with details about antecedent and background conditions, can be used to derive features of the action potential. Hodgkin and Huxley insist that their model is not an explanation. This suggests either that subsuming a phenomenon under physical laws is insufficient to explain it or that Hodgkin and Huxley were wrong. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Norman Swartz (1985). The Concept of Physical Law. Cambridge University Press.score: 100.0
    The Concept of Physical Law is an original and creative defense of the Regularity theory of physical law, the concept that physical laws are nothing more than descriptions of whatever universal truths happen to be instanced in nature. Professor Swartz clearly identifies and analyzes the arguments and intuitions of the opposing Necessitarian theory, and argues that the standard objection to the Regularity theory turns on a mistaken view of what Regularists mean by 'physical impossibility'; that (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Dana Jalobeanu & Peter R. Anstey (eds.) (2011). Vanishing Matter and the Laws of Motion: Descartes and Beyond. Routledge.score: 96.0
    This volume explores the themes of vanishing matter, matter and the laws of nature, the qualities of matter, and the diversity of the debates about matter in the early modern period.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Edmund A. DiMarzio (1977). A Unified Theory of Matter. II. Derivation of the Fundamental Physical Law. Foundations of Physics 7 (11-12):885-905.score: 96.0
    The equation for the fundamental field quantity ϱ is obtained. It is Div $\rho ^\mu (\Omega _1 ) = \operatorname{h} \int {[\rho _\mu (\Omega _1 ),\rho ^\mu (\Omega _2 )]_ - \operatorname{d} \Omega _2 } $ ,where h is an arbitrary function oft andr, and [,]− is the commutator. The derivation requires the following hypotheses:(1) All of physical reality is completely described by the field ϱ.(2) Relativistic covariance of the equations governing ϱ.(3) Principle of continguous action.(4) Conservation of total (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Marc Lange (2009). Laws and Lawmakers: Science, Metaphysics, and the Laws of Nature. Oxford University Press.score: 96.0
    Laws form counterfactually stable sets -- Natural necessity -- Three payoffs of my account -- A world of subjunctives.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Paul Davies, The Implications of a Cosmological Information Bound for Complexity, Quantum Information and the Nature of Physical Law.score: 94.0
    The finite age of the universe and the existence of cosmological horizons provides a strong argument that the observable universe represents a finite causal region with finite material and informational resources. A similar conclusion follows from the holographic principle. In this paper I address the question of whether the cosmological information bound has implications for fundamental physics. Orthodox physics is based on Platonism: the laws are treated as infinitely precise, perfect, immutable mathematical relationships that transcend the physical universe (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Yuri Balashov, Laws of Physics and the Universe.score: 90.0
    Are the laws of nature real? Do they belong to the world or merely reflect the way we speak about it? And if they are real, what sort of entity are they? These questions have been intensely debated by philosophers. Modern cosmology, however, has given such questions a new twist by introducing a unique perspective on physical reality, the perspective which I shall call the cosmological point of view. In this perspective, the universe as a whole presents itself (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Jean E. Burns (2003). What is Beyond the Edge of the Known World? Journal of Consciousness Studies 10 (6-7):7-28.score: 90.0
    Experiments show that psi differs from known physical processes in a variety of ways, and these differences are described herein. Because of these, psi cannot be accounted for in terms of presently known physical laws. A number of theories, of which we review a sampling, suggest ways in which known physical laws might be expanded in order to account for psi. However, there is no agreement on which of these theories, if any, will ultimately provide (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jean E. Burns (2012). The Action of the Mind. In I. Fredriksson (ed.), Aspects of Consciousness. McFarland. 204.score: 90.0
    It is assumed that mental action, such as free will, exists, and an exploration is made of its relationship to the brain, physical laws, and evolutionary selection. If the assumption is made that all content of conscious experience is encoded in the brain, it follows that free will must act as process only. This result is consistent with the experimental results of Libet and others that if free will exists, it must act by making a selection between alternatives (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Clifford A. Pickover (2008). Archimedes to Hawking: Laws of Science and the Great Minds Behind Them. Oxford University Press.score: 90.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Marcello Guarini (2000). Horgan and Tienson on Ceteris Paribus Laws. Philosophy of Science 67 (2):301-315.score: 84.0
    Terence Horgan and John Tienson claim that folk psychological laws are different in kind from basic physical laws in at least two ways: first, physical laws do not possess the kind of ceteris paribus qualifications possessed by folk psychological laws, which means the two types of laws have different logical forms; and second, applied physical laws are best thought of as being about an idealized world and folk psychological laws about (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Mauro Dorato (2012). Mathematical Biology and the Existence of Biological Laws. In D. Dieks, S. Hartmann, T. Uebel & M. Weber (eds.), Probabilities, Laws and Structure. Springer.score: 78.0
    An influential position in the philosophy of biology claims that there are no biological laws, since any apparently biological generalization is either too accidental, fact-like or contingent to be named a law, or is simply reducible to physical laws that regulate electrical and chemical interactions taking place between merely physical systems. In the following I will stress a neglected aspect of the debate that emerges directly from the growing importance of mathematical models of biological phenomena. My (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000