Demonstrative induction, old and new evidence and the accuracy of the electrostatic inverse square law

Synthese 99 (1):23 - 58 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Maxwell claimed that the electrostatic inverse square law could be deduced from Cavendish's spherical condenser experiment. This is true only if the accuracy claims made by Cavendish and Maxwell are ignored, for both used the inverse square law as a premise in their analyses of experimental accuracy. By so doing, they assumed the very law the accuracy of which the Cavendish experiment was supposed to test. This paper attempts to make rational sense of this apparently circular procedure and to relate it to some variants of traditional problems concerning old and new evidence.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Electrostatic Inverse Square Law.Jon Dorling - 1974 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 4 (4):327.
Dimensionality, Symmetry, and the Inverse Square Law.Dimitria Gatzia & Rex Ramsier - 2020 - Notes and Records: Royal Society Journal of the History of Science 75 (3):333-348.
Model selection, simplicity, and scientific inference.Wayne C. Myrvold & William L. Harper - 2002 - Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2002 (3):S135-S149.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
65 (#86,957)

6 months
9 (#1,260,759)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ronald Laymon
Ohio State University

References found in this work

Theory and Evidence.Clark N. Glymour - 1980 - Princeton University Press.
Theory and Evidence.Clark Glymour - 1980 - Ethics 93 (3):613-615.
Theory and Evidence.Clark Glymour - 1982 - Erkenntnis 18 (1):105-130.

View all 15 references / Add more references