On the observational equivalence of continuous-time deterministic and indeterministic descriptions Content Type Journal Article Pages 193-225 DOI 10.1007/s13194-010-0011-5 Authors Charlotte Werndl, Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method, London School of Economics, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE UK Journal European Journal for Philosophy of Science Online ISSN 1879-4920 Print ISSN 1879-4912 Journal Volume Volume 1 Journal Issue Volume 1, Number 2.

In vice epistemology, bad epistemic outcomes, such as maintaining false beliefs, are interpreted as indicators of blameworthy irrationality. Conversely, a growing trend in philosophical psychology advocates for environmentalist explanations, suggesting these outcomes emerge because rational cognitive processes of faultless individuals falter due to polluted environmental inputs. Building on concrete examples, I first offer a systematic analysis of the relative explanatory merits of that environmentalist project. I then use this analysis to advance the rationality debate, which has recently been identified as (...) stagnating due to an observational equivalence between environmentalist and vice accounts. Although the conceptual imprecision of vice epistemology has frequently been critiqued, the framework developed here reveals that environmentalism is (also) unable to meet various theoretical desiderata. I show why this is so and argue that, to make progress, environmentalism needs a more substantive conception of epistemic rationality. To this end, I propose that a closer engagement with questions of cognitive agency – how rational creatures can “make up” their minds about what to believe – could enable the necessary progress. (shrink)

Recently some results have been presented which show that certain kinds of deterministic descriptions and indeterministic descriptions are observationally equivalent (Werndl 2009a, 2010). This paper focuses on some philosophical questions prompted by these results. More specifically, first, I will discuss the philosophical comments made by mathematicians about observational equivalence, in particular Ornstein and Weiss (1991). Their comments are vague, and I will argue that, according to a reasonable interpretation, they are misguided. Second, the results on observational (...) class='Hi'>equivalence raise the question of whether the deterministic or indeterministic description is preferable relative to all evidence. If none of them is preferable, there is underdetermination. I will criticize Winnie's (1998) argument that, by appealing to different observations, one finds that the deterministic description is preferable. In particular, I will clarify a confusion in this argument. Furthermore, I will argue that if the concern is a strong kind of underdetermination, the argument delivers the desired conclusion but this conclusion is trivial; and for other kinds of underdetermination of interest the argument fails. (shrink)

Suppose that two theories θ and θ ′ are observationally equivalent, so that any possible evidence for or against one has the same relation to the other. Are these theories then logically equivalent? If not, is rational choice between them possible (on non-empirical grounds), or must we forever suspend judgment? It is argued that these questions are unintelligible, because the required sense of "observationally equivalent" does not exist. An explanation as to why this fact has been long overlooked is attempted (...) by suggesting that the existence of a precisely describable "domain" for θ and θ ′ frequently makes discussion of observational equivalence possible, though not in the sense required by the above questions. (shrink)

In this paper I examine two mathematical definitions of observational equivalence, one proposed by Charlotte Werndl and based on manifest isomorphism, and the other based on Ornstein and Weiss's ε-congruenceε-congruence. I argue, for two related reasons, that neither can function as a purely mathematical definition of observational equivalence. First, each definition permits of counterexamples; second, overcoming these counterexamples will introduce non-mathematical premises about the systems in question. Accordingly, the prospects for a broadly applicable and purely mathematical (...) definition of observational equivalence are unpromising. Despite this critique, I suggest that Werndl's proposals are valuable because they clarify the distinction between provable and unprovable elements in arguments for observational equivalence. (shrink)

The central question of this paper is: are deterministic and indeterministic descriptions observationally equivalent in the sense that they give the same predictions? I tackle this question for measure-theoretic deterministic systems and stochastic processes, both of which are ubiquitous in science. I first show that for many measure-theoretic deterministic systems there is a stochastic process which is observationally equivalent to the deterministic system. Conversely, I show that for all stochastic processes there is a measure-theoretic deterministic system which is observationally equivalent (...) to the stochastic process. Still, one might guess that the measure-theoretic deterministic systems which are observationally equivalent to stochastic processes used in science do not include any deterministic systems used in science. I argue that this is not so because deterministic systems used in science even give rise to Bernoulli processes. Despite this, one might guess that measure-theoretic deterministic systems used in science cannot give the same predictions at every observation level as stochastic processes used in science. By proving results in ergodic theory, I show that also this guess is misguided: there are several deterministic systems used in science which give the same predictions at every observation level as Markov processes. All these results show that measure-theoretic deterministic systems and stochastic processes are observationally equivalent more often than one might perhaps expect. Furthermore, I criticise the claims of the previous philosophy papers Suppes (1993, 1999), Suppes and de Barros (1996) and Winnie (1998) on observational equivalence. (shrink)

We prove that the observational equivalence of third-order finitary Idealized Algol is decidable using Game Semantics. By modelling the state explicitly in our games, we show that the denotation of a term M of this fragment of IA is a compactly innocent strategy-with-state, i.e. the strategy is generated by a finite view function fM. Given any such fM, we construct a real-time deterministic pushdown automaton that recognizes the complete plays of the knowing-strategy denotation of M. Since such plays (...) characterize observational equivalence, and there is an algorithm for deciding whether any two DPDAs recognize the same language, we obtain a procedure for deciding the observational equivalence of third-order finitary IA. Restricted to second-order terms, the DPDA representation cuts down to a deterministic finite automaton; thus our approach gives a new proof of Ghica and McCusker’s regular-expression characterization for this fragment. Our algorithmic representation of program meanings, which is compositional, provides a foundation for model-checking a wide range of behavioural properties of IA and other cognate programming languages. Another result concerns second-order IA with full recursion: we show that observational equivalence for this fragment is undecidable. (shrink)

Change and local spatial variation are missing in canonical General Relativity's observables as usually defined, an aspect of the problem of time. Definitions can be tested using equivalent formulations of a theory, non-gauge and gauge, because they must have equivalent observables and everything is observable in the non-gauge formulation. Taking an observable from the non-gauge formulation and finding the equivalent in the gauge formulation, one requires that the equivalent be an observable, thus constraining definitions. For massive photons, the de Broglie-Proca (...) non-gauge formulation observable A_{\mu} is equivalent to the Stueckelberg-Utiyama gauge formulation quantity A_{\mu} + \partial_{\mu} \phi, which must therefore be an observable. To achieve that result, observables must have 0 Poisson bracket not with each first-class constraint, but with the Rosenfeld-Anderson-Bergmann-Castellani gauge generator G, a tuned sum of first-class constraints, in accord with the Pons-Salisbury-Sundermeyer definition of observables. The definition for external gauge symmetries can be tested using massive gravity, where one can install gauge freedom by parametrization with clock fields X^A. The non-gauge observable g^{\mu\nu} has the gauge equivalent X^A,_{\mu} g^{\mu\nu} X^B,_{\nu}. The Poisson bracket of X^A,_{\mu} g^{\mu\nu} X^B,_{\nu} with G turns out to be not 0 but a Lie derivative. This non-zero Poisson bracket refines and systematizes Kuchař's proposal to relax the 0 Poisson bracket condition with the Hamiltonian constraint. Thus observables need covariance, not invariance, in relation to external gauge symmetries. The Lagrangian and Hamiltonian for massive gravity are those of General Relativity + \Lambda + 4 scalars, so the same definition of observables applies to General Relativity. Local fields such as g_{\mu\nu} are observables. Thus observables change. Requiring equivalent observables for equivalent theories also recovers Hamiltonian-Lagrangian equivalence. (shrink)

Change and local spatial variation are missing in Hamiltonian general relativity according to the most common definition of observables as having 0 Poisson bracket with all first-class constraints. But other definitions of observables have been proposed. In pursuit of Hamiltonian–Lagrangian equivalence, Pons, Salisbury and Sundermeyer use the Anderson–Bergmann–Castellani gauge generator G, a tuned sum of first-class constraints. Kuchař waived the 0 Poisson bracket condition for the Hamiltonian constraint to achieve changing observables. A systematic combination of the two reforms might (...) use the gauge generator but permit non-zero Lie derivative Poisson brackets for the external gauge symmetry of General Relativity. Fortunately one can test definitions of observables by calculation using two formulations of a theory, one without gauge freedom and one with gauge freedom. The formulations, being empirically equivalent, must have equivalent observables. For de Broglie-Proca non-gauge massive electromagnetism, all constraints are second-class, so everything is observable. Demanding equivalent observables from gauge Stueckelberg–Utiyama electromagnetism, one finds that the usual definition fails while the Pons–Salisbury–Sundermeyer definition with G succeeds. This definition does not readily yield change in GR, however. Should GR’s external gauge freedom of general relativity share with internal gauge symmetries the 0 Poisson bracket, or is covariance sufficient? A graviton mass breaks the gauge symmetry, but it can be restored by parametrization with clock fields. By requiring equivalent observables, one can test whether observables should have 0 or the Lie derivative as the Poisson bracket with the gauge generator G. The latter definition is vindicated by calculation. While this conclusion has been reported previously, here the calculation is given in some detail. (shrink)

One of the highly contraversial discussions in philosophy of mind is equivalence of human being mind and machines. Here we show that no one could prove that, in certain he is a machine.

Change seems missing in Hamiltonian General Relativity's observables. The typical definition takes observables to have $0$ Poisson bracket with \emph{each} first-class constraint. Another definition aims to recover Lagrangian-equivalence: observables have $0$ Poisson bracket with the gauge generator $G$, a \emph{tuned sum} of first-class constraints. Empirically equivalent theories have equivalent observables. That platitude provides a test of definitions using de Broglie's massive electromagnetism. The non-gauge ``Proca'' formulation has no first-class constraints, so everything is observable. The gauge ``Stueckelberg'' formulation has first-class (...) constraints, so observables vary with the definition. Which satisfies the platitude? The team definition does; the individual definition does not. Subsequent work using the gravitational analog has shown that observables have not a 0 Poisson bracket, but a Lie derivative for the Poisson bracket with the gauge generator $G$. The same should hold for General Relativity, so observables change locally and correspond to 4-dimensional tensor calculus. Thus requiring equivalent observables for empirically equivalent formulations helps to address the problem of time. (shrink)

A precise fomulation of the strong Equivalence Principle is essential to the understanding of the relationship between gravitation and quantum mechanics. The relevant aspects are reviewed in a context including General Relativity but allowing for the presence of torsion. For the sake of brevity, a concise statement is proposed for the Principle: An ideal observer immersed in a gravitational field can choose a reference frame in which gravitation goes unnoticed. This statement is given a clear mathematical meaning through an (...) accurate discussion of its terms. It holds for ideal observers (time-like smooth non-intersecting curves), but not for real, spatially extended observers. Analogous results hold for gauge fields. The difference between gravitation and the other fundamental interactions comes from their distinct roles in the equation of force. (shrink)

Decompositional equivalence is the principle that there is no preferred decomposition of the universe into subsystems. It is shown here, by using a simple thought experiment, that quantum theory follows from decompositional equivalence together with Landauer’s principle. This demonstration raises within physics a question previously left to psychology: how do human—or any—observers identify or agree about what constitutes a “system of interest”?

Research on sleep loss and vigilance both focus on declines in cognitive performance, but theoretical accounts have developed largely in parallel in these two areas. In addition, computational instantiations of theoretical accounts are rare. The current work uses computational modeling to explore whether the same mechanisms can account for the effects of both sleep loss and time on task on performance. A classic task used in the sleep deprivation literature, the Psychomotor Vigilance Test, was extended from the typical 10-min duration (...) to 35 min, to make the task similar in duration to traditional vigilance tasks. A computational cognitive model demonstrated that the effects of time on task in the PVT were equivalent to those observed with sleep loss. Subsequently, the same mechanisms were applied to a more traditional vigilance task—the Mackworth Clock Task—providing a good fit to existing data. This supports the hypothesis that these different types of fatigue may produce functionally equivalent declines in performance. (shrink)

The underdetermination of theory by evidence must be distinguished from holism. The latter is a doctrine about the testing of scientific hypotheses; the former is a thesis about empirically adequate logically incompatible global theories or "systems of the world". The distinction is crucial for an adequate assessment of the underdetermination thesis. The paper shows how some treatments of underdetermination are vitiated by failure to observe this distinction, and identifies some necessary conditions for the existence of multiple empirically equivalent global theories. (...) We consider how empiricists should respond to the possibility of such systems of the world. (shrink)

Are theories ‘underdetermined by the evidence’ in any way that should worry the scientific realist? I argue that no convincing reason has been given for thinking so. A crucial distinction is drawn between data equivalence and empirical equivalence. Duhem showed that it is always possible to produce a data equivalent rival to any accepted scientific theory. But there is no reason to regard such a rival as equally well empirically supported and hence no threat to realism. Two theories (...) are empirically equivalent if they share all consequences expressed in purely observational vocabulary. This is a much stronger requirement than has hitherto been recognised— two such ‘rival’ theories must in fact agree on many claims that are clearly theoretical in nature. Given this, it is unclear how much of an impact on realism a demonstration that there is always an empirically equivalent ‘rival’ to any accepted theory would have—even if such a demonstration could be produced. Certainly in the case of the version of realism that I defend—structural realism—such a demonstration would have precisely no impact: two empirically equivalent theories are, according to structural realism, cognitively indistinguishable. (shrink)

Learning equivalence classes of acyclic models with latent and selection variables from multiple datasets with overlapping variables is discussed. The problem of inferring the presence of latent variables, their relation to the observables, and the relation among themselves, is considered. A different approach for identifying causal structures, one that results in much simpler equivalence classes, is provided. It is found that the computational cost is much higher than the procedure implemented, but if datasets are individually of modest dimensionality, (...) it might be doable in practice. From the point of view of search algorithms for optimizing structure, much of the machinery of combinatorial optimization could optimize the penalized composite likelihood score by enforcing constraints such that the independence models over different subsets of variables agree on the overlapping sets. (shrink)

In the literature over the Ramsey-sentence approach to structural realism, there is often debate over whether structural realists can legitimately restrict the range of the second-order quantifiers, in order to avoid the Newman problem. In this paper, I argue that even if they are allowed to, it won’t help: even if the Ramsey sentence is interpreted using such restricted quantifiers, it is still an implausible candidate to capture a theory’s structural content. To do so, I use the following observation: if (...) a Ramsey sentence did encode a theory’s structural content, then two theories would be structurally equivalent just in case they have logically equivalent Ramsey sentences. I then argue that this criterion for structural equivalence is implausible, even where frame or Henkin semantics are used. (shrink)

The paper contains some observations on e-complete, precomplete, and uniformly finitely precomplete r. e. equivalence relations. Among these are a construction of a uniformly finitely precomplete r. e. equivalence which is neither e- nor precomplete, an extension of Lachlan's theorem that all precomplete r. e. equivalences are isomorphic, and a characterization of sets of fixed points of endomorphisms of uniformly finitely precomplete r. e. equivalences.

In “A new proof of the completeness of the Lukasiewicz axioms” Chang proved that any totally ordered MV-algebra A was isomorphic to the segment \}\) of a totally ordered l-group with strong unit A *. This was done by the simple intuitive idea of putting denumerable copies of A on top of each other. Moreover, he also show that any such group G can be recovered from its segment since \^*}\), establishing an equivalence of categories. In “Interpretation of AF (...) C *-algebras in Lukasiewicz sentential calculus” Mundici extended this result to arbitrary MV-algebras and l-groups with strong unit. He takes the representation of A as a sub-direct product of chains A i, and observes that \ where \. Then he let A * be the l-subgroup generated by A inside \. He proves that this idea works, and establish an equivalence of categories in a rather elaborate way by means of his concept of good sequences and its complicated arithmetics. In this note, essentially self-contained except for Chang’s result, we give a simple proof of this equivalence taking advantage directly of the arithmetics of the the product l-group \, avoiding entirely the notion of good sequence. (shrink)

We work with weakly precomplete equivalence relations introduced by Badaev. The weak precompleteness is a natural notion inspired by various fixed point theorems in computability theory. Let E be an equivalence relation on the set of natural numbers $$\omega $$, having at least two classes. A total function f is a diagonal function for E if for every x, the numbers x and f(x) are not E-equivalent. It is known that in the case of c.e. relations E, the (...) weak precompleteness of E is equivalent to the lack of computable diagonal functions for E. Here we prove that this result fails already for $$\Delta ^0_2$$ equivalence relations, starting with the $$\Pi ^{-1}_2$$ level. We focus on the Turing degrees of possible diagonal functions. We prove that for any noncomputable c.e. degree $${\textbf{d}}$$, there exists a weakly precomplete c.e. equivalence E admitting a $${\textbf{d}}$$ -computable diagonal function. We observe that a Turing degree $${\textbf{d}}$$ can compute a diagonal function for every $$\Delta ^0_2$$ equivalence relation E if and only if $${\textbf{d}}$$ computes $${\textbf{0}}'$$. On the other hand, every PA degree can compute a diagonal function for an arbitrary c.e. equivalence E. In addition, if $${\textbf{d}}$$ computes diagonal functions for all c.e. E, then $${\textbf{d}}$$ must be a DNC degree. (shrink)

It is well known that there may be many causal explanations that are consistent with a given set of data. Recent work has been done to represent the common aspects of these explanations into one representation. In this paper, we address what is less well known: how do the relationships common to every causal explanation among the observed variables of some DAG process change in the presence of latent variables? Ancestral graphs provide a class of graphs that can encode conditional (...) independence relations that arise in DAG models with latent and selection variables. In this paper we present a set of orientation rules that construct the Markov equivalence class representative for ancestral graphs, given a member of the equivalence class. These rules are sound and complete. We also show that when the equivalence class includes a DAG, the equivalence class representative is the essential graph for the said DAG. (shrink)

According to the standard interpretation of Einstein’s field equations, gravity consists of mass-energy curving spacetime, and an additional physical force or entity—denoted by Λ (the ‘cosmological constant’)—is responsible for the Universe’s metric-expansion. Although General Relativity’s direct predictions have been systematically confirmed, the dominant cosmological model thought to follow from it—the ΛCDM (Lambda cold dark matter) model of the Universe’s history and composition—faces considerable challenges, including various observational anomalies and experimental failures to detect dark matter, dark energy, or inflation-field candidates. (...) This paper shows that Einstein’s Equivalence Principle entails two possible physical interpretations of General Relativity’s field equations. Although the field equations facially appear to support the standard interpretation—that gravity consists of mass-energy curving spacetime—the field equations can be equivalently understood as holding that gravitational effects instead result from mass-energy accelerating the metric-expansion of a second-order spacetime fabric superimposed upon an absolute, first-order Euclidean space, resulting in the observational appearance of spacetime curvature. This alternative interpretation of relativity is shown to be empirically equivalent to the standard interpretation of relativity, albeit with a changing value for Λ (which is similar to how Λ is understood in the conception of Λ as ‘quintessence’, but in this case takes Λ to be gravity). The reconceptualization is then shown to potentially resolve major observational anomalies for the ΛCDM model, including recent observations conflicting with ΛCDM predictions, as well as failures to directly detect dark matter, dark energy, and inflation field/particle candidates. (shrink)

We develop a relativistic perspective on structures of quantum observables, in terms of localization systems of Boolean coordinatizing charts. This perspective implies that the quantum world is comprehended via Boolean reference frames for measurement of observables, pasted together along their overlaps. The scheme is formalized categorically, as an instance of the adjunction concept. The latter is used as a framework for the specification of a categorical equivalence signifying an invariance in the translational code of communication between Boolean localizing contexts (...) and quantum systems. Aspects of the scheme semantics are discussed in relation to logic. The interpretation of coordinatizing localization systems, as structure sheaves, provides the basis for the development of an algebraic differential geometric machinery suited to the quantum regime. (shrink)

Is change missing in Hamiltonian Einstein–Maxwell theory? Given the most common definition of observables, observables are constants of the motion and nonlocal. Unfortunately this definition also implies that the observables for massive electromagnetism with gauge freedom are inequivalent to those of massive electromagnetism without gauge freedom. The alternative Pons–Salisbury–Sundermeyer definition of observables, aiming for Hamiltonian–Lagrangian equivalence, uses the gauge generator G, a tuned sum of first-class constraints, rather than each first-class constraint separately, and implies equivalent observables for equivalent massive (...) electromagnetisms. For General Relativity, G generates 4-dimensional Lie derivatives for solutions. The Lie derivative compares different space-time points with the same coordinate value in different coordinate systems, like 1 a.m. summer time versus 1 a.m. standard time, so a vanishing Lie derivative implies constancy rather than covariance. Requiring equivalent observables for equivalent formulations of massive gravity confirms that G must generate the 4-dimensional Lie derivative for observables. These separate results indicate that observables are invariant under internal gauge symmetries but covariant under external gauge symmetries, but can this bifurcated definition work for mixed theories such as Einstein–Maxwell theory? Pons, Salisbury and Shepley have studied G for Einstein–Yang–Mills. For Einstein–Maxwell, both \ and \ are invariant under electromagnetic gauge transformations and covariant under 4-dimensional coordinate transformations. Using the bifurcated definition, these quantities count as observables, as one would expect on non-Hamiltonian grounds. (shrink)

Goethe's objections to Newton's theory of light and colours are better than often acknowledged. You can accept the most important elements of these objections without disagreeing with Newton about light and colours. As I will argue, Goethe exposed a crucial weakness of Newton's methodological self-assessment. Newton believed that with the help of his prism experiments, he could prove that sunlight was composed of variously coloured rays of light. Goethe showed that this step from observation to theory is more problematic than (...) Newton wanted to admit. By insisting that the step to theory is not forced upon us by the phenomena, Goethe revealed our own free, creative contribution to theory construction. And Goethe's insight is surprisingly significant, because he correctly claimed that all of the results of Newton's prism experiments fit a theoretical alternative equally well. If this is correct, then by suggesting an alternative to a well-established physical theory, Goethe developed the problem of underdete... (shrink)

This paper is devoted to clarification of the notion of entanglement through decoupling it from the tensor product structure and treating as a constraint posed by probabilistic dependence of quantum observable _A_ and _B_. In our framework, it is meaningless to speak about entanglement without pointing to the fixed observables _A_ and _B_, so this is _AB_-entanglement. Dependence of quantum observables is formalized as non-coincidence of conditional probabilities. Starting with this probabilistic definition, we achieve the Hilbert space characterization of the (...) _AB_-entangled states as amplitude non-factorisable states. In the tensor product case, _AB_-entanglement implies standard entanglement, but not vise verse. _AB_-entanglement for dichotomous observables is equivalent to their correlation, i.e., \(\langle AB\rangle _{\psi} \not = \langle A\rangle _{\psi} \langle B\rangle _{\psi}.\) We describe the class of quantum states that are \(A_{u} B_{u}\) -entangled for a family of unitary operators (_u_). Finally, observables entanglement is compared with dependence of random variables in classical probability theory. (shrink)

If observation is 'theory-laden', how can there be 'observationally equivalent theories'? How can the observations 'laden' by one theory be 'the same as' those 'laden' by another? The answer might lie in the expressibility of observationally equivalent theories in a common mathematical formalism.

Two problems have long been confused with each other: the gravitational redshift as discussed by the equivalence principle; and the Doppler shift observed by a detector which moves with constant proper acceleration away from a stationary source. We here distinguish these two problems and give for the first time a solution of the former which is ‘exact’ within the context of the equivalence principle in a sense discussed in the paper. The equivalence principle leads to transformations between (...) flat spacetimes. These are analyzed, and a generalized Lorentz transformation is proposed which covers transformations from inertial to uniformly accelerated frames of reference. (shrink)

The equivalence connective in ukasiewicz logic has its algebraic counterpart which is the distance function d(x,y) =|x–y| of a positive cone of a commutative -group. We make some observations on logically motivated algebraic structures involving the distance function.

Propertius' account of this myth contains two major difficulties of syntax and interpretation: modo. When the word modo means ⋯ννοτε μ⋯νand stands in the first of two co-ordinate clauses it requires an answering modo or its equivalent in the second clause. Et and etiam are not satisfactory equivalents. So the necessary second modo—or equivalent—is here absent. ibat uidere is the sole account of Milanion's activities in connection with the hirsutae ferae. As such it appears obscure and abrupt.

A unitary transformation replaces the given description of a quantum system by an equivalent one. It is observed, however, that not all members of a set of unitarily equivalent Hamilton operators are equally well suited for identifying the corresponding classical systems. A criterion is proposed for recognizing the privileged representatives of the set. A few explicit examples are reported that show the criterion at work.

The circular arc swept out by the angular displacement of a clock indicator (or its equivalent representation) measuring time is shown to be a Lorentz invariant, representing “universal” time. The concepts of time dilation and transverse Doppler effect are accordingly not physically observable. The experiments on these effects when examined critically are found to be inconclusive. Length contraction, also experimentally unconfirmed, and kinematic temporal phase, both consequences of the Lorentz transformations, are as a matter of logical consistency also physically unobservable.

We make some beginning observations about the category Eq of equivalence relations on the set of natural numbers, where a morphism between two equivalence relations R and S is a mapping from the set of R-equivalence classes to that of S-equivalence classes, which is induced by a computable function. We also consider some full subcategories of Eq, such as the category Eq(Σ01) of computably enumerable equivalence relations (called ceers), the category Eq(Π01) of co-computably enumerable (...) class='Hi'>equivalence relations, and the category Eq(Dark*) whose objects are the so-called dark ceers plus the ceers with finitely many equivalence classes. Although in all these categories the monomorphisms coincide with the injective morphisms, we show that in Eq(Σ01) the epimorphisms coincide with the onto morphisms, but in Eq(Π01) there are epimorphisms that are not onto. Moreover, Eq, Eq(Σ01), and Eq(Dark*) are closed under finite products, binary coproducts, and coequalizers, but we give an example of two morphisms in Eq(Π01) whose coequalizer in Eq is not an object of Eq(Π01). (shrink)

We consider semi‐algebraic sets and properties of these sets that are expressible by sentences in first‐order logic over the reals. We are interested in first‐order properties that are invariant under topological transformations of the ambient space. Two semi‐algebraic sets are called topologically elementarily equivalent if they cannot be distinguished by such topological first‐order sentences. So far, only semi‐algebraic sets in one and two‐dimensional space have been considered in this context. Our contribution is a natural characterisation of topological elementary equivalence (...) of regular closed semi‐algebraic sets in three‐dimensional space, extending a known characterisation for the two‐dimensional case. Our characterisation is based on the local topological behaviour of semi‐algebraic sets and the key observation that topologically elementarily equivalent sets can be transformed into each other by means of geometric transformations, each of them mapping a set to a first‐order indistinguishable one. (shrink)

Starting from the observation that the construction of vague reference in legal texts is intended by the legislator, we examine the intensifier adjective grave linked to linguistic vagueness. The aim is to define the meanings of grave and the role of the noun it qualifies, and to identify Polish equivalents in comparable and parallel legal texts. After mentioning studies on vagueness and vague reference, we analyse definitions that indicate two meanings: ‘importance’ and ‘consequence. The ‘cause-consequence’ relationship becomes central to the (...) study of the categories of intensifiable nouns and grave meanings. The Polish equivalents prove that it is polysemous and that the place of the N in the logical relation must be taken into account. (shrink)

The aim of the famous Born and Jordan 1925 paper was to put Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics on a firm mathematical basis. Born and Jordan showed that if one wants to ensure energy conservation in Heisenberg’s theory it is necessary and sufficient to quantize observables following a certain ordering rule. One apparently unnoticed consequence of this fact is that Schrödinger’s wave mechanics cannot be equivalent to Heisenberg’s more physically motivated matrix mechanics unless its observables are quantized using this rule, and not (...) the more symmetric prescription proposed by Weyl in 1926, which has become the standard procedure in quantum mechanics. This observation confirms the superiority of Born–Jordan quantization, as already suggested by Kauffmann. We also show how to explicitly determine the Born–Jordan quantization of arbitrary classical variables, and discuss the conceptual advantages in using this quantization scheme. We finally suggest that it might be possible to determine the correct quantization scheme by using the results of weak measurement experiments. (shrink)

Contrary to popular belief, I argue that Leibniz is not hopelessly confused about motion: Leibniz is indeed both a relativist and an absolutist about motion, as suggested by the textual evidence, but, appearances to the contrary, this is not a problem; Leibniz’s infamous doctrine of the equivalence of hypotheses is well-supported and well-integrated within Leibniz’s physical theory; Leibniz’s assertion that the simplest hypothesis of several equivalent hypotheses can be held to be true can be explicated in such a way (...) that it makes good sense; the mere Galilean invariance of Leibniz’s conservation law does not compromise Leibniz’s relativism about motion; and Leibniz has a straightforward response to Newton’s challenge that the observable effects of the inertial forces of rotational motions empirically distinguish absolute from relative motions. (shrink)

The various physical aspects of the general relativistic principles of covariance and strong equivalence are discussed, and their mathematical formulations are analyzed. All these aspects are shown to be present in classical general relativity, although no contemporary formulation of canonical or covariant quantum gravity has succeeded to incorporate them all. This has, in part, motivated the recent introduction of a geometro-stochastic framework for quantum general relativity, in which the classical frame bundles that underlie the formulation of parallel transport in (...) classical general relativity are replaced by quantum frame bundles. It is shown that quantum frames can take over the role played by complete sets of observables in conventional quantum theory, so that they can mediate the natural transference of the general covariance and the strong equivalence principles from the classical to the quantum general relativistic regime. This results in a geometrostochastic mode of quantum propagation in general relativistic quantum bundles, which is mathematically implemented by path integration methods based on parallel transport along horizontal lifts of geodesics for the vacuum expectation values of a quantum gravitational field in a quantum spacetime supermanifold. The covariance features of this field are embedded in a quantum gravitational supergroup, which incorporates Poincaré as well as diffeomorphism invariance, and resolves the issue of time in quantum gravity. (shrink)

The conditional independence relations present in a data set usually admit multiple causal explanations — typically represented by directed graphs — which are Markov equivalent in that they entail the same conditional independence relations among the observed variables. Markov equivalence between directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) has been characterized in various ways, each of which has been found useful for certain purposes. In particular, Chickering’s transformational characterization is useful in deriving properties shared by Markov equivalent DAGs, and, with certain generalization, (...) is needed to justify a search procedure over Markov equivalence classes, known as the GES algorithm. Markov equivalence between DAGs with latent variables has also been characterized, in the spirit of Verma and Pearl (1990), via maximal ancestral graphs (MAGs). The latter can represent the observable conditional independence relations as well as some causal features of DAG models with latent variables. However, no characterization of Markov equivalent MAGs is yet available that is analogous to the transformational characterization for Markov equivalent DAGs. The main contribution of the current paper is to establish such a characterization for directed MAGs, which we expect will have similar uses as Chickering’s characterization does for DAGs. (shrink)

Different directed acyclic graphs may be Markov equivalent in the sense that they entail the same conditional independence relations among the observed variables. Chickering provided a transformational characterization of Markov equivalence for DAGs, which is useful in deriving properties shared by Markov equivalent DAGs, and, with certain generalization, is needed to prove the asymptotic correctness of a search procedure over Markov equivalence classes, known as the GES algorithm. For DAG models with latent variables, maximal ancestral graphs provide a (...) neat representation that facilitates model search. However, no transformational characterization -- analogous to Chickering's -- of Markov equivalent MAGs is yet available. This paper establishes such a characterization for directed MAGs, which we expect will have similar uses as it does for DAGs. (shrink)

This important book explores the question of what an educational theory is and how educational theories can work. It offers a classification scheme of distinct types of educational theory and considers ways the nature of theories can inform the work of educational theorists and practitioners. Kvernbekk observes throughout how metatheoretical knowledge of the structure of theory types will improve understanding and representation of educational phenomena and enhance the ability to change these phenomena for the better. The author explores how the (...) philosophy of science can answer what a theory is and applies two influential but different theory conceptions to the field of education. It is argued that educational theories are representational devices that allow us to understand, describe and explain phenomena, and, when desired, to change them. The analysis offers a classification scheme that allows us to discriminate distinct types of educational theory: goal-directed, equivalence and interlevel theories. Examples of all three types are discussed, covering their structure, what they say about the phenomena and how they say it. The book also offers a critical overview of different conceptions of practice and different understandings of the theory-practice relationship. Encouraging a strong understanding of what theories say about the phenomena they represent, this book will be of interest to educational researchers and postgraduate students in the fields of philosophy of education, education theory and education policy. (shrink)

It is proposed that the physical structure of an observer in quantum mechanics is constituted by a pattern of elementary localized switching events. A key preliminary step in giving mathematical expression to this proposal is the introduction of an equivalence relation on sequences of spacetime sets which relates a sequence to any other sequence to which it can be deformed without change of causal arrangement. This allows an individual observer to be associated with a finite structure. The identification of (...) suitable switching events in the human brain is discussed. A definition is given for the sets of sequences of quantum states which such an observer could occupy. Finally, by providing an a priori probability for such sets, the definitions are incorporated into a complete mathematical framework for a many-worlds interpretation. At a less ambitious level, the paper can be read as an exploration of some of the technical and conceptual difficulties involved in constructing such a framework. (shrink)

It can be shown that certain kinds of classical deterministic and indeterministic descriptions are observationally equivalent. Then the question arises: which description is preferable relative to evidence? This paper looks at the main argument in the literature for the deterministic description by Winnie (The cosmos of science—essays of exploration. Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh, pp 299–324, 1998). It is shown that this argument yields the desired conclusion relative to in principle possible observations where there are no limits, in principle, on (...) class='Hi'>observational accuracy. Yet relative to the currently possible observations (of relevance in practice), relative to the actual observations, or relative to in principle observations where there are limits, in principle, on observational accuracy the argument fails. Then Winnie’s analogy between his argument for the deterministic description and his argument against the prevalence of Bernoulli randomness in deterministic descriptions is considered. It is argued that while the arguments are indeed analogous, it is also important to see they are disanalogous in another sense. (shrink)

There are results which show that measure-theoretic deterministic models and stochastic models are observationally equivalent. Thus there is a choice between a deterministic and an indeterministic model and the question arises: Which model is preferable relative to evidence? If the evidence equally supports both models, there is underdetermination. This paper first distinguishes between different kinds of choice and clarifies the possible resulting types of underdetermination. Then a new answer is presented: the focus is on the choice between a Newtonian deterministic (...) model supported by indirect evidence from other Newtonian models which invoke similar additional assumptions about the physical systems and a stochastic model that is not supported by indirect evidence. It is argued that the deterministic model is preferable. The argument against underdetermination is then generalised to a broader class of cases. Finally, the paper criticises the extant philosophical answers in relation to the preferable model. Winnie’s (1998) argument for the deterministic model is shown to deliver the correct conclusion relative to observations which are possible in principle and where there are no limits, in principle, on observational accuracy (the type of choice Winnie was concerned with). However, in practice the argument fails. A further point made is that Hoefer’s (2008) argument for the deterministic model is untenable. (shrink)

This article focuses on three recent discussions on determinism in the philosophy of science. First, determinism and predictability will be discussed. Then, second, the paper turns to the topic of determinism, indeterminism, observational equivalence and randomness. Finally, third, there will be a discussion about deterministic probabilities. The paper will end with a conclusion.

In his general theory of relativity (GR) Einstein sought to generalize the special-relativistic equivalence of inertial frames to a principle according to which all frames of reference are equivalent. He claimed to have achieved this aim through the general covariance of the equations of GR. There is broad consensus among philosophers of relativity that Einstein was mistaken in this. That equations can be made to look the same in different frames certainly does not imply in general that such frames (...) are physically equivalent. We shall argue, however, that Einstein's position is tenable. The equivalence of arbitrary frames in GR should not be equated with relativity of arbitrary motion, though. There certainly are observable differences between reference frames in GR (differences in the way particles move and fields evolve). The core of our defense of Einstein's position will be to argue that such differences should be seen as fact-like rather than law-like in GR. By contrast, in classical mechanics and in special relativity (SR) the differences between inertial systems and accelerated systems have a law-like status. The fact-like character of the differences between frames in GR justifies regarding them as equivalent in the same sense as inertial frames in SR. (shrink)