A scientific theory is always in danger of being superseded by a ‘better’ theory. What makes the later theory ‘better’ and how theories are related to each other – these and other relevant matters are treated in this review. Examples are drawn from theoretical physics to illustrate the development, coexistence, and replacement of rival theories; a methodology for examining the problem is offered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KuhnTh., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The University of Chicago Press (1970).
2.
LakatosI. and MusgraveA.(Eds.)Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press (1970).
3.
FeyerabendP., Problems of empiricism, inBeyond the Edge of Certainty, ColodnyR. G.(Ed.), pp. 145–260. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (1965). Quoted from p. 149.
4.
FeyerabendP., Against Method. New Left Books, London (1975).
5.
ScheibeE., Explanations of theories and the problem of progress in physics, Ref. 16, pp. 71–94.
6.
WeizsäckerC. F. v., The Unity of Nature. Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, New York (1980). Quoted from p. 168.
7.
ScheibeE., Eine Fallstudie zur Grenzfallbeziehung in der Quantenmechanik, inGrundlagenprobleme der modern Physik, NitschJ., et al. (Eds.), pp. 257–269. B.I.-Wissenschaftsverlag, Mannheim (1981).
8.
ScheibeE., Die Erklärung der Keplerschen Gesetze durch Newtons Gravitationsgesetz, inEinheit und Vielheit, E. Scheibe and G. Süßmann (Eds.), pp. 98–118. Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Göttingen (1973).
9.
KünzleH. P., Galilei and Lorentz structures on space-time: Comparison of the corresponding geometry and physics. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré17, 337–362 (1972).
10.
EhlersJ., Über den Newtonschen Grenzwert der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie, inGrundlagenprobleme der modernen Physik, NitschJ., et al. (Eds.), pp. 65–84. B.I.-Wissenschaftsverlag, Mannheim (1981).
11.
EhlersJ., On limit relations between, and approximative explanations of, physical theories, inLogic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science VII. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1985).
12.
AshtekarA., On the relation between classical and quantum observables. Commun. Math. Phys. 71, 59–64 (1980).
13.
EmchG. G., Geometric dequantization and the correspondence problem. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 22, 397–420 (1983).
14.
LudwigG., Die Grundstrukturen einer physikalischen Theorie. Springer, Berlin (1978).
15.
NiiniluotoI. and TuomelaR.(Eds.), The Logic and Epistemology of Scientific Change. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1979).
16.
BalzerW., et al. (Eds.), Reduction in Science. Reidel, Dordrecht (1984).
17.
HartkämperA. and SchmidtH.-J.(Eds.), Structure and Approximation in Physical Theories. Plenum, New York (1981).
18.
HookerC. A.(Ed.), The Logico-Algebraic Approach to Quantum Mechanics. Two volumes. Reidel, Dordrecht (1975, 1979).
19.
ScheibeE., Two types of successor relations between theories. J. Gen. Phil. Sci. 14, 68–80 (1983).
