Allan Franklin - Böcker

In Experiment, Right or Wrong, Allan Franklin continues his investigation of the history and philosophy of experiment presented in his previous book, The Neglect of Experiment. Using a combination of case studies and philosophical readings of those studies, Franklin again addresses two important questions: (1) What role does and should experiment play in the choice between competing theories and in the confirmation or refutation of theories and hypotheses? (2) How do we come to believe reasonably in experimental results? Experiment, Right or Wrong makes a significant contribution to an important area in contemporary history and philosophy of science. Philosophers and historians of science, physicists, and advanced students in these areas will find much of interest in this engaging study.

What role have experiments played, and should they play, in physics? How does one come to believe rationally in experimental results? The Neglect of Experiment attempts to provide answers to both of these questions. Professor Franklin's approach combines the detailed study of four episodes in the history of twentieth century physics with an examination of some of the philosophical issues involved. The episodes are the discovery of parity nonconservation ( or the violation of mirror symmetry) in the 1950s; the nondiscovery of parity nonconservation in the 1930s, when the results of experiments indicated, at least in retrospect, the symmetry violation, but the significance of those results was not realized; the discovery and acceptance of CP ( combined parity-charge conjugations, paricle-antiparticle) symmetry; and Millikan's oil-drop experiment. Franklin examines the various roles that experiment plays, including its role in deciding between competing theories, confirming theories, and calling fo new theories. The author argues that one can provide a philosophical justification for these roles. He contends that if experiment plays such important roles, then one must have good reason to believe in experimental results. He then deals with deveral problems concerning such reslults, including the epistemology of experiment, how one comes to believe rationally in experimental results, the question of the influence of theoretical presuppositions on results, and the problem of scientific fruad. This original and important contribution to the study of the philosophy of experimental science is an outgrowth of many years of research. Franklin brings to this work more than a decade of experience as an experimental high-energy physicist, along with his significant contributions to the history and philosophy of science.

In Experiment, Right or Wrong, Allan Franklin continues his investigation of the history and philosophy of experiment presented in his previous book, The Neglect of Experiment. Using a combination of case studies and philosophical readings of those studies, Franklin again addresses two important questions: (1) What role does and should experiment play in the choice between competing theories and in the confirmation or refutation of theories and hypotheses? (2) How do we come to believe reasonably in experimental results? Experiment, Right or Wrong makes a significant contribution to an important area in contemporary history and philosophy of science. Philosophers and historians of science, physicists, and advanced students in these areas will find much of interest in this engaging study.

What makes a good experiment? Although experimental evidence plays an essential role in science, as Franklin argues, there is no algorithm or simple set of criteria for ranking or evaluating good experiments, and therefore no definitive answer to the question. Experiments can, in fact, be good in any number of ways: conceptually good, methodologically good, technically good, and pedagogically important. And perfection is not a requirement: even experiments with incorrect results can be good, though they must, he argues, be methodologically good, providing good reasons for belief in their results. Franklin revisits the same important question he posed in his 1981 article in the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, when it was generally believed that the only significant role of experiment in science was to test theories. But experiments can actually play a lot of different roles in science—they can, for example, investigate a subject for which a theory does not exist, help to articulate an existing theory, call for a new theory, or correct incorrect or misinterpreted results. This book provides details of good experiments, with examples from physics and biology, illustrating the various ways they can be good and the different roles they can play.

Allan Franklin offers an accurate picture of science to both a general reader and to scholars in the humanities and social sciences who may not have any background in physics. Through the examination of nontechnical case studies, he illustrates the various roles that experiment plays in science. He uses examples of unquestioned success, such as the discoveries of the electron and of three types of neutrino, as well as studies that were dead ends, wrong turns, or just plain mistakes, such as the \u201cfifth force,\u201d a proposed modification of Newton's law of gravity. Franklin argues that science is a reasonable enterprise that provides us with knowledge of the natural world based on valid experimental evidence and reasoned and critical discussion, and he makes clear that it behooves all of us to understand how it works.

In 1865, Gregor Mendel presented \u201cExperiments in Plant-Hybridization,\u201d the results of his eight-year study of the principles of inheritance through experimentation with pea plants. Overlooked in its day, Mendel's work would later become the foundation of modern genetics. Did his pioneering research follow the rigors of real scientific inquiry, or was Mendel's data too good to be true-the product of doctored statistics?In Ending the Mendel-Fisher Controversy, leading experts present their conclusions on the legendary controversy surrounding the challenge to Mendel's findings by British statistician and biologist R. A. Fisher. In his 1936 paper \u201cHas Mendel's Work Been Rediscovered?\u201d Fisher suggested that Mendel's data could have been falsified in order to support his expectations. Fisher attributed the falsification to an unknown assistant of Mendel's. At the time, Fisher's criticism did not receive wide attention. Yet beginning in 1964, about the time of the centenary of Mendel's paper, scholars began to publicly discuss whether Fisher had successfully proven that Mendel's data was falsified. Since that time, numerous articles, letters, and comments have been published on the controversy.This self-contained volume includes everything the reader will need to know about the subject: an overview of the controversy; the original papers of Mendel and Fisher; four of the most important papers on the debate; and new updates, by the authors, of the latter four papers. Taken together, the authors contend, these voices argue for an end to the controversy-making this book the definitive last word on the subject.

Five episodes from physics and genetics are used to substantiate this thesis: the Meselson-Stahl experiment on DNA replication, the discoveries of the positron and the omega minus hyperon, Mendel’s plant experiments, and the discovery of parity nonconservation.

Five episodes from physics and genetics are used to substantiate this thesis: the Meselson-Stahl experiment on DNA replication, the discoveries of the positron and the omega minus hyperon, Mendel’s plant experiments, and the discovery of parity nonconservation.

This book addresses the pursuit and further investigation of experimental results by analyzing classic examples from physics. The authors concentrate on the investigation of experimental results by examining case studies from the history of 20th and 21st century physics.

This book addresses the pursuit and further investigation of experimental results by analyzing classic examples from physics. The authors concentrate on the investigation of experimental results by examining case studies from the history of 20th and 21st century physics.

Thisbook provides the reader with a detailed and captivating account of the storywhere, for the first time, physicists ventured into proposing a new force ofnature beyond the four known ones - the electromagnetic, weak and strongforces, and gravitation - based entirely on the reanalysis of existingexperimental data.  Back in 1986, EphraimFischbach, Sam Aronson, Carrick Talmadge and their collaborators proposed amodification of Newton’s Law of universal gravitation. Underlying this proposalwere three tantalizing pieces of evidence: 1) an energy dependence of the CP (particle-antiparticleand reflection symmetry) parameters, 2) differences between the measurements ofG, the universal gravitational constant, in laboratories and in mineshafts, and3) a reanalysis of the Eötvos experiment, which had previously been used toshow that the gravitational mass of an object and its inertia mass were equalto approximately one part in a billion. The reanalysis revealed that, contrary to Galileo’sposition, the force of gravity was in fact very slightly different fordifferent substances. The resulting Fifth Force hypothesis included thiscomposition dependence and also added a small distance dependence to theinverse-square gravitational force.Over the next four yearsnumerous experiments were performed to test the hypothesis. By 1990 there wasoverwhelming evidence that the Fifth Force, as initially proposed, did notexist. This book discusses how the Fifth Force hypothesis came to be proposedand how it went on to become a showcase of discovery, pursuit and justificationin modern physics, prior to its demise.In this new and significantly expandededition, the material from the first edition is complemented by two essays, onecontaining Fischbach’s personal reminiscences of the proposal, and a second onthe ongoing history and impact of the Fifth Force hypothesis from 1990 to thepresent.