Читайте также:
|
Let’s begin the analysis of the principle of non-being with finding out the conditions, which resulted in necessity of discussion the role of impossible existences in the process of physical theory formation.
At first we find the proofs of impossibility of some existences in the works of Parmenides and Zeno of Elea. These proofs served as a logical method of grounding from opposite. This method always played a very important role in science and often resulted in creating new scientific ideas about the world. Galilei widely used this method for developing his new theory of motion. Let us pay attention to the mode, which was discovered by Galilei to prove his ideas of motion. In Aristotle’s physics motion and rest were considered to be naturally different conditions of physical bodies. This notion was connected with his theory of existence of «natural places» for every physical body. Galilei considered that the state of rest and the state of inertial motion are physical indistinguishable. The method proposed by Galilei presupposed that the criterion of difference of any physical conditions must be a physical experience. An observer staying on a shipboard and conducting physical experiments can not define condition of the ship as resting or as moving evenly and directly basing on his experiments as the experiments in both conditions give the same results. Certainly, an observer staying at the seashore can always define whether the ship moves or rests. In this case the mode discovered by Galilei connected an observer with a real physical experience. He put an observer inside the world and the world seemed to observe it using an experience. An experience becomes the eyes, ears and hands of an observer who is immanent to the world. Thus Galilei showed that the world that is observed from inside is different from the world which is observed from outside. These two worlds differ from each other in the aspect that they have two different existences, namely that the state, which is distinguished and non-identical in one world, is non-distinguished and identical in another world. One can speak about two worlds. In one world there is an «external» observer who can distinguish states which do not exist for an «internal» observer in another world.
It is known that A. Einstein used the same method, comparing the description of different physical processes submitted by the external and internal observers. The thing, which exists for one observer, is impossible existence for other. However both the external and internal observers are local and connected with physically permissible relative systems of coordinates. That is why the position of Einstein is different from the position of Galilei. Einstein does not recognize the external observer who is not included in a certain physical experience. If Galilei admitted the existence of a transcendent subject Einstein excluded such transcendent subject from the analysis of the surrounding world, and thus he considered the description of the world, which was given by a transcendent subject as physically impossible and unreal. In other words the world which is being observed by a transcendent subject does not exist. Such position was vividly manifested in Einstein’s analysis of simultaneity of two events. According to Einstein the absolute simultaneity does not exist for any physically possible experience (observation) shows the relative simultaneity of two events, and there is not such observation which can prove the absolute character of simultaneity. Let us pay attention to the fact that Einstein speaks about gnoseological and methodological impossibility of the absolute simultaneity existence because in this case existence is considered in relation with the definite methods of observation, cognition. And now we reached a very important point of our analysis. The «methodological impossibility» is connected with the fact that Einstein’s understanding of the world is based on the principle of short-range, connected with the idea of the final velocities of physical signals transfer and transmission of interactions. The description and explanation of nature in the classical mechanics of Galilei – Newton are based on the principle of action of a distance admitting infinite velocity of information transmission and physical forces which result in possibility of existence of absolute simultaneity of two events.
The previous analysis points out that physical principle of action at a distance determines the world model, which connected with existence of a transcendent subject of cognition. Everything, which can be the object of a thought for such a subject, can exist in the world. On the over hand the physical principle of short-range presents the other world model in which there are a lot of «local» subjects being immanent to the world and which are identical to physically permissible forms of being of the world. Consequently in this world the impossible existences cannot be the subject of any physical experience based on the principle of short-range. Only the thing, which can be observed during a physical experience, exists, i. e. it can be distinguished. The limitation imposed on a subject of observation is connected with the fact that any subject identifies himself either with the physical existences in the world or with the physically admissible conditions of experience. Such identification is a necessary for the process of cognition of the world.
But none of the above mentioned models of the world and consequently the principles of the world description are autonomous and independent from each other. This point of view is one of the mains in the article, and I am trying to give proof of it further.
Дата добавления: 2014-12-18; просмотров: 115 | Поможем написать вашу работу | Нарушение авторских прав |