Abstract
Any mathematical formalization of scientific activity allows for imperfections in the methodology that is formalized. These can be of three types, “dirty,” “rotten,” and “dammed.” Restricting mathematical attention to those methods that cannot be construed to be imperfect drastically reduces the class of objects that must be analyzed, and relates all other objects to these more regular ones. Examples are drawn from empirical logic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Foulis D. J., and Randall, C. H. (1978). Manuals, morphisms and quantum mechanics, inMathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, A. Marlow, ed., pp. 105–126, Academic Press, New York.
Foulis, D. J., and Randall, C. H. (1981). What are quantum logics and what ought they to be? inCurrent Issues in Quantum Logics, E. Beltrametti and B. van Frassen, eds., pp. 35–52, Plenum Press, New York.
Foulis, D., Piron, C., and Randall, C. (1983).Foundations of Physics,13, 813.
Ludwig, G. (1983).Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Springer, New York.
Mielnik, B. (1968).Communications in Mathematical Physics 9, 55.
Mielnik, B. (1974).Communications in Mathematical Physics 37, 221.
Randall, C. H., and Foulis, D. J. (1978). The operational approach to quantum mechanics, inThe Logico-Algebraic Approach to Quantum Mechanics III: Physical Theory as Logical Operational Structure, C, Hooker, ed., pp. 167–201, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Svetlichny, G. (1981).Foundations of Physics,11, 741.
Svetlichny, G. (1982).Foundations of Physics,12, 301.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Svetlichny, G. Methodological imperfection and formalizations of scientific activity. Int J Theor Phys 26, 221–238 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00668912
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00668912