more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Is Newton's theory simpler than Einstein's, since there is only one relation of simultaneity in absolute time, or is Einstein's simpler because it dispenses with absolute time altogether?
Gist of Idea
Is Newton simpler with universal simultaneity, or Einstein simpler without absolute time?
Source
Geoffrey Gorham (Philosophy of Science [2009], 4)
Book Ref
Gorham,Geoffrey: 'Philosophy of Science' [One World 2009], p.96
A Reaction
A nice question, to which a good scientist might be willing to offer an answer. Since simultaneity is crucial but the existence of time is not, I would vote for Newton as the simpler.
| 22189 | Why abandon a theory if you don't have a better one? [Gorham] |
| 22190 | If a theory is more informative it is less probable [Gorham] |
| 22192 | Is Newton simpler with universal simultaneity, or Einstein simpler without absolute time? [Gorham] |
| 22194 | Structural Realism says mathematical structures persist after theory rejection [Gorham] |
| 22195 | Structural Realists must show the mathematics is both crucial and separate [Gorham] |
| 22196 | For most scientists their concepts are not just useful, but are meant to be true and accurate [Gorham] |
| 22197 | Theories aren't just for organising present experience if they concern the past or future [Gorham] |
| 22193 | Consilience makes the component sciences more likely [Gorham] |
| 22198 | Aristotelian physics has circular celestial motion and linear earthly motion [Gorham] |