Search

Karl Popper, as a critical rationalist, was an opponent of all forms of scepticism, conventionalism and scientific relativism. In 1935 he wrote Logik der Forschung. Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft, later translating the book into English and publishing it as The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959), considered pioneering work in his field. Many of the arguments in this book are directed against members of the "Vienna Circle", such as Moritz Schlick, Otto Neurath, Rudolph Carnap, Hans Reichenbach, Carl Hempel and Herbert Feigl. Popper agrees with them on general aspects of scientific methodology and their distrust of traditional philosophical methodology, but his solutions have been markedly different. Popper has contributed extensively to debates about general scientific methodology, the demarcation of pseudoscience, the nature of probability, and social science methodology.

About the necessity and usefulness of developing a philosophy specific to blockchain technology, emphasizing the ontological aspects. After an Introduction in which I highlight the main philosophical directions for this emerging technology, in Blockchain Technology I explain how blockchain works, discussing the ontological directions of development in the Design and Modeling of this technology. The following section is dedicated to the main application of blockchain technology, Bitcoin, with the social implications of this cryptocurrency. This is followed by a Philosophy section in which I identify blockchain technology with the concept of heterotopia developed by Michel Foucault and interpret it in the light of the notational technology developed by Nelson Goodman as a notational system. In the Ontologies section I develop two directions of development that I consider important: Narrative Ontology, based on the idea of order and structure of history transmitted through Paul Ricoeur's narrative of history, and an ontological system based on Enterprise Ontologies, based on concepts and models of enterprise specific to the semantic web, and which I consider the best developed and the one that will probably become the formal ontological system, at least in terms of the economic and legal aspects of blockchain technology. In the Conclusions I talk about the future directions of development of the philosophy of blockchain technology in general as an explanatory and phenomenologically robust, consistent and testable theory, and of ontologies in particular, arguing for the need for a global adoption of an ontological system for to develop transversal solutions and to make technology profitable.

General Relativity generated various early philosophical interpretations. His adherents have highlighted the "relativization of inertia" and the concept of simultaneity, Kantians and Neo-Kantians have underlined the approach of certain synthetic "intellectual forms" (especially the principle of general covariance, and logical empirics have emphasized the philosophical methodological significance of the theory. Reichenbach approached the GR through the "relativity of geometry" thesis, trying to build a "constructive axiomatization" of relativity based on "elementary matters of fact" (Elementartatbestande) for the observable behavior of light rays, rods and clocks. The mathematician Hermann Weyl attempted a reconstruction of Einstein's theory based on the epistemology of a "pure infinitesimal geometry", an extended geometry with additional terms that formally identified with the potential of the electromagnetic field.

Newton supported the idea of absolute time, unlike Leibniz, for which time is only a relation between events and cannot be expressed independently, a statement in concordance with the relativity of space-time. Eternalism claims that the past and the future exist in a real sense, going to the idea that time is a dimension similar to spatial dimensions, that future and past events are "present" on the axis of time, but this view is clenged. On four-dimensional vision, the universe is an existing space-time topology, containing everything that has happened, everything that happens and everything that's going to happen. It follows that there is no singular moment to be considered as insignificant as present. Time travel is possible if the four-dimensional vision including the time is correct, but it is not possible if presentism is true. William Godfrey-Smith says that "the metaphysical image underlying the discussion of time travel is that of the universe block, in which the world is conceived as extended in time as it is in space."

The delimitation between science and pseudoscience is part of the more general task of determining which beliefs are epistemologically justified. Standards for demarcation may vary by domain, but several basic principles are universally accepted. Karl Popper proposed falsifiability as an important criterion in distinguishing between science and pseudoscience. He argues that verification and confirmation can play no role in formulating a satisfactory criterion of demarcation. Instead, it proposes that scientific theories be distinguished from non-scientific theories by testable claims that future observations might reveal to be false.

The most well-known example of the impossibility of traveling in time is the grandfather paradox or self-infanticide argument: a person who travels in the past and kills his own grandfather, thus preventing the existence of one of his parents and thus his own existence. A philosophical response to this paradox would be the impossibility of changing the past, like Novikov self-consistency principle (if an event exists that would cause a paradox or any "change" to the past whatsoever, then the probability of that event is zero, thus it would be impossible to create time paradoxes).

According to general relativity, the gravitational force is a manifestation of the geometry of local spacetime. RG is a metric theory of gravity. It is based on Einstein's equations, which describe the relationship between the geometry of a four-dimensional pseudo-Riemannian manifold, representing spacetime, and the energy-momentum contained within that spacetime. Gravity is changes in spatial and temporal properties, which in turn change the paths of objects. Curvature is caused by the energy-momentum of matter. According to John Archibald Wheeler, spacetime tells matter how to move, and matter tells spacetime how to bend.

Karl Popper, as a critical rationalist, was an opponent of all forms of skepticism, conventionalism and relativism in science. A major argument of Popper is Hume's critique of induction, arguing that induction should never be used in science. But he disagrees with the skepticism associated with Hume, nor with the support of Bacon and Newton's pure "observation" as a starting point in the formation of theories, as there are no pure observations that do not imply certain theories. Instead, Popper proposes falsifiability as a method of scientific investigation.

The singularities from the general relativity resulting by solving Einstein's equations were and still are the subject of many scientific debates: Are there singularities in spacetime, or not? Big Bang was an initial singularity? If singularities exist, what is their ontology? Is the general theory of relativity a theory that has shown its limits in this case?

One of the most disputed controversy over the priority of scientific discoveries is that of the law of universal gravitation, between Isaac Newton and Robert Hooke. Hooke accused Newton of plagiarism, of taking over his ideas expressed in previous works. In this paper I try to show, on the basis of previous analysis, that both scientists were wrong: Robert Hooke because his theory was basically only ideas that would never have materialized without Isaac Newton's mathematical support; and the latter was wrong by not recognizing Hooke's ideas in drawing up the theory of gravity. Moreover, after Hooke's death and taking over the Royal Society presidency, Newton removed from the institution any trace of the former president Robert Hooke. For this, I detail the accusations and arguments of each of the parts, and how this dispute was perceived by the contemporaries of the two scientists. I finish the paper with the conclusions drawn from the contents.

Based on Galileo's experiments, Newton develops the theory of gravity in his first book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica ("Principia") of 1686. Immediately after, Robert Hooke accused Newton of plagiarism, claiming that he unduly assumed his "notion" of "the rule of the decrease of Gravity, being reciprocally as the squares of the distances from the Center". But, according to Edmond ley, Hooke agreed that "the demonstration of the curves generated by it" belongs entirely to Newton.

Different authors have attempted to clarify the aspects of remote action and God's involvement on the basis of textual investigations, mainly from the Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, Newton's correspondence with Richard Bentley (1692/93), and Queries that Newton introduced at the end of the Opticks book in the first three editions (between 1704 and 1721).

Karl Popper, as a critical rationalist, was an opponent of all forms of skepticism, conventionalism and relativism in science. Many of his arguments on the issue of demarcation are directed against members of the "Viennese Circle". Popper agreed with them on general aspects of scientific methodology and their distrust of traditional philosophical methodology, but his solutions were significantly different. He contributed significantly to debates on general scientific methodology, the demarcation of science from pseudoscience, the nature of probability, and social science methodology.