Različita shvatanja postojanja (II) - Blogovi - Forum Krstarice
Prikaži RSS

Ljubav prema mudrosti

Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)

Oceni ovaj blog
Naučni metod istraživanja ima empirijski karakter što znači da se temelji na otkrivanju onih zakonitosti ili pojava u fizičkoj dimenziji koje se mogu utvrditi, dokazati, proveriti kao i primeniti što je Ajnštajn sažeto izrazio na sledeći način: "Vrhunski domet celokupne nauke je da što više empirijskih činjenica obuhvati logičkim rasudjivanjem iz što manjeg broja hipoteza i aksioma."

Zato se takav metod uglavnom koncentriše na otkrivanje fizičkih zakonitosti okoline u kojoj ljudi žive. On se pokazao veoma efikasnim jer je doprineo progresivnom akademskom i tehnološkom razvoju. Međutim, razumevanje ljudi je stalni proces promene što znači da naučni metod takodje mora biti podvrgnut stalnom razvoju kao i proveri da bi se dobili što adekvatniji rezultati.

Stalna promena ili razvoj uslovljava relativan, a ne apsolutan karakter naučne spoznaje a time i mogućnost zabluda i grešaka.
Charles P. Steinmetz (poznati Nemačko-Američki matematičar i elektro inžinjer) daje primer značajnog naučnog propusta ili greške koja dovoljno govori sama po sebi pa je iznosim u vidu većeg citata:
"More than once, in the apparently continuous and unbroken structure of science, wide gaps have been discovered into which new sections of knowledge fitted, sections the existence of which had never been suspected.

So in Mendelejeff's Periodic System of the Elements all chemical elements fitted in without gaps—in a continuous series (except a few missing links, which were gradually discovered and filled in). Nevertheless, the whole group of six noble gases, from helium to emanium, were discovered and fitted into the periodic system at a place where nobody had suspected a gap.

One of the most interesting of such unsuspected gaps in the structure of science is the following, because of its pertinency to the subject of our discussion.
In studying the transformations of matter, the chemist records them by equations of the form:
(1) 2H2 + O2 = 2H2O, which means:
Two gram molecules of hydrogen H2(2 X 2 = 4 grams) and 1 gram molecule of oxygen O2(1 X 32 grams), combine to 2 gram molecules of water vapor H2O (2 X 18 = 36 grams).

For nearly a hundred years chemists wrote and accepted this equation; innumerable times it has been experimentally proved by combining 4 parts of hydrogen and 32 parts of oxygen to 36 parts of water vapor; so that this chemical equation would appear as correct and unquestionable as anything can be.
Nevertheless, it is wrong, or rather incomplete. It does not give the whole event, but omits an essential part of it, and now we write it:

(2) 2H2 + O2 = 2H2O + 293,000 J., which means:
The matter and energy of 2 gram molecules of hydrogen, and the matter and energy of 1 gram molecule of oxygen, combine to the matter and energy of 2 gram molecules of water vapour and 293,000 joules, or units, of free energy.

For a hundred years the chemists thus saw only the material transformation as represented by equation (1), but overlooked and did not recognize the energy transformation coincident with the transformation of matter, though every time the experiment was made, the 293,000 J. of energy in equation (2) made themselves felt as flame, as heat and mechanical force, sometimes even explosively shattering the container in which the experiment was made.

But the flame and the explosion appeared only as an incidental phenomenon without significance, as it represents and contains no part of the matter, but equation (1) gives the complete balance of matter in transformation.

It was much later that the scientists realized the significance of the flame accompanying the material transformation as not a mere incidental phenomenon, but as the manifestation of the entity energy, permanent and indestructible, like matter, and the complete equation (2) appeared, giving the balance of energy as well as the balance of matter—that is, coincident with the transformation of matter is a transformation of energy, and both are indissoluble from each other, either involves the other, and both may be called different aspects of the same phenomenon.”

Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na Facebook Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na Google Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na My Yahoo! Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na Live Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na MySpace Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na Twitter Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na Digg Pošalji "Različita shvatanja postojanja (II)" na del.icio.us

Kategorije
Nekategorizovano

Komentari

  1. zxy (avatar)
    E ovaj post je do sada najrazumljiviji
    mislim za one tamo u...Australiji
  2. sofija06 (avatar)
    Nisam imala dovoljno vremena da prevedem tekst pa sam ga napisala u originalu s nadom da ce citaoci biti u stanju da ga sami prevedu. Izvinjavam se onima ciji engleski nije adekvatan da prevedu tekst. Odabrala sam ga zato sto nedvosmisleno ukazuje na mogucnost greske i pogresnog razumevanja u nauci.
    Mada na prvi pogled moze izgledati da se u nekoj pojavi nema vise sta otkriti posto je sve jasno i otkriveno, ipak se uspostavi da nije tako. Razlog tome je, kao sto sam vec dosta puta do sada isticala, taj sto je spoznaja ljudi neprekidan proces razvoja te samim tim ima karakteristike izvesne ogranicenosti. Zato nauka i njen pristup takodje ima svoja ogranicenja ili mogucnost zablude.
    Ukoliko budem imala vise vremena potrudicu se da prevedem tekst. Ukoliko ne, bila bih zahvalna nekom od citaoca da ga prevede za one ljude koji bi zeleli da ga procitaju na srpskom.
    Ažurirano 16.04.2011. u 00:44, autor: sofija06