‘THE OPEN UNIVERSITY OF SRI LANKA. BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY — LEVEL 05 FINAL EXAMINATION- 2013/2014 MPJ5231 - NATURE OF SCIENCE DURATION — FOUR (04) HOURS OPEN BOOK EXAMINATION (OBE) Date: 02™ September 2014 Time: 0930 hr. ~ 1330 hr Answer any six (06) questions only. SECTION ~A State the Galilean Transformation equations. What was the problem with Maxwell’s laws of electromagnetism with regards to Galilean Transformation? What did Lorentz notice with Maxwell’s laws of electromagnetism and the new transformation he introduced, namely Lorentz Transformation? ‘What did Einstein postulate regarding the laws of physics? ‘What was the bold decision that Einstein took with regards to Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism and Newton’s laws of mechanics? ‘The two inertial frames of reference S and S’ are such that S' moves with uniform velocity V along the x-axis relative to frame S. The space-time coordinates of the two events as measured by frame S$ are 1 =6X 10*m, yy =2,=0m, y= 1x10%s x2 =12% 10'm, y,=2,=0m, t,=2% 107s What must be the velocity of S’ w.r.t S, if an observer in $' measure the ‘two events occur simultaneously? State the 4Relativistic Velocity addition formula ( all three components along x,y and z axes) A, A and Fy are three inertial frames, The mapping F, + F, and FF; are special Lorentz, Transformations in x and y directions respectively such that the velocities of F; relative to F, and F relative to F, are (v,0,0) ,(0, v', 0) respectively. Show that the velocity of F; relative to F; is fe vy03. iii) Twin brothers 71,7 are each 20 years old on earth (E), when 7; sets off on a joumey to a distance star S. T; moves with an uniform speed ¥ for most of the joumey and returns to earth E by the same route with the uniform speed V, When Tyarrives on earth 7, is 61 years old and Ty is 29 years old. a) Find /, and the distance to the star in light years. b) How long will 7; live after the death of his twin brother 7, assuming that the span of life is 70 years. SECTION -B Read the following passage, and answer the questions given below. Francis Bacon (1581 - 1626) is best known as the originator of the ‘Scientific method’ of discovery, or a ‘new machine for the mind’ as Bacon himself prefers to call it. The method is such that it leaves no scope for the freedom of a pesson’s mind; it leads the mind along the correct path, ‘not leaving it to itself, but directing it perpetually from the very first, and attaining our end as it were by mechanical aid’, Bacon is quite aware that the human understanding, left to itself, does not act as a mechanical engine. Man sees that world in his own image. And this image derives its features, from the nature of the mind in general, from the idiosyncrasies (peculiar characteristics or habits) of the individual, from the individual's interaction with others, and from the philosophical dogmas current at the time. Bacon realized that those aspects of the human condition which intervene between the world and man’s understanding of it are important constraints on human knowledge. He formulated the famous doctrine of the Four Idols in a lucid exposition of the constraints under which the human understanding operates. Bacon gives us an outline of his conception of the scientific method in Book I of the ‘Novum Organum (New Instrument). This method involved collection of particulars through observation and systematic experimentation, putting down this data in writing in a proper and well arranged fashion (order), deriving axioms by certain method and rules from the above particulars and finally deriving new particulars from these axioms so that the axioms could confirm their own extent and generality. Bacon was wary of both the empiricists who refuse to generalize beyond the limited particulars of their observation, and the sophists who make no of little contact with experiment, The true Baconian method thus achieves a golden mean, avoiding the pitfalls of both the empiricists and the sophists. i) According to the passage given above, why did Bacon preferred to call hi ‘Scientific method” a new machine for the mind?04, 05. 06. i) iii) ‘What aspects of the human condition act as the important constraints ih’ the process of gaining (acquiring) human knowledge according to the above passage? Explain briefly the salient features of Bacon’s conception of the scientific method as mentioned in the above passage. Explain briefly the two extremes that Bacon tried to avoid in achieving a golden mean for the Baconian method? According to the relevant session in your course material for MPJ5231(Unit 1) on Francis Bacon’s method of science, explain briefly the poetic analogy given by Bacon to identify his method by comparing the methods of the crafismen and the scholars of his era. Explain briefly as to why David Hume’s critique of Bacon's method of science shook the very foundations of western science. Compare and contrast the views of Logical Positivists and Karl Popper regarding the following, Observations ii, Theories in science iii, Methodology of science. On what basis Karl Popper claims that his method of science is superior to the method of science advocated by Logical Positivists? Why did Karl Popper reject ad-hoc modifications to theories? Explain briefly how Karl Popper describes the progress of science using the concept introduced by him namely ‘Verisimilitude’ What is the major drawback of Popper's method of science? Describe the changes taking place in the life of every major science when it passes through from the pre-paradigmatic stage to the paradigmatic stage, according to Thomas Kuhn, Explain briefly the role played by the scientific community in bringing forth a Revolution in science according to Thomas Kuhn. Read the following passage and answer the question given below. Feyerabend’s conception of incommensurability stems from theory- dependence of observation. ‘The meanings and interpretations of concepts and the observation statements that employ them will depend on the theoretical context in which they occur. In some cases the fundamental principles of two rival theories may be so radically different that it is not possible even to formulate the basic concepts of one theory in terms of the 307. other with the consequence that the two rivals do not share angOL observation statements. In such cases it is not possible to logically deduce some of the consequences of one theory from the tenets of its rival for the purpose of comparison, The two theories will be incommensurable. One of Feyerabend's examples of incommensurability is the relationship between classical mechanics and relativity theory. Explain briefly how Feyerabend describes the incommensurability of two rival theories according to the above passage. Read the following passage, and answer the questions given below. The process of normal science, that of articulation and application of the paradigm, is more or less mechanical. But despite being mechanical in nature, this process has nothing to do with the objective, value-free apprehension of reality that Bacon advocated. On the contrary, nature is approached in terms of categories and concepts supplied by the paradigm, and the data are worked upon through the ideal problem solutions and experimental procedures afforded by the paradigm. In fact, according to the Kuhn, the paradigms so deeply condition the scientist’s perceptions during his normal activity that it can be said that not only normal science, but the scientists’ world itself is constituted by the paradigms. The hold of the categories supplied by paradigms on the scientists is weakened by the crisis situations and in these revolutionary stages of scientific activity, the scientists do behave to some extent like innocent children free of all preconceptions about the world. Even for the scientific community, acceptance of a new paradigm is hardly a mechanical process based on ‘certain rule and method’, but involves intangible considerations like aesthetic appeal, neatness, simplicity, etc.. Having arrived at this completely non-Baconian understanding of the process of scientific development, and having seen the influence of non- mechanical cultural and personal factors in the crucial stages of the history of science, one expects that Kuhn would abandon the idea of western science being somehow unique, compared to other non-western knowledge systems. One would expect him to take a relativistic position, allowing for the possibility of different cultures arriving at different yet equally valid knowledge systems. However Kuhn is quick to point out that scientific knowledge is not relative. He tells us that even though modern science cannot be shown to be a transcript of the divine mind (God), yet it remains the uniquely valid knowledge system available to humanity, simply because no other culture has ever possessed any science. Only the civilizations that descended from Hellenic Greece (Western Europe) have possessed more than the most rudimentary sciences of other cultures However Kuhn does not happen to be an authority on the non-Hellenic civilizations and their sciences.8) Feyerabend complains, with justifications that defenders of science typically judge it to be superior to other systems of knowledge without adequately investigating those other systems. Feyerabend is not prepared to accept the necessary superiority of science over other systems of knowledge. Further, in the light of his incommensurability thesis, he rejects the idea that there ever can be a decisive argument in favour of science over other systems of knowledge incommensurable with it. If western science is to be compared with other systems of knowledge, then it will be necessary to investigate the nature, aims and ‘methods of science of those other systems of knowledge. This will be done by the study of historical records, text books, original papers, records of meetings and private conversations, letters and the like. i, Explain briefly how Kuhn attacks (criticizes) the popular view of western science advocated by Bacon namely, ‘western science is an objective, value free knowledge system’ utilizing the role played by the concept ‘paradigm’ during the process of normal science, according to the above passage. ii, Explain briefly the factors that influence the scientific community in accepting a new paradigm during the revolutionary stages of scientific activity according to the above passage. ii, Compare and contrast the views of Kukn and Feyerabend regarding the uniqueness of westem science among other knowledge systems according to the above passage. SECTION C Read the following passage, and answer the questions given below. Until the 1960s, most physicians took it for granted that the universe was eternal, governed by changeless laws and made up of a constant amount of matter and energy. Their idea of Laws of Nature has been fundamental in modern science ever since the scientific revolution of the 17" century A.D, and is rooted in the Pythagorean and Platonic Philosophies of Ancient Greece. The patriarch of modern science, Francis Bacon, asserted in 1620 that the Laws of Nature were ‘eternal and immutable ‘ and science’s founding fathers, including Kepler, Galileo, Descartes and Newton , saw them as immaterial mathematical ides in the mind of God. The Laws of Nature were eternal because they participated in God's eternal nature, and like God transcended time and space. They were enforced by God’s omnipotence. When the entire universe was believed to be eternal, made up of a constant amount of matter and energy, etemnal laws presented no problems. In the 19" and 20" centuries, most physicists believed that all fundamental aspects 59) of physics were fixed forever - the total amount of matter, energy and electric charge was always the same, according to the laws of conservation of mass, energy and electric charge Everything changed with the great revolution in the 1960s, when the Big Bang theory becames the new orthodoxy. Ever since, most cosmologists have believed that the universe began about 15 billion years ago. When everything first appeared from nowhere- there was no space and time before the cosmos - it was less than the size of the head of a pin and immensely dense and hot. The cosmos has been expanding and cooling ever since. All atoms, molecules, stars, galaxies, crystals, planets and forms of life have come into being in time. They have evolutionary histories. The universe looks like a vast developing organism, not like an eternal machine slowly running out of steam. Evolutionary cosmology makes eternal Laws of Nature yet more problematical. Perhaps the Laws of Nature are not all fixed forever, but evolve along with nature. New laws may arise as phenomena become more complex. As soon as we admit this possibility, we realize that the metaphorical source of the Laws of Nature, namely human laws, are not in fact eternal but evolve along with the society. (What was the fundamental idea regarding the Laws of Nature ever since the scientific revolution of the 17" century A.D that occurred in Western European? (ii) What was the idea rooted in the minds of 19" and 20" century physicists which formed the basis for various laws of conservation, some of which are still being used? (iii) Explain briefly the changes that took place with the great revolution in cosmology in the 1960s, when the Big Bang theory become the new orthodoxy. Read the passage given below and the Session 14 of Unit 2 (Page 101) “Reductionism and limits to science” in your course material of Nature of Science (MPJ 5231), and answer the following questions. According to Vandana Shiva, a physicist by training, a philosopher of science and a leading environmentalist, the nexus (bond) between modem science and violence is obvious from the fact that 80% of all scientific research is devoted to war industry and is frankly aimed at large-scale violence. She argues that modern science is violent even in the peaceful domains such as health care and agriculture, where the professed objective of scientific research is not violence but human welfare. Her argument is based on the premise that modem science is basically reductionist. Reductionist science is also at the root of the growing ecological crisis. Violence is inflicted on the subject socially through the sharp division between the expert and non-expert. But even the expert is not spared. Fragmentation of knowledge converts the expert in to a non-knower in fields of knowledge other than his/her specialization. In order to prove itself superior to 6alternative modes of knowledge and be the only legitimate mode of knowing; reductionist science resorts to suppression and falsification of facts and thus commits violence against science itself. Reductionism provided the assumptions and criteria which guide modem science. Those basic assumptions are: i) A system is reducible to its parts. All systems are made up of the same basic constituents which are discrete and atomistic All systems have the same basic processes which are mechanical Sum total of knowledge of all the parts of a system gives knowledge of the whole system ‘experts’ and ‘specialists’ are the only legitimate knowledge-seekers and knowledge justifiers. All that can be granted to reductionist science is that it is an approach, a way to looking, a mode of thought. i) Most people believe that the root cause of the growing ecological crisis is abusing of the westem scientific knowledge by a few selfish and power hhungry scientists and politicians. But according the above passage Vandana Shiva presents a totally different root cause. Briefly explain this .e, Popular view Vs Vandana Shiva’s view) conflict of views, Explain briefly the major drawbacks of the two assumptions of Reductionism, namely (d) & (¢) of the above passage. copyrights reserved -