SOUTHERN LUZON STATE UNIVERSITY

GRADUTE SCHOOL
Lucban, Quezon

JOJIMAR SJ. JULIAN NOVEMBER 25, 2017

Ph. D. Science Education Dr. LEONISA O. BERNARDO

REPORT # 16
UNDERDETERMINATION AND REALISM OF SCINTIFIC THEORY

Direction: Answer the following questions with utmost direct and logical explanation.
The following rubrics will be used to evaluate and score your answers:
Excellent – 10 points

 Shows a thorough understanding of the question -  Addresses all aspects of the

question
 Shows an ability to analyze. evaluate, compare, and/or contrast issues and
events 
 Richly supports with relevant facts, examples, and details 
 Writes a well-developed answer, consistently demonstrating a logical and clear
plan of organization 
Very Good – 8 points

 Shows a clear understanding of the question - Addresses all aspects of the

question 
 Shows an ability to analyze, evaluate, compare, and/or contrast issues and
events 
 Includes relevant facts, examples. and details, but may not support all aspects of
the task evenly
 Writes a well-developed answer, consistently demonstrating a logical and clear
plan of organization  

Good – 6 points

 Presents a general understanding of the question

 Addresses most aspects of the question or addresses all aspects in a limited way
 Shows an ability to analyze or evaluate issues and events, but not in any depth
 Writes a satisfactorily developed answer, demonstrating a general plan of
organization, with adequate topic sentences
 Uses some facts, examples. and details

HPS – Ka jhojhie Julian

 Satisfactory – 4 points

 Attempts to address the question, but uses vague and/or somewhat  inaccurate

information
 Shows a limited understanding of the question; omits concrete examples; uses
weak details
 Writes a poorly’ organized answer lacking focus: uses few facts, examples &
details;  includes information that contains  inaccuracies

Unsatisfactory– 2 points

 Has vague or missing information

 Develops a faulty analysis or evaluation 
 Lacks analysis or evaluation of the issues and events beyond stating vague
and/or inaccurate facts
 Uses little or no accurate or relevant facts, details, or examples

Questions:
1. Nature of testing relation increases and strengthen the correctness of
information. One way of testing is through Falsification. Science progresses by
subjecting a hypothesis to increasingly strengthen tests, until the hypothesis is
falsified, so that it may be corrected, improved, or give way to a better
hypothesis. Using the principles of falsification prove the following Physics
concept:
a. Newton’s Theory of Gravitation

Suggest that either Newtonian gravity does not apply universally or

that, conservatively, upwards of 50% of the mass of galaxies was contained in
the relatively dark galactic halo. Met with skepticism, Rubin insisted that the
observations were correct.
Based on Newtonian mechanics and assuming, as was originally
thought, that most of the mass of the galaxy had to be in the galactic bulge near
the center, matter (such as stars and gas) in the disk portion of a spiral should
orbit the center of the galaxy similar to the way in which planets in the solar
system orbit the sun, i.e. where the average orbital speed of an object at a
specified distance away from the majority of the mass distribution would
decrease inversely with the square root of the radius of the orbit.
Observations of the rotation curve of spirals, however, do not bear
this out. Rather, the curves do not decrease in the expected inverse square root
relationship but are “flat”, i.e. outside of the central bulge the speed is nearly a
constant.

HPS – Ka jhojhie Julian

 Rotation curve of a typical spiral galaxy: predicted (A) and observed (B).
Sadly, the scientific establishment deviated from the Scientific Method by
refusing to accept the [repeated] falsification of a Newton’s [sacrosanct] Law of
Universal Gravitation. Instead, the scientific establishment preferred to keep its
Newtonian belief system intact by accepting the mathematical invention of Dark
Matter.
Dark matter came to the attention of astrophysicists due to discrepancies
between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their
gravitational effects, and the mass calculated from the “luminous matter” they
contain; such as stars, gas and dust. It was first postulated by Jan Oort in 1932
to account for the orbital velocities of stars in the Milky Way and Fritz Zwicky
in 1933 to account for evidence of “missing mass” in the orbital velocities of
galaxies in clusters. Subsequently, other observations have indicated the
presence of dark matter in the universe, including the rotational speeds of
galaxies, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as
the Bullet Cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and
clusters of galaxies.

b. Theorem of Calculus

For mathematical theories, it is not so clear if Popper's criteria applies. In principle, we

can say that the only way to "falsify" a math theory is proving his inconsistency

c. Ideal Gas Law

Ideal gas law: PV=rT

P is the pressure of the gas

V is the volume of the gas

R is the specific gas constant

T is the temperature of the gas

• For the test we measure two of the three variables, say the volume of the gas
container and temperature, use the law to calculate a predicted pressure, and
then compare the predicted gas pressure to its actual value.

HPS – Ka jhojhie Julian

 • If the predicted value is identical to the observed value, the evidence supports
the hypothesis.

• If it does not, then presumably the hypothesis is falsified.

• But in this test of the ideal gas law we needed to measure the volume of the gas
and its temperature.

– Measuring its temperature requires a thermometer, and employing a

thermometer requires us to accept one or more rather complex
hypotheses about how thermometers measure heat (auxiliary
hypothesis)

• If the predicted value of the pressure of the gas diverges from the observed
value,

– maybe our thermometer was defective,

– or that our hypothesis about how expansion of mercury in an enclosed

tube measures temperature change is false.

– To show that a thermometer was defective, because say the glass tube
was broken, presupposes another general hypothesis: thermometers with
broken tubes do not measure temperature accurately.

2. Discuss the relationship of entropy and second law of thermodynamics using the
concepts of under determination.

As we have discussed, the logical result of section 2 gives us a theoretical reason to doubt the universal
applicability of physical laws in situations involving high complexity. It is clear that statistical mechanics
is a field of interest in this context, due to the potential complexity factor involved when linking this
theory to thermodynamics and other macroscopic theories. Entropy may be defined information
theoretically, and there are no logical problems with its definition on the micro level, for simple systems.
However, when the well-known conclusion concerning increasing total entropy in the universe is proved
in the traditional way, one uses thermodynamic postulates concerning macroscopically defined
thermodynamic coordinates or physical assumptions equivalent to such postulates. Such
thermodynamic postulates are based on empirical evidence, but of course all experiments conducted
have been done in situations with a logical complexity far below the levels in which underdetermination
of the kind we are discussing here, can occur. Although the potential logical complexity associated with
macro scale systems is large when considering the jump from Planck scale, many macro systems are of
course structurally much simpler. The logical result of section 2 gives a theoretical reason to doubt the
validity of these postulates for some systems of sufficiently high complexity. Of course, an obvious
candidate for such a sufficiently complex system would again be the human nervous system.
But, one may then rightfully ask, if there really may occur processes violating one of the commonly
accepted thermodynamic postulates, so that there may exist, for instance, irreversible processes in
which the total change in entropy is not positive, why has nothing of this sort been observed in

HPS – Ka jhojhie Julian

connection with the actions of human beings? A first answer would be that in order to actually observe
such a thing, one would probably need to tackle the complexity of the processes within the human body
on a micro level. It is fair to say that nothing remotely similar to that has ever been done. More
importantly, there are good reasons to believe that actually observing a case where one of the
thermodynamic postulates breaks down in this way, is impossible even in principle. The reason is simply
that we are dealing with underdetermination, not overdetermination. This may naturally mean that the
thermodynamics of the real world is consistent with standard thermodynamics theory and statistical
physics when it comes to observations. However, given that there still are free physical maneuvering
spaces, we might get the impression that in the long run, things do not develop as we would expect
when taking into account, say, the principle of increasing total entropy. On the other hand, we would
not be able to single out a concrete process which violates the physical laws in question, the reason
being that the physical time development of the physical system we consider, is underdetermined by
these laws, and therefore compatible with the laws when it comes to observations which can actually be
performed. This physical situation would form a perfect analogy to the fact that the absolute
undecidability argument for the sentence D of section 2 cannot be formalized.
Reasoning this way we obtain, in particular, a possible theoretical explanation of the fact that physical
processes associated with living organisms and other complex systems in the long run does not seem to
really confirm with the principle of increasing total entropy. Contrary to this principle, the universe has
developed complex, apparently low-entropy structures. Rejecting the general validity of the increasing
entropy principle also means that theories in e.g. cosmology where this principle is used as a
premise, may be considered irrelevant.

3. Enumerate and explain the Dimensions of Scientific Realism.

 Metaphysical – idea that the world exists outside of our minds
 Semantic – literal interpretation of scientific claims made about the world. Any claims
should be stated as fact, whether true or not.
 Epistemological – theoretical claims constitute knowledge of the world

HPS – Ka jhojhie Julian