Difference between revisions of "The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015)"
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
|Accepted From Day=1 | |Accepted From Day=1 | ||
|Accepted From Approximate=No | |Accepted From Approximate=No | ||
| − | |Acceptance Indicators= | + | |Acceptance Indicators=The proposition became ''de facto'' accepted by the community at that time together with the whole [[The Theory of Scientific Change|theory of scientific change]]. |
|Still Accepted=Yes | |Still Accepted=Yes | ||
|Accepted Until Approximate=No | |Accepted Until Approximate=No | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 16:05, 16 February 2017
This is an answer to the question Tautological Status of The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) that states "Barseghyan's original second law is tautological."
The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological was formulated by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015.1 It is currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available answer to the question.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
| Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | The proposition became de facto accepted by the community at that time together with the whole theory of scientific change. | Yes |
Question Answered
The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015) is an attempt to answer the following question: Is Barseghyan's original second law a tautology?
See Tautological Status of The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) for more details.
Description
According to Barseghyan's initial position, "the second law is not a law in the traditional sense, for normally a law is supposed to have some empirical content, i.e. its opposite should be conceivable at least in principle. Obviously, the second law is a tautology, since it follows from the definition of employed method".1p. 129, footnote
Reasons
No reasons are indicated for this theory.
If a reason supporting this theory is missing, please add it here.
Questions About This Theory
There are no higher-order questions concerning this theory.
If a question about this theory is missing, please add it here.
