LOV and LTV

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

LOV and LTV
by Justin Schwartz
05 February 2002 19:49 UTC


>
>Charles writes:
> > Can we get into a little more what a heuristic is ?  Seems to be a sort
>of
>ok device for guiding scientific enquire, but sort of not a fulfledged
>...what ? Theoretical concept ?   What is the term for other types of ideas
>( that are more than heuristic ) that are used in scientific or economic
>theories ?

"Theory," "law," "variable," etc.

^^^^^^^^
CB: Lets talk more about scientific laws. Here's Einstein's statement of the "first" law of physics.


Albert Einstein (1879*1955).  Relativity: The Special and General Theory.  1920.


IV.  The Galileian System of Co-ordinates


AS is well known, the fundamental law of the mechanics of Galilei-Newton, which is known as the law of inertia, can be stated thus: A body removed sufficiently far from other bodies continues in a state of rest or of uniform motion in a straight line. This law not only says something about the motion of the bodies, but it also indicates the reference-bodies or systems of co-ordinates, permissible in mechanics, which can be used in mechanical description. The visible fixed stars are bodies for which the law of inertia certainly holds to a high degree of approximation. Now if we use a system of co-ordinates which is rigidly attached to the earth, then, relative to this system, every fixed star describes a circle of immense radius in the course of an astronomical day, a result which is opposed to the statement of the law of inertia. So that if we adhere to this law we must refer these motions only to systems of co-ordinates relative to which the fixed stars do not move in a cir!
cle. A system of co-ordinates of which the state of motion is such that the law of inertia holds relative to it is called a "Galileian system of co-ordinates." The laws of the mechanics of Galilei-Newton can be regarded as valid only for a Galileian system of co-ordinates.


^^^^^^^^

CB: Seems to me that Marx's law of value is just as fulfledged as the law. It generates only ordinal, not cardinal, quantitative predictions. The law has a limited application,etc.

Also, in the above "law", "theory", "variable" are not "theoretical concepts" in the sense of what "value" would be in a scientific theory.  "Force" would be a theoretical concept that is in a corresponding role to "value" in the theory of mechanics.