Responsables : Nadine de Courtenay, Olivier Darrigol, Sara Franceschelli, Jan Lacki
PROGRAMME 2016-2017
Séances le mardi, 17:00–19:00, en salle Malevitch, 483A, bâtiment Condorcet,
Université Paris Diderot, 4, rue Elsa Morante, 75013 Paris – plan d’accès.
11 octobre
Christian Joas (Université Ludwig Maximilian, Munich)
Quantum many-body physics in the 1950s.
22 novembre
Andreas Hüttemann (Université de Cologne)
Causal explanation, metaphysical explanation and the part-whole-relation.
10 janvier 2017
Jos Uffink (Université du Minnesota)
Schrödinger’s work on entanglement and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox before 1935.
17 janvier 2017
Jean Seidengart (Université de Paris-Ouest Nanterre)
Duhem et les limites de son phénoménisme : la théorie physique peut-elle se contenter de « sauver les phénomènes » ?
24 janvier
Martin Niss (Université de Roskilde)
A Mathematician doing physics : Mark Kac and phase transitions in the 1960s.
14 mars
Tilman Sauer (Université Johannes Gutenberg, Mayence)
The Stern-Gerlach experiment revisited.
21 mars
Daniel Jon Mitchell (Université d’Aix-la- Chapelle)
"The etherealisation of common sense" ? J.D. Everett, James Thomson and nineteenth-century mathematics of measurement.
13 juin
Eran Tal (McGill University, Canada)
Measurement, Computer Simulation and Observational Grounding.
Recent studies have argued that, under certain circumstances, a computer simulation can produce results that are as evidentially reliable as the results of calibrated measurement procedures (Morrison 2009 ; Parker 2015 ; Lusk 2016). A common objection is that measurement results are closer to raw observations than simulation results, where ‘closeness’ is understood in terms of causal connection, structure preservation, or inferential simplicity. I show that none of these senses of ‘closeness’ entail the supposed epistemic privilege of measurement. Building on recent work by Bas van Fraassen (2008 ; 2012) and Kent Staley (2012), I propose a novel view of the observational grounding of measurement that appeals to coherence between theory and instrumentation. According to this view, nothing in principle prevents computer simulations from attaining a level of evidential reliability similar to that of calibrated measurement procedures, but in practice very few simulations can currently be said to attain this level.