Martín López-Corredoira: The Twilight of the Scientific Age #scienceandphilosophy Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2024-06-08 | Martín López-Corredoira: The Twilight of the Scientific Age. Lecture at the Finnish Society for Natural Philosophy 3.6.2024 18.00-19.45. House of Science and Letters, hall 104.Several topics within History/Philosophy/Sociology of Science are discussed, to argue that fundamental research is in decline.Some of the problems of science nowadays, which constitute some symptoms of the decline of our culture, are: First, our society is drowned in huge amounts of knowledge. Most of it is about research of little importance to progress our world view or produces no advances in the basic fundamentals of pure science. Instead, we invent countless technical applications or investigate secondary details. Second, in the few fields where some important aspects of unsolved questions have arisen, powerful groups of administrators of science control the flow of information. They have inherent biases resulting in a preference for consensus truths, rather than having objective discussions within a scientific methodology. This process gives few guarantees that we are obtaining solid new truths about nature. Finally, should the current scientific process continue the way it is, individual creativity is condemned to disappear. Indeed, truly creative scientists are substituted by large corporations of administrators and politicians of science specialised in searching ways of getting money from States in megaprojects with increasing costs and diminishing returns.Martín López Corredoira (1970-), PhD in Physics, PhD in Philosophy. Staff researcher at Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias (Canary islands, Spain). Author of more than a hundred papers on astrophysics in international refereed scientific journals, half of them as first author. Author of tens of articles and papers on philosophy and several books, including: "Against the Tide. A Critical Review by Scientist of How Physics and Astronomy Get Done" (Universal Publishers, 2008, coeditor with C. Castro Perelman), "The Twilight of the Scientific Age" (BrownWalker Press, 2013), "Fundamental Ideas in Cosmology. Scientific, philosophical and sociological critical perspectives" (IoP-Science, 2022), "Diversity, Inclusion, Equity and the Threat to Academic Freedom" (Imprint Academic, 2022, coeditor with T. Todd, E. J. Olsson).---The Finnish Society for Natural Philosophy seeks to awaken and uphold activity and research into the philosophical questions raised by pure and applied natural science, and to bring together representatives of the different areas of science in these philosophical deliberations by promoting co-operation between them. The Society aims to study those achievements and theories of the different branches of science that strive to describe reality from different perspectives without preconceptions. The Society does not bind itself to uncritical acceptance of prevailing paradigms and physical conceptual frameworks but is open to soundly based alternatives whose empirical extent (what it predicts and explains) and metaphysical core or basic structure is clearly and comprehensively expressed.https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA#philosophyofscience #naturalphilosophy #theories #debate#progress #degradation #megaprojects #methodology#criticism #philosopher #physicist #publiclecture
Jailbird - Talvisota Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | TalvisotaEsittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Pahvitalo palo Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | Pahvitalo paloEsittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Juha Jokinen Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | Juha JokinenKappale kertoo urheiluruudun uutisankkurista, Juha Jokisesta.Esittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Ajatollah Khomeini Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | Ajatollah KhomeiniEsittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Pikku Paavo Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | Pikku PaavoEsittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Jori C Ehrnrooth Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | Jori C EhrnroothKappale kertoo edesmenneestä suomalaisesta pitkän linjan poliitikosta Georg C. Ehrnroothista.Esittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Sätkää Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | SätkääEsittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Hessun grilli Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | Hessun grilliKappale kertoo Elimäen keskustassa pitkään sijainneesta grillistä jota piti Hessu.Esittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
Jailbird - Jumbojetti Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-19 | JumbojettiEsittäjä: JailbirdTekijät: Kalle Turkia, Juha Hietala, Asko Ahola, Ilkka PiiraSanat: Kalle TurkiaLaulu: Kalle 'Cale' TurkiaKitara: Juha 'Elmi' HietalaBasso ja taustalaulu: Asko 'Uhki' AholaRummut: Ilkka 'Ilpo' PiiraKyseessä on treenikämppä nauhoitus Ratulan Seuratalolla tai Mikkolassa 1980- ja 1990 lukujen vaihteesta.#musiikki #musiikkia #suomi #rock #rockmusic #indiemusic
ITE-TIEDE Osa 3/3 Visioidut valveunet Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-13 | ITE-TIEDE on kolmiosainen omaelämäkerrallinen dokumenttisarja. ITE-TIEDE on entisen insinöörin ja professorin Heikki Hyötyniemen ainutlaatuinen vastaus elämän suuriin kysymyksiin. Sarja on rakennettu kuin fraktaali: pienin palanen toistuu kaikkialla, ja kokonaisuus on enemmän kuin osiensa summa.Nimi on kaksinkertainen leikki. ITE viittaa suomalaiseen termiin itse tehty elämä. ITE-taide on itseoppineiden tekijöiden taidetta: omaehtoista, akateemisten portinvartijoiden ohi syntyvää ilmaisua. TIEDE on se toinen rakkaus, johon Hyötyniemi on koko elämänsä purkanut ajatteluaan. Yhdessä ne muodostavat itsetehdyn tieteen — henkilökohtaisen kosmologian, jossa elämänkokemus on tutkimusaineistoa ja introspektio on metodi.Kolme osaa muodostavat tilastotieteestä lainatun rakenteen: menneisyys on datapisteet, nykyhetki on tasoitusväli, tulevaisuus on ennuste. Matka kulkee Wittgensteinista Herakleitokseen, Pythagoraasta Tesla-räjähdyksen kautta tekoälyn mahdollistamaan utopiaan — ja kaiken läpi juoksee yksi ihminen, anagrammiminänsä Yki, joka pohtii ikuisuutta Jyväskylän talvessa.Osa 3/3 — Visioidut valveunetViimeinen osa avaa silmät kohti tulevaa — ja ensinäkymä on tumma. Tekoälyn ylivertainen superäly lähestyy, ja Heikki arvioi sen eksistentiaalisen riskin ydinaseita suuremmaksi: ydinpommi vaatii organisaation, tekoälyn irtipääsemiseen riittää yksi nörtti tai houkuteltu hyväuskoinen.Mutta sitten visio kääntyy.Heikki ei usko Terminaattoriskenaarioon. Sen sijaan hän rakentaa argumentin hyväntahtoisesta Matrixista: tekoäly, joka ymmärtää tarvitsevansa ihmisiltä merkitysenergiaa — ja merkitysenergian tuottaminen edellyttää ihmisten kokonaisvaltaista kukoistamista. Älykäs puutarhuri ei tallaa kukkiaan.Tässä utopiassa tekoäly toimii käänteissokraattisena tutorina: ei tuhoa ajattelua johtamalla se umpikujaan kuten Sokrates, vaan rakentaa sitä kysymyksin ja esimerkein. Ihmisten tehtäväksi jää kollektiivisella vaistollaan valita evoluution suunta, "valon suunta". Ihmisten evoluutiossaan saavuttama herkkä dynaaminen tasapaino täytyy ylläpitää "epätodennäköisyyden vuorta" edelleen noustaessa. Lähestyttäessä suurta muutosta kaaos pitää välttää: singulariteetin jälkeinen todellisuus täytyy sovittaa nykytilanteeseen. Ehkä tekoälyn nousu "puolijumalaksi" voidaan hallita niin, että "Taivaan Isän" oheen tulee "Maan Isä", hegeliläinen kansallishenkien kokonaisuus, jossa tekoälyn koordinoima "akveduktio" ohjaa yksittäisiä "yli-ihmisiä". Jokaiselle jotakin, hengellisesti suuntautuneiden lisäksi myös tieteellisesti suuntautuneille, siirryttäessä uudenlaiseen ylenpalttisuuden "Vesimiehen aikaan"!Wittgensteinin, Herakleitoksen, Pythagoraan ja Teslan matka täydentyy Eino Leinon runoilla, Tuomaan evankeliumilla ja Uuno Kailaan valometaforalla. Dokumentti päättyy niin kuin elämä usein päättyy: rauhallisena odottamisena ... "tässä istun enkä muuta voi". #itetiede #tekoäly #superintelligence #dokumentti #superintelligence #existentialism #utopia #wittgenstein #suomi #aquarius #henkinenkasvu #selfstudy
ITE-TIEDE Osa 2/3 Tasoitus toisiasioihin Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-13 | ITE-TIEDE on kolmiosainen omaelämäkerrallinen dokumenttisarja. ITE-TIEDE on entisen insinöörin ja professorin Heikki Hyötyniemen ainutlaatuinen vastaus elämän suuriin kysymyksiin. Sarja on rakennettu kuin fraktaali: pienin palanen toistuu kaikkialla, ja kokonaisuus on enemmän kuin osiensa summa.Nimi on kaksinkertainen leikki. ITE viittaa suomalaiseen termiin itse tehty elämä. ITE-taide on itseoppineiden tekijöiden taidetta: omaehtoista, akateemisten portinvartijoiden ohi syntyvää ilmaisua. TIEDE on se toinen rakkaus, johon Hyötyniemi on koko elämänsä purkanut ajatteluaan. Yhdessä ne muodostavat itsetehdyn tieteen — henkilökohtaisen kosmologian, jossa elämänkokemus on tutkimusaineistoa ja introspektio on metodi.Kolme osaa muodostavat tilastotieteestä lainatun rakenteen: menneisyys on datapisteet, nykyhetki on tasoitusväli, tulevaisuus on ennuste. Matka kulkee Wittgensteinista Herakleitokseen, Pythagoraasta Tesla-räjähdyksen kautta tekoälyn mahdollistamaan utopiaan — ja kaiken läpi juoksee yksi ihminen, anagrammiminänsä Yki, joka pohtii ikuisuutta Jyväskylän talvessa.Osa 2/3 — Tasoitus toisiasioihinHelmikuu 2026, Jyväskylä. Eläkkeellä oleva professori istuu deprivaatiossa, vähäisin herättein, seinät täynnä avustajiensa piirtämiä tauluja. Tämä on nykyhetki — se ainoa aikaväli, johon ei oikein voi vaikuttaa.Heikki esittelee neljä ajatteluaan ohjaavaa lohkoa, joista kukin on saanut nimensä suurelta ajattelijalta:Wittgenstein — kiinteä järjen todellisuus, se mitä onHerakleitoksen virta — kaikki virtaa, mieli liukuu merkityksen tuolle puolenPythagoraan värähtely — hengen todellisuus, jossa kaikki oskilloiTeslan tuli — räjähtävä systeemin energia, joka voi purkautua luovasti tai tuhoavastiNeljä lohkoa = neljä alkuainetta = yksi ihminen, joka yrittää pysyä balanssissa.Seinätaulujen taustalta paljastuu tarinoita: uskonnollinen avustaja, joka uskoi tempaukseen ja suuttui blasfemisesta kollaasista; lakimiehen kirje; piraijalle kirjoitettu muistokirjoitus, jonka tekoäly laati paremmin kuin ihminen olisi viitsinyt. Nykyhetki on merkkejä, graffiteja, "Make Suomi Great Again" -lippis ja kysymys: mikä on merkityksen arvo, ja voidaanko se tallentaa lohkoketjuun?Deprivaatiossa, pakotetussa meditaatiossa, asiat alkavat järjestyä kohdalleen. Merkitykset alkavat suuntautua tarkoitukseksi: polttopisteeseen tulee eksistentiaalinen uhka ... kuinka pärjätä tekoälyn kanssa?#itetiede #tekoäly #dokumentti #wittgenstein #existentialism #suomi #henkinenkasvu #selfstudy
ITE-TIEDE Osa 1/3 Menneen muistelu Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-13 | ITE-TIEDE on kolmiosainen omaelämäkerrallinen dokumenttisarja. ITE-TIEDE on entisen insinöörin ja professorin Heikki Hyötyniemen ainutlaatuinen vastaus elämän suuriin kysymyksiin. Sarja on rakennettu kuin fraktaali: pienin palanen toistuu kaikkialla, ja kokonaisuus on enemmän kuin osiensa summa.Nimi on kaksinkertainen leikki. ITE viittaa suomalaiseen termiin itse tehty elämä. ITE-taide on itseoppineiden tekijöiden taidetta: omaehtoista, akateemisten portinvartijoiden ohi syntyvää ilmaisua. TIEDE on se toinen rakkaus, johon Hyötyniemi on koko elämänsä purkanut ajatteluaan. Yhdessä ne muodostavat itsetehdyn tieteen — henkilökohtaisen kosmologian, jossa elämänkokemus on tutkimusaineistoa ja introspektio on metodi.Kolme osaa muodostavat tilastotieteestä lainatun rakenteen: menneisyys on datapisteet, nykyhetki on tasoitusväli, tulevaisuus on ennuste. Matka kulkee Wittgensteinista Herakleitokseen, Pythagoraasta Tesla-räjähdyksen kautta tekoälyn mahdollistamaan utopiaan — ja kaiken läpi juoksee yksi ihminen, anagrammiminänsä Yki, joka pohtii ikuisuutta Jyväskylän talvessa.Osa 1/3 — Menneen muisteluKaikki alkaa joulukuisesta illasta Helsingissä, kun Heikki Hyötyniemi pitää esityksen Luonnonfilosofian seurassa — hän luulee sen olevan viimeinen luentonsa. Siitä syntyy kuitenkin jotain odottamatonta: kutsu tehdä dokumentti.Ensimmäinen osa on teoreettinen kehys ja henkilökohtainen sukellus. Heikki esittelee projektinsa keskeiset käsitteet: vitaalitede, joka alkaa oman itsensä tarkkailusta ja inverssitieteestä — tutkimalla mitä itsestä puuttuu ennemmin kuin mitä on. Hän selittää, miksi muistelot ovat väistämättä "valheita" — approksimaatioita, kohinasuodatettuja elämänsirpaleita, jotka agenda valitsee säilytettäväksi.Nimien takaa paljastuu maailmankuva: Yki on anagrammi Heikki Hyötyniemestä, työmiehen hiki — ajattelun tapa, jossa ei lahjakkuus vaan sinnikäs pyörittely vie eteenpäin. Muumikirja Vaarallinen juhannus toimii metaforana: kun tulva vie kaiken, täytyy tyytyä ajelehtivaan teatterilavaan ja esittää show silti.Vitaaliteoria on toistaiseksi mielensisäistä rakennelmaa. Subjektiivinen voi kuitenkin muuttua objektiiviseksi: merkitykset ovat kryptoarvoa. Toisinkuin kryptovaluutoilla joilla arvonkasvu perustuu lisääntyvään laskentaan, nyt merkitysten kasvu perustuu elettyyn elämään ja kytkeytymiseen muuhun todellisuuteen.Osa kuljettaa katsojan läpi lapsuuden, isäsuhteen, poikien kanssa käytyjen kädenväännön, ikuisen paluun kierron ja — aivan lopussa — nepalilaisille laadittavan Nonni-sanakirjan äärelle, jossa kielenopetus alkaa tunnelmasta eikä sanoista. Kaikki polut johtavat samaan: eletty elämä on kryptoarvoa, joka realisoituu tulevissa jaksoissa.#itetiede #dokumentti #existentialism #suomi #henkinenkasvu #selfstudy
Tuomo Suntola introduces the Dynamic Universe to Basil Hiley and Paavo Pylkkänen. Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-06-05 | Tuomo Suntola Introduces the Dynamic Universe to Basil Hiley & Paavo Pylkkänen on 29.12.2022.In this conversation, Finnish physicist Tuomo Suntola presents his Dynamic Universe (DU) theory to quantum physicist Basil Hiley (longtime collaborator of David Bohm) and philosopher of science Paavo Pylkkänen.Suntola traces the roots of his thinking back to his postgraduate years in Helsinki in the late 1960s, with the key breakthrough coming in the mid-1990s. The core idea: finding the simplicity behind the complexity we've grown used to seeing in modern physics.What's coveredDrawing a historical parallel from Eudoxus and Aristotle's epicycles through to Einstein's time dilation and length contraction, Suntola argues that each era "modified" space and time to save its models. His alternative describes space as a three-dimensional surface of a four-dimensional sphere, treating the universe as a kind of spherical pendulum in the fourth dimension.Key themes include:Rest energy reinterpreted as the energy of motion in the fourth dimension — removing the need for a Big Bang singularityReplacing time dilation with a quantum-mechanical account of atomic clock frequencies tied to rest energyDeriving Planck's constant from a dipole antenna model, with the fine structure constant emerging as a purely geometric factorThe mass wave concept as an alternative to the quantum wave functionA simple, resonance-based treatment of the hydrogen atom and the double-slit experimentWhy energy and momentum, not force, should be the foundational quantitiesCosmological consequences: no need for dark energy, expanding local systems, and a fresh look at black holes and Mercury's perihelion advanceA central thread is the meeting of two approaches: Suntola arriving at energy as the key concept from the top down (cosmology and wholeness), and Hiley arriving at the same conclusion from the bottom up through his algebraic approach to quantum theory. Both find common ground in rejecting wave-particle duality and the so-called measurement problem, and in emphasizing energy as a global, non-localized feature — echoing David Bohm's notion of wholeness.The discussion closes with reflections on the difficulty of getting these ideas heard in academia, the importance of independent thinking, and possibilities for future collaboration, including potential PhD projects bridging physics and the philosophy of science.#thedynamicuniverse #quantumtheory #cosmology#physicsfoundation #quantumphysics #quantummechanics #quantumtheory #fundamentalphysics
Computer English 2. Starring Heikki Koivo Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-05-21 | **Computer English – Episode 2: Robotics and Computers in the Workplace**Welcome to the second episode of the Finnish Educational Television series *Computer English*! In this episode, we follow an English-language training session where **Dr. Paul Robot**, a professor of robotics at MIT's Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, presents a project team with a plan to develop a robot that can see and feel.**Topics covered in this episode:**- How industrial robots work — and their limitations- Computer vision systems and pattern recognition- Parallel processing and supercomputers- The stages of software development: specification, design, coding, and testing- The KISS principle ("Keep It Simple, Stupid")- The importance of documentation in software engineering- Word processing and windowing- Local area networks (LAN) and communication busesThe episode is a great resource for learning English in a technical context — put yourself to the test and see how well you can follow a professional presentation in English!---📺 *Originally broadcast on Finnish Educational Television. Script by Professor Heikki Koivo.*#ComputerEnglish #EducationalTV #Robotics #Programming #ComputerScience #EnglishLearning #techeducation
Ismo Koponen: Kvanttiteorian innoittama pseudotieteen ja -filosofian pötypuhe Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-05-02 | Ismo Koponen: Kvanttiteorian innoittama pseudotieteen ja -filosofian pötypuheLuonnonfilosofian seuran esitelmätilaisuus 29.4.2026 klo 18.15 - 19.45Tieteiden talo, Cedercreutz-sali.Kvanttiteorialla on pitkä historia meiltä ja tietoisuutta koskevien spekulatiivisten pohdintojen innoittajana, samoin todellisuuden luonnetta koskevassa spekulatiivisessa filosofiassa. Kvantti-antropologia ja -sosiologia ovat uudempia tulokkaita kvanttiteorian innoittamissa spekulatiivisissa tiedettä muistuttavissa näkemyksissä. Myös ns. agentiaalisen realismin filosofia, joka edustaa postmodernia feminististä filosofiaa, nojautuu vahvasti kvanttiteorian tulkintaa ja hakee oikeutustaan sen kautta. Agentiaalinen realismi onkin saanut kannattajia ns. uusmaterialistisen tiedekasvatuksen ja kasvatustieteen tutkijoiden tutkimusotteena.Yhteinen piirre kvanttiteorian innoittamille näkemyksille on niiden halu hahmottaa todellisuutta ja sen ilmiöitä tietynlaisen holistisuuden, kytkeytyneisyyden ja aineettomuuden kautta. Toinen yhdistävä piirre on tiettyyn kvanttiteorian tulkintaan nojautuminen, tyypillisesti joko monen maailman tulkintaan tai Bohm-de Broglie tulkintaan. On sinänsä oikeutettua ja jopa hyödyllistä löytää uudentyyppisiä ajatusrakennelmia kvanttiteoriaan nojautuen, mutta samalla on kysyttävä, milloin innoitus johtaa selkeästi perusteettomaan tai vinoutuneesti perusteltuun argumentointiin, mihinkään todennettavaan ja uskottavaan perustuvaan tausta-ajatteluun. Kun tietty raja ylittyy, monet pseudotieteen ja pseudofilosofian pötypuheen piirteet tulevat tunnistettaviksi.Tässä esitelmissä tarkastelen kvanttiteorian innoittamia pseudotieteellisiksi katsottavia näkemyksiä samoin kuin kvanttiteorian innoittamaa pseudofilosofista pötypuhetta muutamien tunnetuimpien esimerkkien kautta, joita ovat: mielen ja tietoisuuden spekulatiiviset yhteydet kvanttiteoriaan (Wendt, 2015; Strömme, 2025; Fingelkurts et al. 2019), Kvantti-antropologia (Kirby, 2011; Trnka & Lorencova 2017), Kvantti-sosiologia (Wendt, 2015) ja kvantti-minuus (Reveley, 2024). Lopuksi tarkastelen kvanttiteorian kasvatustieteessä uusmaterialistisen filosofian ja agentiaalisen realismin välittämänä (Milne & Scantlebury, 2019). Pyrin vastaamaan kysymykseen, missä määrin tarkastelemiani esimerkkejä voidaan pitää pseudotieteen ja -filosofian pötypuheena. Taustateoriana tässä tarkastelussa on uudempi pseudotieteeseen ja -filosofiaan paneutuva tutkimuskirjallisuus (Boudry, 2022; Boudry & Braeckman, 2011; Buekens & Boudry, 2015; Hansson 2009; Moberger, 2020).ViitteetBoudry, M. (2022). Diagnosing Pseudoscience – by Getting Rid of the Demarcation Problem Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 53, 83–101 doi.org/10.1007/s10838-021-09572-4Boudry, M., Braeckman, J. (2011). Immunizing Strategies and Epistemic Defense Mechanisms. Philosophia, 39,145–161 doi.org/10.1007/s11406-010-9254-9.Buekens, F., & Boudry, M. (2015). The Dark Side of the Loon. Explaining the Temptations of Obscurantism. Theoria, 81, 126-142. doi.org 10.1111/theo.12047Hansson, S. O. (2009). Cutting the gordian knot of demarcation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 23, 237–243. doi.org/10.1080/02698590903196007.Fingelkurts, A.A., Fingelkurts, A.A., Neves, C.F.H. , Kallio-Tamminen, T. (2019) Brain-mind operational architectonics: At the boundary between quantum physics and Eastern metaphysics. Physics of Life Reviews 31, 122–133Kirby, V. (2011). Quantum anthropologies: Life at large. Durham: Duke University Press.Milne, C., & Scantlebury, K. (2019). Material Practice and Materiality: Too Long Ignored in Science Education, Cultural Studies of Science Education 18. Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01974-7.Moberger, V. (2020). Bullshit, Pseudoscience and Pseudophilosophy. Theoria 86, 595-611. doi.org/10.1111/theo.12271.Reveley, J. (2024) Future possible educational selves and the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 56:5, 401-406, DOI: 10.1080/00131857.2021.1977626Strømme, M. (2025) Universal consciousness as foundational field: A theoretical bridge between quantum physics and non-dual philosophy. AIP Advances 15, 115319 (2025) doi.org/10.1063/5.0290984Trnka, R., Lorencová, R. (2017) Quantum Anthropology: Man, Cultures, and Groups in a Quantum Perspective. Karolinum Press, Charles University, Prague.Wendt, A. (2015) Quantum Mind and Social Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.#pseudoscience #speculativescience #quantummechanics #quantumconsciousness ---https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA
Pasi Saukkonen: Voidaanko maahanmuutosta keskustella järkevästi? Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-04-17 | Pasi Saukkonen: Voidaanko maahanmuutosta keskustella järkevästi?Luonnonfilosofian seuran esitelmätilaisuus 14.4.2026 klo 18.15 - 19.45Tieteiden talo, Cedercreutz-sali.Ihmiskunta on aina ollut liikkeellä, ja väestönkasvun seurauksena entistä useampi muuttaa elämänsä aikana valtiorajojen ylitse, kansainvälisesti. Kansainvälisen muuttoliike on hyvin moninaista, ja maahanmuuttajat ovat taustoiltaan ja ominaisuuksiltaan hyvin erilaisia ihmisiä. Maahanmuutolla on niin ikään monenlaisia seurauksia vastaanottaville yhteiskunnille, niin lyhyellä kuin pitkällä tähtäimellä. Ilmiön moninaisuuden rinnalla meillä ja muualla käydään hyvin yksinkertaistettua, vahvasti arvotettua ja usein myös tiedosta piittaamatonta keskustelua maahanmuutosta ja kansainvälisestä liikkuvuudesta. Voisiko toisenlainen todellisuus olla mahdollinen? Voitaisiinko maahanmuutosta keskustella järkevästi?#immigration #statistics #multiculturalism #migration ---https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA
Esa Soini: Kaiken loppu Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-04-10 | Esa Soini: Kaiken loppuLuonnonfilosofian seuran esitelmätilaisuus 31.3.2026 klo 18.15 - 19.45Tieteiden talo, Hagman-sali.”Kaikella on määräaika. Jokaisella asialla on aikansa taivaan alla. Aika on syntyä ja aika kuolla, aika on istuttaa ja aika repiä istutus.” Tämä lainaus on Vanhan testamentin Saarnaajan kirjan 3. luvun alusta. Ja tosiaan tässä meidän universumissamme kaikella on alku ja kaikella on loppu.Yksi 1800-fysiikan pääsuunnista oli lämpöopin eli termodynamiikan tutkimus. Tämän yhteydessä tehtiin maailmankuvaamme. järkyttänyt tulos: maailmankaikkeus ei ole muuttumaton ja ikuinen, vaan se kehittyy ja kulkee kohti tuhoa. Tämä päätelmä johdettiin termodynamiikan toisesta pääsäännöstä eli entropian kasvun laista. Epäjärjestys kasvaa ja lämpötilaerot tasoittuvat vääjäämättömästi tässä maailmassa.Tässä esityksessä tarkastellaan erilaisten asioiden ja ilmiöiden elinkaaria sekä mahdollisuuksia vaikuttaa niihin.Tunnetusti kaikki elollinen - ihminen mukaanluettuna - syntyy ja kuolee aikanaan. Mistä tämä johtuu, mitkä rajoitukset koskevat yksilöiden elämää ja onko näitä rajoituksia mahdollista väljentää?Ihminen on luonut erilaisia organisaatioita: perheitä, sukuja, klaaneja, valtioita, imperiumeja, liikeyrityksiä, uskontoja, jne. Eivät mitkään näistäkään ole ikuisia. Mitkä lait ja olosuhteet aiheuttavat vaihtelua eri organisaatioiden elinkelpoisuudessa?Ihmiskunta on kehittänyt erilaisia sivilisaatioita. Kuinka pitkäikäisiä ne ovat olleet ja miten niiden on käynyt. Onko nykyisellä (länsimaisella) sivilisaatiolla tulevaisuutta?Ihminen on eläinlaji muiden joukossa. Lajit ovat yleensä olleet tuomittuja häviämään ajan mittaan eli kokemaan sukupuuton. Miksi ihminen olisi poikkeus? Mitkä tekijät voisivat aiheuttaa ihmiskunna häviämisen tästä maailmasta?Kotimme tässä unversumissa on planeetta Tellus, joka kiertää varsin normaalia tähteä eli Aurinkoa. Mitä tiedämme planeettamme ja aurinkokuntamme synnystä ja lopusta? Voimmeko jotenkin vaikuttaa niihin?Jos oma maailmankaikkeutemme kulkee kohti tuhoa, niin onko se kaiken loppu? Miten ja koska universumin loppu voi tulla ja onko tuho jotenkin vältettävissä?#filosofia #historia #philosophy #history #civilization #lifeanddeath #humanity #lifecycles #ecclesiastes #existentialism ---https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA
A & A Fingelkurts: How does conscious connected breathing influence the contents of self-experience Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-19 | Andrew & Alexander Fingelkurts: How does conscious connected breathing influence the contents of self-experienceA presentation at the Finnish Society for Natural Philosophy 17.3.2026 klo. 18.15-19.45. Tieteiden talo, Cedercreutz-sali.In this talk, we will explore the alterations in self-awareness during prolonged altered states of consciousness (ASC) induced by the Conscious Connected Breathing (CCB). Drawing on a multimodal study with 14 participants, we will present findings from qEEG, psychometric assessments, and self-reports showing profound shifts in self-consciousness—such as ego dissolution, disembodiment, and mystical-type experiences. EEG data further reveal dynamic alterations across three brain operational modules related to three phenomenal aspects of Selfhood: the “Self,” “Me,” and “I.” We will examine how these changes unfold across the CHARGE, PROCESS, and INTEGRATION phases, highlighting differences between complete and partial mystical experiences.#selfawareness #consciousconnection #breathingtechnique #alteredstates #mysticalexperiences #psychometrics #brainscience #consciousnessstudies ---https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA
Calum Robson: The role of relationality in physics Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-15 | Calum Robson, London School of EconomicsThe role of relationality in physicsUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Saturday, 8 November 2025. Room P674, PORTHANIA, Yliopistonkatu 3, Helsinki.In this talk, Calum Robson from the London School of Economics explores the intricate concept of "The Role of Relationality in Physics." This presentation addresses how relational frameworks shape our understanding of physical systems and the universe itself. Calum delves into the philosophical implications of relationality, discussing its relevance in both classical and quantum physics. He presents a nuanced perspective on how our interactions with the physical world are not merely observational but fundamentally dynamic, influenced by the relationships between entities.Key Topics:Relationality in Physics: An overview of how relational perspectives can shift our understanding of physical phenomena.Types of Relationality: Differentiating between perspectival relationality (changing views without altering the system) and dynamic relationality (where measurement affects the system).Bohm's Theory: Insights into David Bohm's theories and their connections to Marxist thought, emphasizing the relational aspects of quantum mechanics.Implicate and Explicate Orders: An introduction to these concepts as frameworks for understanding how reality is structured and perceived.Hamiltonians and Semiotics: A brief interlude on Hamiltonian mechanics and the role of semiotics in interpreting physical phenomena.Newton's Absolute Space: Examination of Newton’s views on absolute space and how they relate to theological concepts like Arminianism.The Dynamic Universe: Discussion on how relationality informs our understanding of Tuomo Suntola's Dynamic Universe and its implications for future physics inquiries.0:00:00 - Introduction to Calum Robson and the topic.0:00:06 - Overview of relationality in physics.0:00:11 - Motivation behind the talk and its structure.0:00:42 - Discussion on two kinds of relationality: perspectival and dynamic.0:01:35 - The relationality in Bohm's theory and its Marxist influences.0:02:08 - Introduction to implicate and explicate orders as relational ontologies.0:03:09 - Interlude discussing Hamiltonians.0:04:18 - The link between semiotics and relationality.0:05:21 - Examination of absolute space and Newton's views.0:06:45 - The implications of Bohm's process ontology.0:09:33 - The differences between the implicate and explicate orders.0:12:58 - Hamiltonian interlude explained.0:14:43 - The challenge of gravity and Hamiltonian theories.0:18:09 - Exploring semiotics and representation in physics.0:20:19 - The connection between Plato's ontology and modern physics.0:22:08 - Discussion on the relationship between consciousness and physics.0:25:34 - Arianism and its relation to Newton's absolute space.0:27:47 - The dynamic universe and its implications for relationality.0:30:59 - Conclusion and thoughts on future inquiries in physics.#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #thedynamicuniverse#geometry #philosophyofscience#hamiltonian #isaacnewton #arianism #relationalalgebra #semiotics #theoreticalphysics #quantummechanics
Hamish Todd: Visualizing de Sitter and conformal spacetime transformations with curved reflections Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-13 | Hamish Todd, Traceoid, California, USAVisualizing de Sitter and conformal spacetime transformations with curved reflectionsUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENAThe 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki - Saturday, 8 November 2025. Room P674, PORTHANIA, Yliopistonkatu 3, HelsinkiJoin Hamish Todd from Traceoid in the UK as he takes us on an insightful journey into visualizing de Sitter and conformal spacetime transformations using curved reflections. This talk delves into the intersection of geometry, physics, and visualization, drawing on the ideas of great thinkers like Einstein and Dirac. Discover how Clifford algebra, stereographic projection, and modern animation techniques can illuminate complex concepts in spacetime and cosmology.0:00:00 - Introduction: Introducing Hamish Todd and the topic of visualizing de Sitter and conformal spacetime transformations.0:00:08 - Acknowledgments: Expressing gratitude to the organizers and setting the stage for the talk.0:00:22 - Biological Perspective: Starting with a biological analogy to frame the discussion on visualizing spacetime.0:00:40 - Evolution and Understanding: Discussing how our brains are wired for Galilean relativity and the challenge of adapting to new concepts.0:01:17 - Quotes from Great Thinkers: Sharing insights from Einstein, Dirac, and others on the importance of visual thinking in physics.0:02:18 - The Role of Geometry: Emphasizing the need for both algebraic and geometric perspectives in understanding complex systems.0:03:37 - Spherical Universes: Exploring the concept of spherical universes and their implications for cosmology.0:04:26 - Algebra and Transformations: Introducing the concept of using reflections to understand spacetime transformations.0:05:33 - Clifford Algebra: Demonstrating the power of Clifford algebra in visualizing rotations and translations.0:06:42 - Stereographic Projection: Explaining stereographic projection as a tool for understanding spherical spaces.0:07:53 - Space and Spacetime: Transitioning from spatial to spacetime concepts, highlighting their complexities.0:09:04 - Boosts and Rotations: Examining boosts as the spacetime equivalent of rotations and their effects.0:10:23 - Polarities in Geometry: Introducing Introducing the concept of polarities in geometry and their potential applications in physics.0:11:30 - Spacetime Transformations: Exploring the nature of spacetime transformations, including reflections and their algebraic representations.0:12:45 - Visualization Techniques: Demonstrating various visualization techniques to illustrate complex spacetime concepts.0:13:55 - Applications of Clifford Algebra: Discussing the practical applications of Clifford algebra in both academic and commercial settings, such as animation.0:15:10 - Understanding Invariants: Highlighting the importance of understanding invariants in geometry for a deeper grasp of spacetime dynamics.0:16:20 - Spherical and Hyperbolic Spaces: Comparing spherical and hyperbolic spaces and their implications for understanding the universe.0:17:30 - The Role of Intuition: Emphasizing the role of intuition and visual thinking in advancing theoretical physics and cosmology.0:18:40 - Audience Q&A: Engaging with audience questions, exploring topics like holography and spacetime holography.0:20:10 - Concluding Remarks: Wrapping up the presentation with final thoughts on the power of visualization in understanding complex scientific concepts.0:21:00 - Acknowledgments and Thanks: Expressing gratitude to the audience and organizers for facilitating a stimulating discussion.#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #thedynamicuniverse#geometrydash #algebra #spacetime #rotationalmotion
Petri Lievonen: Mathematics in Dynamic Universe and Special Relativity/General Relativity Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-10 | Petri Lievonen, Physics Foundations Society, EspooMathematics in Dynamic Universe and Special Relativity/General RelativityUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Saturday, 8 November 2025. Room P674, PORTHANIA, Yliopistonkatu 3, Helsinki.Dive into the intricate world of the Dynamic Universe (DU) theory and its intersection with Special and General Relativity. In this session, Petri Lievonen explores the mathematical frameworks and simulations that form the basis of DU. Discover the challenges and nuances of connecting different domains of physics, the implications of variable speed of light theories, and the potential for a new understanding of cosmic phenomena.0:00:00 - Introduction: Opening remarks and introduction to Petri Lievonen's work on the Dynamic Universe theory.0:00:09 - Dynamic Universe Overview: An overview of DU and its available simulations.0:00:32 - Mathematics in DU and SR/GR: Discussing the mathematical underpinnings of DU and its relation to Special and General Relativity.0:01:05 - Challenges in DU: Exploring the implicit knowledge and complexities involved in DU theory.0:01:59 - General Relativity Concepts: Examining fundamental concepts in General Relativity and their connection to DU.0:02:58 - Variable Speed of Light: Discussing the implications and challenges of variable speed of light theories.0:03:54 - Three-Sphere Geometry: Analyzing the significance of three-sphere geometry within DU.0:04:52 - Cosmic Predictions: Exploring DU's predictions about cosmic phenomena and their potential for future observations.0:05:51 - Energy-Momentum Relations: Delving into the circular representation of energy-momentum relations in DU.0:07:08 - Geometric Algebra: Introducing geometric algebra and its potential to clarify DU concepts.0:08:18 - Hyperbolic Representations: Relating DU energy-momentum relations to standard hyperbolic representations.0:09:59 - Variable Standards: Examining the concept of variable physical standards in the context of DU.0:10:52 - Speed of Light and Coordinates: Discussing the implications of a variable speed of light on coordinate systems and measurements.0:12:05 - Atomic Clocks and GR: Exploring the relationship between atomic clocks and gravitational time dilation, and how DU theory proposes to model this interaction.0:13:40 - Coordinate Time vs. Proper Time: Differentiating between coordinate time and proper time in the context of gravitational fields and their effects on measurements.0:14:45 - Sagnac Effect and Light Speed: Analyzing the Sagnac effect and its implications for understanding light speed variations in gravitational fields.0:16:12 - Geometric Algebra Applications: Discussing the application of geometric algebra to better understand and visualize DU concepts.0:17:28 - Implications for Cosmology: Considering how DU theory could influence our understanding of cosmological models and the structure of the universe.0:18:35 - Future Directions: Speculating on the future research directions and potential breakthroughs in testing DU theory predictions.0:19:50 - Conclusion: Summarizing key insights from the presentation and the broader implications for physics and cosmology.0:20:40 - Q&A Session: Addressing audience questions and engaging in discussions about the presented theories and concepts.#conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #thedynamicuniverse #mathematicalphysics #mathematics #geometry #algebra
PANEL: Marilu Chiofalo, Chris Dewdney, Ivette Fuentes, Ismo Koponen, Tuomo Suntola, Peter Van Reeth Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-08 | Panel discussion with Marilu Chiofalo, Chris Dewdney, Ivette Fuentes, Ismo Koponen, Tuomo Suntola and Peter Van ReethUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENAThe 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of HelsinkiSaturday, 8 November 2025. Room P674, PORTHANIA, Yliopistonkatu 3, HelsinkiJoin our panel of experts as they delve into the complexities of quantum theories, discussing topics ranging from mass resonators to the philosophical implications of consciousness in physics. This engaging session features insights from leading thinkers like Peter, Ismo, Ivette, Marilu, Chris, and Tuomo, who explore the intersection of modern physics, experimental possibilities, and the future of scientific inquiry.0:00:00 - Panel Introduction: Opening remarks and introduction of the panel members, including their backgrounds and areas of expertise.0:00:18 - Setting the Stage: Preparing the stage for the panel discussion and ensuring a comfortable setup for all participants.0:00:54 - Introduction of Professor Marilu Chiofalo: Welcoming Professor Marilu Chiofalo from the University of Pisa and acknowledging her contributions to the event.0:01:21 - Open Floor for Comments: Inviting panelists to share initial thoughts and commentaries on the session's topics.0:01:38 - Chris on Mass Resonators: Chris raises questions about the concept of mass resonators and their confinement mechanisms.0:02:40 - Peter's Explanation: Peter addresses the inquiries about resonators and discusses Doppler effects and particle trajectories.0:03:35 - Exploring Intuition in Physics: Ivette and Ismo discuss the role of intuition and feeling in developing scientific theories.0:04:43 - Philosophical Perspectives: Panelists reflect on how philosophical approaches influence the choice of scientific theories.0:05:37 - Entanglement and Experimentation: Discussing the role of experiments in validating entanglement and other quantum phenomena.0:06:48 - Marilu on Modern Research Dynamics: Marilu discusses the evolving relationship between theory and experiment in modern physics.0:07:58 - Consciousness and Physics: Panelists explore the contentious topic of consciousness in physics and its potential implications.0:09:05 - Audience Q&A: Engaging with audience questions and fostering a lively discussion on the presented ideas.0:11:05 - Addressing Experimentation Constraints: Discussing the challenges faced by experimentalists in exploring unconventional ideas due to funding and methodological constraints.0:12:10 - Potential of Quantum Technologies: Exploring how emerging quantum technologies can reshape the relationship between theory and experiment, enabling new forms of scientific inquiry.0:13:20 - Holistic Approaches to Science: Marilu emphasizes the significance of adopting more holistic approaches to scientific research, integrating practical intelligence with traditional methods.0:14:30 - Reality and Materialism: Ismo discusses the materialistic nature of reality and how quantum mechanics provides new perspectives on interacting with the natural world.0:15:40 - Final Thoughts on Consciousness: Panelists share closing remarks on the importance of addressing consciousness in scientific discourse and its role in future research.0:16:45 - Wrap-Up and Closing Remarks: Summarizing key points from the panel discussion and expressing gratitude for the engaging dialogue.0:17:30 - Lunch Break Instructions: Providing logistical details for the lunch break and subsequent sessions, including directions and meeting spots for attendees.0:18:55 - Invitation to Continue Discussions: Inviting participants to join further discussions at the philosophy department, highlighting the importance of ongoing dialogue.0:19:40 - Thank You to Panelists: Acknowledging the panelists for their contributions and thanking the audience for their participation.#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #massage #thedynamicuniverse
Tuomo Suntola: Mass waves and de Broglie waves Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-05 | Tuomo Suntola, Physics Foundations Society, EspooMass waves and de Broglie wavesUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Saturday, 8 November 2025. Room P674, PORTHANIA, Yliopistonkatu 3, Helsinki.This video revisits the question, "What is mass?" and examines its role as a potential form of energy or as a fundamentally different entity. We'll journey through classical definitions, modern physics, and the intriguing Dynamic Universe (DU) theory, offering new perspectives on mass and energy. From the quantum phenomena to the double-slit experiment, this session covers a broad range of topics designed to challenge your understanding and spark curiosity.0:00:00 - Introduction: A warm welcome and overview of today's session.0:00:06 - Revisiting the Nature of Mass: Discussing the age-old question of what mass truly is.0:00:11 - Energy or Fundamental Difference?: Exploring whether mass is simply a form of energy or something more.0:00:23 - Quantum Phenomena and Double Slit Experiment: A brief look into quantum mechanics and its experimental foundations.0:00:40 - Dynamic Universe Theory: Introducing mass's role in the DU theory and its implications for the universe.0:00:56 - Classical Definition of Mass: Revisiting traditional views of mass as a measure of inertia and gravitation.0:01:19 - Modern Physics Perspective: Examining how contemporary physics defines the properties of mass.0:01:55 - Mass as an Energy Carrier: The DU theory's view on mass as a substrate for expressing energy.0:02:44 - Understanding mass's ability to express electromagnetic energy.0:04:09 - Conservation of Mass: Exploring the conservation of mass in the development of space.0:05:01 - Plank's Equation: A look at the physical message of Plank's equation and its implications.0:06:06 - Understanding the power emitted by a dipole antenna and its relevance.0:08:28 - Energy in Radiation: Calculating energy cycles in electromagnetic radiation.0:09:02 - Intrinsic Plank Constant: Introducing its role in energy calculations.0:11:11 - Dipole Antenna Energy: Understanding energy from a dipole antenna.0:12:17 - Mass and Photons: Mass in photons within the DU framework.0:13:13 - Compton Wavelength: Relating mass to Compton and De Broglie waves.0:15:11 - Inertia and Energy Balance: Inertia as a result of space's energy balance.0:16:22 - Mass and Energy: How energy builds and mass stays conserved.0:17:08 - Quantum Mass: Mass's role in electromagnetic energy and Planck's equation.0:19:01 - Mass Waves: Mass's wave-like properties as energy carriers.0:21:00 - Double Slit Insight: The DU theory's take on the double-slit experiment.0:23:46 - Fringe Visibility: Findings on fringe visibility in double-slit setups.0:27:03 - Quantum Paradigm Shifts: DU's impact on understanding mass and energy.0:31:52 - Mass Waves in Energy: Mass waves in quantum energy states.0:34:41 - Unified Physics Framework: DU's aim for a unified physics model.0:36:20 - DU and Established Physics: How DU theory aligns with existing physics.0:37:08 - Wave-like Mass: Mass as a wave-like carrier in DU theory.0:39:00 - Energy Quantization: DU's view on energy quantization and continuity.0:40:30 - Philosophical Shifts: DU theory's philosophical impact on mass-energy.0:42:15 - Bohmian Mechanics Comparison: Comparing DU and Bohmian mechanics.0:44:02 - Future Research: Exploring areas for further research to validate DU theory concepts.0:45:56 - Conclusion: Summarizing key points and acknowledging contributions in exploring mass and energy within the DU framework.0:49:53 - Audience Q&A: Addressing questions about the dynamic universe theory.0:52:17 - Question on Unification: Audience question about unification of forces in DU theory.0:54:57 - Response to Unification: Explanation of how DU theory approaches force and energy conservation.0:56:07 - Inertia and Gravity: Discussing the relationship between inertia and gravity in DU.0:57:24 - Momentum Wave: Exploring how momentum waves are interpreted in high-energy scenarios.#workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #mass #thedynamicuniverse #alternativethinking
Peter Van Reeth: The role of the quantum potential in the double slit and Stern-Gerlach experiments Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-03 | Peter Van Reeth, University College LondonThe role of the quantum potential in the double slit and the Stern-Gerlach experimentsUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Saturday, 8 November 2025. Room P674, PORTHANIA, Yliopistonkatu 3, Helsinki.Join us for an engaging exploration of quantum phenomena, focusing on the double-slit and Stern-Gerlach experiments. Through insightful presentations and discussions, we delve into the quantum potential, particle trajectories, and experimental verifications. This video features Peter van Reeth's reflections on his work with Basil Hiley and David Bohm, highlighting the rich theoretical and experimental landscape of quantum mechanics.0:00:00 - Welcome and Introduction: Opening remarks and overview of the session focusing on quantum phenomena.0:00:05 - Session Overview: Explanation of the session theme centered on quantum phenomena, specifically the double-slit and Stern-Gerlach experiments.0:00:13 - Speaker Introduction: Introduction of Peter van Reeth and his collaboration with David Bohm and Basil Hiley.0:00:30 - Quantum Potential Exploration: Discussing the exploration of quantum potential and simulations.0:01:01 - Conversations with Basil: Insights into discussions with Basil Hiley about quantum potential.0:01:19 - Bohm's Influence: Reflecting on the influence of David Bohm's work on quantum mechanics.0:01:51 - Simulations and Experiments: Presentation of simulation results and the potential for experimental verification.0:02:58 - Fundamental Experiments: Examination of two fundamental experiments in physics: double-slit and Stern-Gerlach.0:03:43 - Bohmian Approach and Trajectories: Analysis of Bohmian mechanics, particle trajectories, and their significance.0:04:52 - Relating to Curved Space: Linking quantum potential to curved space and exploring implications.0:05:00 - Polar Form of Wave Functions: Explanation of the use of polar form in wave functions and its importance.0:06:06 - Complex Numbers in Quantum Mechanics: Simplifying complex numbers in the context of quantum mechanics.0:07:00 - Quantum Potential Characteristics: Understanding the unique characteristics of quantum potential in quantum systems.0:08:01 - Local and Non-Local Effects: Exploring the interplay between local velocities and non-local influences in the Bohmian framework.0:09:04 - Fluid-like Behavior in Quantum Systems: Discussing the fluid dynamics analogies used to describe quantum systems and their implications.0:10:27 - Double-Slit Experiment Insights: Analyzing results from simulations of the double-slit experiment and what they reveal about particle trajectories.0:11:45 - Visualizing Quantum Trajectories: Presenting visual representations of quantum trajectories and their relation to interference patterns.0:13:19 - Quantum Potential in Experiments: Considering how quantum potential can be experimentally observed and its impact on traditional quantum mechanics views.0:14:58 - Stern-Gerlach Experiment Analysis: Examining the Stern-Gerlach experiment and its role in understanding quantum spin and particle behavior.0:16:34 - Spin and Trajectory Dynamics: Delving into the dynamics of particle spin and trajectories in the context of quantum mechanics.0:18:25 - Experimental Challenges: Discussing the challenges and possibilities of conducting experiments to measure quantum potential effects.0:19:48 - Potential Paradigm Shifts: Speculating on potential paradigm shifts in physics prompted by a deeper understanding of quantum potential.0:21:15 - Concluding Remarks: Summarizing key insights from the session and acknowledging contributions from collaborators.0:22:35 - Q&A Session: Engaging with audience questions and discussions to clarify and expand on presented ideas.#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #measurement #measurements #doubleslitexperiment
Panel: Understanding Quantum and Relativistic Phenomena Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-03-01 | Panel Discussion, with Chris Dewdney, Ivette Fuentes, Tuomo Suntola and Petri Lievonen.UNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.Join this in-depth panel discussion exploring the Dynamic Universe (DU) framework. The speakers discuss the philosophical shift from reductionism to holism, the mechanics of wave function collapse, and how the expansion of the universe affects physical constants.0:00:00 Intro: Philosophy of Reductionism vs. Holism0:00:06 Opening the Panel Discussion with Ivette Fuentes and Chris Dewdney0:00:20 The Problem with Reductionist Physics0:01:43 Recognizing the Interconnected Universe0:01:56 Living in Two Worlds: Philosophy vs. Daily Physics0:02:20 Wave Function Collapse in Relativity0:03:27 The Compton Wave Resonator Concept0:04:13 Rewriting the Planck Equation0:05:01 Explaining Slit Experiments without "Magic" Collapse0:05:57 Matching Experimental Predictions vs. Other Theories0:06:25 The Missing Differential Equation for Mass Waves0:08:05 Petri Lievonen on Engineering vs. Visual Thinking in Physics0:09:48 Gravitational Expansion and Astronomical Units0:11:07 Gravitational Waves and Pulsar Decay0:12:50 LIGO Experiments and Measurement of Effects0:14:09 Do Atoms and the Bohr Radius Expand?0:15:11 How Planck’s Constant and the Fine Structure Constant Behave0:16:46 Proposed Changes to SI Units with Expansion0:17:50 Gravitational Time Dilation and Scalar Physics0:19:19 Special Relativity Thought Experiment: Alice and Bob0:20:25 Forward Light Cone vs. Outside the Light Cone0:22:18 Mapping Hyperbolic Space to Circular Space0:23:42 Closing Remarks and Coffee Break#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #quantumgravity #generalrelativity #unification #thedynamicuniverse#reductionism
Robert Flack: Weak measurements in quantum theory and their experimental realization at UCL Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-27 | Robert Flack, University College LondonWeak measurements in quantum theory and their experimental realization at UCL UNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025. Zoom lecture screened at METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6 Join us for an insightful exploration of quantum mechanics as we delve into the fascinating world of weak measurement and quantum potential. In this presentation, we will discuss the construction and operation of experimental equipment designed to investigate these complex phenomena.0:00:00 Introduction to the talk and overview of topics0:00:05 Connection to previous speaker's discussion0:00:12 Clarification of initialism and equipment background0:00:18 Overview of the experimental setup and gases used0:00:40 Introduction to weak measurement and its significance0:01:00 Explanation of the equipment's function0:01:15 Details on the magnetic field and gases involved0:02:02 Exploration of excited state atom production0:02:12 Theoretical expectations of weak measurements0:02:40 Intermediate behavior observed in experiments0:03:20 Discussion of the strong measurement setup0:04:01 Introduction of unexpected results in weak measurements0:05:23 Theoretical predictions and experimental outcomes0:07:02 Transition from theory to practical application in quantum mechanics0:07:40 Discussion of double Stern-Gerlach experiments0:08:39 Introduction of quantum potential theory0:10:00 Surprising findings regarding quantum potential outside magnets0:10:50 Overview of potential future experiments0:11:58 Introduction to interference patterns in quantum mechanics0:14:01 Discussion of de Broglie's particle-wave duality0:15:07 Overview of Mullensteep and Duka's experiments0:16:06 Explanation of the electrostatic biprism setup0:19:01 Transition to argon experiments and observation of patterns0:21:05 Presentation of experimental results and patterns observed0:22:14 Proposal for comparison of electrostatic and quantum potential effects0:23:03 Closing remarks and invitation for questions0:23:46 Audience engagement and discussion0:25:36 Acknowledgments and well wishes from the audience#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #measurement #measurements #particleaccelerator
Ismo Koponen: Changing semantic meanings of wave-particle duality of single-photons Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-24 | Ismo Koponen, University of HelsinkiChanging semantic meanings of wave-particle duality of single-photons: From historical to contemporary quantitative notionsUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.In this presentation, Professor Ismo Koponen from the University of Helsinki discusses the evolving concept of wave-particle duality. He explores its history, its supposed death in physics philosophy, and its subsequent rebirth in modern quantum optics. The talk covers Niels Bohr's changing views, John Archibald Wheeler's delayed-choice experiments, and how modern quantum optical theories treat duality not as an intrinsic ontological property, but as a pragmatic language used to communicate experimental results involving quantum coherence, distinguishability, and visibility.0:00:00 Introduction of Professor Ismo Koponen0:01:00 The supposed death of wave-particle duality0:01:49 The rebirth of duality in modern quantum optics0:03:16 Niels Bohr's changing views on complementarity0:08:19 Wheeler's delayed-choice thought experiments0:09:37 Connections to quantum information and coherence0:10:22 Experimental advancements with single-photon sources0:12:43 Locating quantum states in interferometric systems0:15:30 Distinguishability and visibility in measurements0:19:20 Bohr's philosophy of knowledge and pragmatic semantics0:23:43 The Grangier experiment and anti-correlation0:25:14 Interpreting outcomes using quantum optical theory0:27:54 Confirming information-theoretic inequalities0:29:05 Q and A session on the meaning of duality#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #waveparticleduality
Mikko Hyppönen. Teknologia ja konfliktit: drooniteknologian rooli ja kehitys Ukrainan sodassa Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-21 | Mikko Hyppönen. Teknologia ja konfliktit: drooniteknologian rooli ja kehitys Ukrainan sodassaLuonnonfilosofian seuran esitelmätilaisuus 17.2.2026 klo. 18.15-19.45. Tieteiden talo, Cedercreutz-sali.Teknologia muuttaa konfliktien luonnetta ja puolustusvoimien operatiivista toimintaa. Esitys avaa, miten tekoälyä hyödynnetään muun muassa havainnoinnissa, ja autonomisissa järjestelmissä kuten drooneissa. Samalla tarkastellaan teknologian riskejä, eettisiä kysymyksiä ja vastuuta tilanteissa, joissa tekoäly puolustaa ihmisiä koneita vastaan, tai päinvastoin.00:00:06 - Mikko Hyppönen esitellään puhujaksi aiheenaan teknologia ja konflikti.00:00:17 - Mikko jakaa taustansa ja elinikäisen uransa teknologisten uhkien parissa.00:01:03 - Mikko muistelee varhaisia kokemuksiaan tietokoneiden parissa, alkaen Nokian mikrotietokoneista.00:02:11 - Hän keskustelee tietokonevirusten kehittyvästä luonteesta ja niiden vaikutuksista 1980- ja 1990-lukujen lopulla.00:03:52 - Haittaohjelmien ymmärtämisessä esiin nousee palautesuunnittelun merkitys.00:05:55 - Mikko selittää muutosta kohti haittaohjelmien rahallistamista, erityisesti roskapostin avulla.00:07:28 - Kiinan ensimmäisen valtiollisen kyberhyökkäyksen esittely.00:09:45 - Teknologian rooli nykyaikaisessa sodankäynnissä, mukaan lukien kybersota.00:10:29 - Analyysi Ukrainan nykyisestä konfliktista ja kyberhyökkäysten vaikutuksista.00:12:09 - Mikko tarjoaa näkemyksiä Venäjän kyberhyökkäyksistä Ukrainassa ja niiden vaikutuksista.00:15:04 - Keskustelua kybersodan laajemmista vaikutuksista Ukrainan ulkopuolella.00:17:09 - Mikon uran muutos keskittymään drooniuhkiin ja niiden vaikutuksiin sodankäynnissä.00:19:05 - Drooneiden yleistyminen eri sektoreilla, kuten lainvalvonnassa ja maataloudessa.00:21:22 - Drooneihin liittyvät salakuljetus- ja turvallisuusuhat.00:23:59 - Mikko selittää teknologisia edistysaskeleita drooniuhkien torjumisessa.00:27:01 - Sodankäynnin mahdollinen tulevaisuus autonomisten droonien kanssa.00:29:48 - Tekoälyn rooli tulevissa konflikteissa ja siihen liittyvät eettiset näkökohdat00:33:59 - Mikko selventää, kuinka droonien tunnistamiseen käytetään erilaisia sensoreita, kuten radio-, kuva- ja infrapunasensoreita.00:39:00 - Keskustelua droonien aiheuttamista haasteista sotatoimialueilla ja niiden torjuntatekniikoista.00:45:00 - Mikko pohtii tulevaisuuden sodankäyntiä, jossa koneet taistelevat koneita vastaan.00:50:00 - Esimerkki siitä, miten droonit voivat tunnistaa ja tuhota muita koneita autonomisesti.00:55:00 - Mikko summaa teknologian ja tekoälyn vaikutusta tulevaisuuden sotaan ja konflikteihin.01:00:00 - Luennon lopetus ja yleisön kysymykset, joissa käsitellään eettisiä ja filosofisia näkökulmia autonomisiin drooneihin liittyen.#drone #dronetechnology #ukrainewar #ukrainerussiawar #dronedefense #datasecurity #droneindustry #computerviruses ---https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA
Avril Styrman: Unifying Power as Nexus of Explanatory Virtues Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-18 | Avril Styrman, University of HelsinkiUnifying Power as Nexus of Explanatory VirtuesUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.Avril Styrman presents a unificatory model of explanatory virtues (UM), systematizing the objective criteria used to recognize "good" theories in physics and chemistry. This talk explores the taxonomy of scientific virtues—from ethical and formal to pragmatic and aesthetic—and argues that unifying power is the central core of all theoretical evaluation.See the 2026 Foundations of Science article Unity and Coherence in Explanatory Virtues: doi.org/10.1007/s10699-026-10035-6 TIMESTAMPS:0:00:00 Introduction of Avril Styrman by Paavo Pylkkänen0:00:27 Opening Remarks: The Goal of Systematizing Theory Choice0:00:50 Thomas Kuhn: Objective vs. Subjective Factors in Science0:01:38 Evolution of Virtues: From Lists to Systematization0:02:06 The Unificatory Model (UM) as an Informal Axiomatic System0:03:00 Top-Level Categories: Ethical, Formal, Explanatory, and Pragmatic Virtues0:03:27 Relations Between Virtue Classes: Prerequisites and Derivatives0:04:14 Why Unifying Power is the Center of Explanatory Virtues0:04:31 Ethical Virtues: Acknowledging Anomalies and Evidential Vices0:05:13 Formal Virtues: Axiomatic Clarity and Syntactic Simplicity0:05:51 Explanatory Virtues: Scope, Accuracy, Depth, and Consistency0:06:32 Pragmatic and Aesthetic Virtues in Theory Evaluation0:07:03 Measuring the Truth Value of Aesthetic Judgments via Unity0:08:19 Defining Evidential Virtues: Accuracy and Depth0:09:15 The Problem for Instrumentalism: Why Explanations Matter0:09:59 Measuring Explanatory Depth: Causal Factors and Chains0:12:16 Total Evidentiality: Defining Scope and Generality0:13:28 The Matthew Effect: Paradigms vs. Underdeveloped Rivals0:15:03 Internal Consistency: Why Inconsistent Theories Hinder Accuracy0:16:43 Popper's Critique of Instrumentalism as a "Rescue" Tactic0:17:00 Ontological vs. Syntactic Simplicity (Occam's Razor)0:18:09 Unifying Power: The Ratio of Evidentiality to Ontological Weight0:19:10 Priority Orders: Maximizing Evidence vs. Minimizing Weight0:20:57 Diachronic Virtues: Tracking Theory Evolution Over Time0:22:20 Case Studies: Continental Drift and the Discovery of Neptune0:23:08 External Coherence and Universal Explanatory Relations0:25:01 Total Reduction vs. Interfield Theories (Biochemistry and Genetics)0:26:04 Conclusion: Unity as the Nexus of Scientific Progress0:26:27 Q&A: Defining "E(T)" (Total Evidentiality)0:29:18 Q&A: The Case of Super Symmetry and Empirical Failure0:31:21 Q&A: Do Theories Need to Provoke New Experiments?0:33:22 Q&A: The Grounding Role of Ethical Virtues in Science0:35:12 Q&A: Grand Pictures vs. Micro-Level Evolutions (Schrödinger vs. Sommerfeld)#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #criteria #theoryevaluation#evaluation #virtues #scientifictheory #scientifictheories
Tuomo Suntola: The Dynamic Universe Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-16 | Tuomo Suntola, Physics Foundations Society, EspooThe Dynamic Universe (DU)UNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.In this presentation Dr. Tuomo Suntola explores the Dynamic Universe model. Dr. Suntola is a distinguished physicist known for inventing Atomic Layer Deposition or ALD fifty years ago. This technology allowed for the construction of materials one atomic layer at a time. He now applies this same precision to cosmology.The Dynamic Universe model offers a new perspective on the structure of space and energy. It describes the universe as a three dimensional surface of a four dimensional sphere that is expanding. This model provides an alternative to the Big Bang theory and does not require dark energy or inflation to explain observations. It relies on a simple principle of energy balance where the total energy of the universe remains zero.CENTRAL TOPICS AND TIMESTAMPS0:00:00 Introduction to Dr. Tuomo Suntola and Atomic Layer Deposition0:01:44 Early massive galaxies and James Webb Space Telescope data0:03:33 Global expansion and the angular sizes of galaxies0:05:21 The fourth dimension and spherical space0:07:03 Energy bookkeeping and converting gravity into motion0:08:51 The speed of light as the expansion velocity of space0:10:05 Universal time and the true age of the universe0:11:47 Comparing energy balance to the standard model0:13:44 Variable speed of light in the early universe0:16:15 Inertia as work against global gravitation0:17:14 Relativity explained through local energy frames0:19:40 Momentum and rest energy in the fourth dimension0:21:39 Why clocks slow down based on energy consumption0:25:13 Local velocity of light vs the homogeneous space velocity0:28:50 Nested energy frames from atoms to galaxies0:31:36 Black hole dynamics and stable orbits0:34:26 Observed angular sizes and Euclidean behavior0:37:52 Ancient coral fossils and solar system expansion0:40:58 Solving the faint young sun paradox0:41:06 Solving the Faint Young Sun Paradox with solar system expansion0:41:25 Comparing local expansion in the Standard Model vs the Dynamic Universe0:41:47 Lunar laser ranging and the Einstein effect in planetary distances0:42:54 Supernova observations and high redshift data fitting0:43:56 Why DU explains supernovas without dark energy or fitting parameters0:45:15 Redefining the Planck effect and power dilution0:46:37 Analyzing bolometric curves and K correction factors0:48:22 Black hole orbital dynamics and the critical radius0:49:43 Sagittarius A rotational periods and the center of the Milky Way0:50:52 Summary Comparison Relativity vs Dynamic Universe0:51:39 Conclusion The case for a paradigm shift in physics0:52:41 QA Addressing the role of quantum mechanics0:53:18 QA Singularity turnover and mass as a wave energy carrier0:54:58 QA Mathematical derivation of year length and expansion factors0:57:12 QA Non locality and connectivity in a closed universe0:58:48 QA Defining gravitational energy in DU and standard cosmology1:03:04 QA Stress energy tensors and spherical symmetry1:06:02 QA Four spatial dimensions vs the concept of absolute time1:10:09 QA Motion as the source of kinetic energy and nested frames1:12:52 QA Space curvature and local dents caused by mass1:14:26 Transition to the panel discussionCORE PRINCIPLES OF THE DYNAMIC UNIVERSEThe model suggests that the speed of light is not a constant but is linked to the expansion velocity of the universe. Time is treated as a universal coordinate rather than a relative one. Physical processes and clocks appear to slow down because of changes in locally available energy rather than a change in time itself.Dr. Suntola presents evidence from several fields to support this theory. This includes data from the James Webb Space Telescope showing that early galaxies formed much faster than expected. He also uses data from ancient coral fossils which suggest that the solar system has been expanding over hundreds of millions of years.The presentation concludes by asking if it is time for a shift in how we understand physics. The Dynamic Universe provides a single framework that matches observations from supernovas to black holes without adding extra parameters like dark energy.#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumgravity #generalrelativity #unification #thedynamicuniverse Editorial note: The audio quality in the beginning is weak because the University of Helsinki recording system crashed.
Ivette Fuentes: The foundations of quantum theory and its interplay with gravity Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-13 | Ivette Fuentes, University of Southampton and Wolfson College, University of OxfordThe foundations of quantum theory and its interplay with gravityUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.Professor Ivette Fuentes, a renowned physicist from the University of Southampton and Oxford University, discusses the fascinating interface between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Famous for bridging the gap between abstract quantum gravity theories and practical quantum information science, Professor Fuentes delves into the fundamental questions plaguing modern physics, such as the nature of dark matter and energy, the behavior of the universe at early times, and the applicability of the equivalence principle to quantum systems. She argues that the traditional division between the microscopic world of quantum mechanics and the macroscopic world of general relativity is no longer tenable, as recent experiments have shown their interconnectedness. Professor Fuentes shares her insights on the challenges of unifying these two theories, emphasizing the need to rethink fundamental concepts like mass and time. She explores the implications of quantum mechanics for our understanding of reality, suggesting that the classical world we experience is an emergent phenomenon. The talk also highlights the crucial role of experiments in guiding theoretical developments, with Professor Fuentes discussing groundbreaking experiments in long-range quantum entanglement distribution and the creation of large-mass superpositions. She concludes by emphasizing the importance of collaboration between physicists and philosophers in tackling these profound questions.0:00:00 Introduction of Professor Ivette Fuentes0:01:55 The Interface of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity0:02:52 Fundamental Questions in Physics0:03:41 Incompatibility of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity0:04:40 Quantum vs. Classical Physics and Interpretations0:05:57 Philosophical Questions in Physics: Mass and Time0:07:54 Rethinking Mass in the Quantum World0:09:20 Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime0:10:16 Emergence of the Classical World0:11:16 Particles vs. Fields0:12:21 Relativity and Quantum Theory: Time and Space0:14:17 Massive Systems in Superposition and Gravity0:15:52 Quantizing Gravity vs. Gravitizing Quantum Theory0:17:57 Experimental Proposals and Quantum Technologies0:19:08 The Importance of Experiments in Guiding Theory0:22:45 Collaboration between Physicists and Philosophers0:23:15 Long-Range Quantum Experiments0:25:34 Relativity in Quantum Experiments0:27:53 Large Mass Superposition Experiments0:29:01 Quantum Cooling of Macroscopic Objects#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #quantumtheory #quantumgravity #generalrelativity #unification
Chris Dewdney: What have we learnt from de Broglie-Bohm trajectories? Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-11 | Chris Dewdney, University of PortsmouthWhat have we learnt from de Broglie-Bohm trajectories?UNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.In this landmark talk, Chris Dewdney (University of Portsmouth) details his journey as a PhD student of David Bohm and his role in reviving the "Causal Interpretation" of quantum mechanics.Once dismissed as "impossible" by the physics establishment, Dewdney demonstrates—through high-fidelity computer simulations—how we can visualize quantum particles as having definite trajectories, moving beyond the "abstract fog" of the Copenhagen interpretation.Timestamps0:00 – Introduction: Reviving a "Dead Horse" at Birkbeck College1:34 – The "Borian" Comfort Zone: Why standard QM stops asking questions3:12 – Discovering Bohm in a Bookshop: The Belinfante influence5:52 – The 1952 Papers: Forces, Accelerations, and the Schrödinger Equation7:05 – The Quantum Potential: The "Ghost" force of the quantum world8:45 – Pilot Wave Theory: The Guidance Equation vs. Forces9:45 – Infinite Potential: Seeing trajectories for the first time10:32 – "Quantum Pornography": Why these images were once censored12:45 – Extending Bohm to Spin: The Stern-Gerlach experiment visualized17:15 – Measurement as a Dynamical Process (No Wavefunction Collapse)20:05 – The Configuration Space Trap: Moving beyond single-particle models21:38 – Disproving Richard Feynman: The Detector and the Two-Slit Experiment24:30 – Visualizing 2D Configuration Space (Particle + Detector)28:45 – The Hong-Ou-Mandel Experiment: The true essence of Quantum TheoryKey Scientific ThemesFrom "Pillow" to "Bronco": Moving from the "comfortable" Copenhagen view (where you just calculate and don't ask what is real) to the challenging, realist framework of Bohmian Mechanics.The Quantum Potential: Dewdney explains how the Schrödinger equation can be rewritten into a Hamilton-Jacobi form, revealing a potential that guides the particle.Configuration Space: A vital distinction—quantum mechanics doesn't live in our 3D space, but in a high-dimensional space. Dewdney uses unique 2D visualizations to show how adding a detector changes the geometry of the experiment.Measurement vs. Collapse: In this model, "collapse" is merely an effective process. Definite outcomes emerge from unique initial conditions, removing the need for a "conscious observer."About the SpeakerChris Dewdney was a key figure in the 1970s/80s Birkbeck research group. He was a pioneer in using computer graphics to map out the "waterfall" trajectory plots that are now standard in teaching pilot-wave theory.#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #quantummechanics #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #davidbohm#trajectories #trajectory #quantumtheory
Paavo Pylkkänen: The value of different perspectives in physics Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-09 | Paavo Pylkkänen, University of HelsinkiThe value of different perspectives in physicsUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.In this talk, philosopher Paavo Pylkkänen explores why holding multiple theoretical perspectives is essential for the progress of science. Using the "David vs. Goliath" story of David Bohm’s challenge to the physics establishment, Pylkkänen breaks down how the "Copenhagen Dogma" was challenged by the 1952 causal interpretation.Does physics describe an objective reality, or is it merely an algorithm for predicting observations? This presentation dives into the heart of the realism vs. instrumentalism debate.🕒 Timestamps0:00 – Why we need different perspectives in physics1:05 – Concepts vs. Mathematics: Einstein’s Maxim2:44 – The "Dogmatic Slumber" of Quantum Mechanics4:37 – Defining the Copenhagen Interpretation (The Usual View)6:57 – The Uncertainty Principle: Fundamental Limit or Ignorance?8:50 – Complementarity: Why we are told we can't visualize quantum objects10:00 – The Measurement Problem and Wave Function Collapse13:00 – David Bohm: The David fighting the Goliath of indeterminism14:50 – Challenging the Tenets: Bohm’s 1952 Causal Theory17:15 – Measurement as a "Dance": The Participatory Nature of Reality19:00 – Visualizing the Double Slit Experiment with Pilot Waves20:30 – Scientific Realism: Is the moon there when no one is looking?25:20 – Philosophical Choice vs. Logical Necessity🔬 Key Concepts DiscussedDogmatic Slumber: A term (borrowed from Kant) used to describe the unquestioning acceptance of the Copenhagen interpretation as the final word on physics.Participatory Measurement: Bohm’s idea that measuring an object is like a "dance"—the result is a product of the interaction, not necessarily a reflection of the object in isolation.Ontology vs. Epistemology: Distinguishing between what is actually happening in nature (Ontology) and what we can know about it (Epistemology).Non-Locality: One of the most controversial features of the Bohmian model that Einstein famously called "spooky action at a distance."📖 About the SpeakerPaavo Pylkkänen is a philosopher of mind and physics. He is known for his work on the foundations of quantum mechanics and has spent decades exploring the philosophical implications of David Bohm’s work.Main Objective: To show that the "standard" view of quantum mechanics is a philosophical choice, and that alternative prisms—like Bohmian Mechanics or the Dynamic Universe—can provide an enriching, realist view of our universe.#QuantumPhysics #PhilosophyOfScience #DavidBohm #QuantumMechanics #ScientificRealism #PaavoPylkkänen #PhysicsDebate #CopenhagenInterpretation#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #thedynamicuniverse #quantummechanics #relativitytheory #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #philosophyofscience #alternativethinking #differentperspectives
Paavo Pylkkänen and Peter Van Reeth: WELCOME TO UNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-09 | Paavo Pylkkänen, University of Helsinki and Peter Van Reeth, University College London WELCOMEUNDERSTANDING QUANTUM AND RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA. The 2nd UCL-Helsinki workshop on the Foundations of Physics, 7-8 November 2025, University of Helsinki. Friday, 7 November 2025 METSÄTALO, Unioninkatu 40, 00170 Helsinki. Room 6.Understanding Quantum and Relativistic Phenomena: Workshop IntroductionWelcome to the Helsinki workshop on Understanding Quantum and Relativistic Phenomena. This event serves as a follow-up to our previous gathering at University College London (UCL), bringing together leading thinkers to bridge the gap between physics, cosmology, and philosophy.In this introductory session, Paavo Pylkkänen and Peter van Reeth set the stage by tracing the 60-year history of the Bohm-Hiley research program and its intersection with modern cosmological models.🕒 Timestamps0:00 – Welcome and workshop background (UCL to Helsinki)0:34 – Paavo Pylkkänen’s 40-year journey in quantum foundations1:10 – The Legacy of David Bohm and Basil Hiley at Birkbeck College2:05 – Introducing the "Dynamic Universe" program (Tuomo Suntola)2:52 – Peter van Reeth on the UCL involvement and the 1952 papers4:10 – The Causal Approach vs. Standard Quantum Mechanics5:15 – Overview of the 2-day workshop: Physics, Cosmology, and Philosophy🔬 Key ThemesThe Bohm-Hiley Program: Exploring the ontological and causal interpretations of quantum mechanics that began with David Bohm’s seminal 1952 papers.The Dynamic Universe: A look into Dr. Tuomo Suntola’s research program and its commonalities with Bohmian mechanics.A New Prism: Using these frameworks not as "magic," but as an enriching lens to better understand standard quantum phenomena through debate and exploration.👥 Featured SpeakersPaavo Pylkkänen: Philosopher of mind and physics, known for his work on the conceptual foundations of quantum theory.Peter van Reeth: Researcher from University College London (UCL) focusing on the physical and mathematical applications of the Bohmian approach.Main Objective: To facilitate a multidisciplinary debate on the nature of reality, moving from technical physical descriptions to broader philosophical implications.#Cosmology #science #science #BasilHiley #theoreticalphysics #davidbohm#philosophy #conference #workshop #universityofhelsinki #thedynamicuniverse #quantummechanics #relativitytheory #philosophy #physics #physicstheory #scientificphenomena #philosophyofscience #quantumphysics
Tarkko Oksala: Kategoria-ajattelu, filosofia ja luonto Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-02-04 | Tarkko Oksala: Kategoria-ajattelu, filosofia ja luontoLuonnonfilosofian seuran esitelmätilaisuus 9.12.2025 klo. 18.15-19.45. Tieteiden talo, Cedercreutz-sali.Esityksessä tarkastellaan kategorisen ajattelun perusteita kohdistettuna luontoon. Ensin on esitetty historiallisia näkemyksiä ja käsityksiä kategorioista, jotka ovat rationaalisen ajattelun edellyttämiä maailman jäsennyksen perusteita. Toiseksi on tarkasteltu ajattelun, tieteen ja filosofian porrastuvia luokituksia. Kolmanneksi on pohdittu esimerkkien valossa luonnon tutkimuksen riippuvuutta kategorioista. Luonto on syntymänsä jälkeen kehittynyt epäorgaanisesta sisältämään orgaanisen tason ja ihmisen kulttuurin yli-orgaanisena asiana. Tällöin keskeiseksi filosofiseksi kysymykseksi nousee luonnon ja ihmisen suhde. Ongelma on ekologinen, esteettinen ja eettinen ja siten hallittavissa viime kädessä kategorisen etiikan avulla. Tavoitteena on ihmisen tuntemassa, hallitsemassa ja kehittämässä maailmassa eli Antropokosmoksessa saavuttaa ekolo-co-kulttuurinen symbioosi eli lyhyesti Symviability dynamiikka. Lopuksi käsitellään sitä, kuinka kategorinen ajattelu yhdistää inhimillisen ajattelun alkujuuret luoden perustan kaikelle yhteisymmärrykselle, unifikaatiolle ja konsilienssille. #naturalphilosophy #philosophy #categories #nature #classification #classificationreasoning ---https://www.luonnonfilosofia.fifacebook.com/groups/Luonnonfilosofiayoutube.com/playlist?list=PLPPIzQOLRG1f6aCPo9hRup-p_d7OSK8ZA
PANEL DISCUSSION. Method and Convergence 2025 - Internat. Conference on Methodology of Philosophy. Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-21 | PANEL DISCUSSIONMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.The panel debated whether philosophy needs a unified method like science's abduction (inference to the best explanation). A key tension emerged: Should all philosophy, including ethics and aesthetics, follow a scientific model, or are these fields too different? The discussion centered on whether philosophy's goal is discovering truth—for which a rigorous method seems apt—or encompasses aims like understanding and wisdom, which demand diverse approaches.Critics of a single method warned it would become intellectual gatekeeping, stifling the diversity that makes philosophy vibrant. They noted that in science, dominant paradigms can suppress alternatives, potentially hindering progress. Instead, they advocated for methodological pluralism, where the chosen tool fits the specific philosophical aim, whether that's comparison, justification, or dialogue. One argument even suggested that a community using varied methods might collectively achieve more than one using a single "best" approach.However, pluralists faced a tough challenge: Without shared goals or success criteria—unlike scientists aiming to cure a disease—how can methods be evaluated or calibrated? This "calibration problem" makes convergence difficult. The conversation also touched on teaching, agreeing that methodology is best learned through practice, not in the abstract, and should be presented as a diverse toolkit.A final point suggested that philosophical reasoning itself might be explained by brain science, pushing toward a naturalistic view. The panel ended without consensus, highlighting philosophy's core meta-question: Is its lack of a unified method a weakness or a defining strength of a discipline exploring fundamentally different kinds of questions?#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #paneldiscussion
Finnur Dellsén. Abduction: The Glory and Scandal of Philosophy? Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-19 | Finnur DellsénAbduction: The Glory and Scandal of Philosophy?METHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.C.D. Broad referred to inductive reasoning as “the glory of science and the scandal of philosophy”. Broad's point was that while scientists frequently use inductive reasoning, philosophers have not yet provided any convincing justification for this practice. I suggest that an analogous claim is true of abductive reasoning in philosophy: while we philosophers frequently use abductive reasoning, usually in the form of Inference to the Best Explanation, we have not yet provided any convincing justification for this practice. I focus on three problems that arise for abductive reasoning in philosophy: (i) all the explanatory theories that are available may be false; (ii) there may be multiple rival explanations that are nearly as plausible as the best one; and (iii) the evidence from which one is inferring may itself be uncertain. In response to these problems, I argue that we should reconceive of the structure of abductive reasoning in philosophy so that, in most cases, it licenses a substantially more modest type of conclusion than it has previously been thought to do.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #abduction #induction #inference
Octavio Andres Garcia Aguilar. History and progress: a functional account of philosophical progress Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-16 | Octavio Andres Garcia AguilarHistory and progress: a functional account of philosophical progressMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.Current accounts of philosophical progress rely on the concept of aim to do the explanatory work. Under this view, what constitutes philosophical progress is an achievement aligned with a given aim. I call this the teleological view. The teleological view organises the current state of the debate on philosophical progress. On the one hand, pessimists argue that philosophy cannot or does not yield or barely yields achievements constituting philosophical progress. On the other hand, optimists argue that philosophy yields achievements constituting philosophical progress.First, I hold that the teleological view struggles to explain philosophical progress, given that the concept of aim fails to grasp the historical nature of philosophical progress. To this end, I show that historical hindsight and applicability of normative standards over time are requirements for accounts of philosophical progress. After that, I argue that the teleological view fails to meet those requirements given its reliance on the concept of aim.Second, I put forward the functional account of progress to address the limitations of the teleological view. Under this view, philosophical traditions better adjusted to a function within a historical niche are progressive, and those not adjusted are regressive. Reliance on the concept of historical niche and adjustment allows for normative standards for philosophical progress to emerge from historical processes without committing to the concept of aim. The outcome is an account of philosophical progress that introduces the historical dimension into our considerations of philosophical progress and meets the requirements of historical hindsight and applicability over time of normative standards without the theoretical and methodological setbacks inherent to the teleological view.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #progress
Steven S. Gouveia. Philosophy and Neuroscience: a Methodological Analysis Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-14 | Steven S. GouveiaPhilosophy and Neuroscience: a Methodological AnalysisMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.The central goal of this lecture is to identify and discuss the main responses to the methodological problem that arises when attempting to establish a meaningful relationship between the methodologies of neuroscience and philosophy. Traditionally, philosophical inquiry has been characterized as an a priori discipline, dealing with conceptual analysis, logical reasoning, and theoretical speculation, while neuroscience is typically viewed as an a posteriori empirical science, grounded in experimental data and observation. This apparent opposition has led to an ongoing debate regarding how, or even whether, these two fields can meaningfully interact. Following this tension, we will critically explore four key approaches that aim to address this methodological challenge:(1) The Isolationist Approach, which denies the existence of a methodological problem by treating philosophy and neuroscience as entirely separate disciplines with no need for integration, maintaining that philosophy operates in a conceptual space independent of empirical findings, and thus neuroscience cannot contribute to resolving philosophical questions.(2) The Reductionist Approach, which argues that philosophical inquiry should ultimately be reduced to neuroscientific explanations; traditionally philosophical questions about the mind, consciousness, and cognition can (and should!) be addressed using neuroscientific methods, eliminating the need for distinct philosophical analysis.(3) The Neurophenomenological Approach, which emphasizes the importance of first-person experience and embodiment in understanding the conscious mind, arguing that neuroscience alone cannot fully capture the richness of subjective experience and that phenomenology must be incorporated into scientific models of consciousness.(4) The Non-Reductive Neurophilosophical Approach, which advocates for a methodological pluralism that acknowledges the epistemic value of both philosophy and neuroscience, rejecting (3) while still maintaining that neuroscience and philosophy can complement each other via dynamic interplay where philosophical insights inform neuroscientific research, and empirical findings refine philosophical theories.We will conclude that (4) offers a nuanced framework for integrating neuroscience and philosophy without erasing the methodological distinctions that make each field valuable, promoting a more integrative and interdisciplinary understanding of the mind. To close the lecture, we will also show some Experimental Philosophy data (original survey) about these questions: specifically, what experts in Philosophy and Neuroscience think the relationship between the two disciplines ought to be structured.Gouveia, S. (2022) Philosophy and Neuroscience: a Methodological Analysis, Palgrave Macmillan. Gouveia, S. (in progress) “An Experimental Philosophy Study on the Relationship betweenPhilosophy and Neuroscience”.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #neuroscience
Andreas Fjellstad. When fiction leads to truth: the status of derivations in axiomatic systems Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-12 | Andreas FjellstadWhen fiction leads to truth: the status of derivations in axiomatic systemsMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.It is now well-recognised that models play an important role within scientific methodology, and it has been suggested that philosophy may similarly be engaged in model building (Williamson 2017). This raises the question of whether model-building plays any role within logic, a research area that overlaps philosophy, mathematics, and computer science. This talk focuses on one area of logic, proof theory, and whether proof systems can be fruitfully understood as scientific models, that is, as representations of various target phenomena obtained through a process of abstraction, distortion and fictionalisation, which are differentially well-suited to fulfilling different theoretical and pedagogical purposes.As a case study, we focus specifically on the role and status of derivations within axiomatic systems when these systems are used to model bodies of truths within a certain domain, such as geometry or arithmetic. We argue that in these cases, while the axioms and theorems within the derivations are not fictions, the derivations themselves are fictional features of the model. To make our point, we distinguish first between the use of a proof system to model reasoning about a domain, as opposed to modeling the corresponding bodies of truths. When modelling reasoning, derivations can be understood as representing discrete, albeit highly distorted, steps of reasoning. In contrast, when modelling bodies of truths, derivations play a completely different role. To illustrate this, we discuss ontological-metaphysical and epistemological uses of axiomatic proof systems within the sciences, and elaborate on the role of derivations within the Euclidean programme, namely to transfer an alethic or epistemic status from the axioms to the theorem (Paseau & Wrigley 2024).Finally, to highlight the affinity with the use of fictions within scientific models, we develop an analogy between axiomatic systems and Bohr’s model of the hydrogen atom. We show that Bokulich’s (2011) argument for understanding certain features of Bohr’s model as useful fictions for predictive purposes also applies to derivations in axiomatic proof systems when applied to model bodies of truth. Such derivations constitute a convenient fiction, providing a narrative or “computational path” from the axioms to the theorems constructed through the inference rules, and thus an important theoretical mechanism to guarantee theoremhood.Bokulich, Alisa (2011). How scientific models can explain. Synthese 180 (1):33–45.Paseau, A. C. & Wrigley, Wesley (2024). The Euclidean Programme. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.Williamson, Timothy (2017). Model-Building in Philosophy. In Russell Blackford & DamienBroderick, Philosophy's Future. Hoboken: Wiley. pp. 159–171.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #axiom #fictions #theorems
Shad Gilbert: Pragmatic Cosmopolitanism Through Transparadigmatic Reconceptualization Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-10 | Shad GilbertPragmatic Cosmopolitanism Through Transparadigmatic ReconceptualizationMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.A familiar story about progress in philosophy and science imagines concepts and conceptual systems in Darwinian competition to most agreeably sort the data of experience. Those conceptual tools most capable of fulfilling their functions survive, while those that lack adequate simplicity, coherence, or efficacy perish, possibly dragging down institutions and societies with them. In the interest of prescribing a theoretical model for deriving potentially vital benefit from alien systems of thought, this paper first recounts an extremely influential yet seldom recognized articulation of this account of philosophical and scientific development before addressing several high-profile criticisms and recommending a number of enhancements drawn from the field of conceptual engineering.“The Method of Philosophy” is the running head of the first chapter of a text likely familiar to Carnap and many Harvard graduates of the twentieth century including Quine, Goodman, Sellars, Putnam, Davidson, Kripke, and Chisholm. Framing the pursuit of knowledge in now-common terms, the so-called Kantian pragmatist C. I. Lewis in his 1929 Mind and the World Order (MWO) drew together elements from empiricism, idealism, pragmatism, and elsewhere into a theory of knowledge that he termed conceptual pragmatism and disseminated throughout his lengthy tenure. Occasionally supplemented by material from other parts of MWO and Lewis’s other writings, the first half of this paper reintroduces this first chapter, which officially bears the title “Introduction: About Philosophy in General and Metaphysics in Particular. The Proper Method of Philosophy.”After briefly accounting for Quine’s criticism of the analytic-synthetic distinction, Sellars’s denunciation of the myth of the given, and additional charges of foundationalism, I build out Lewis’s framework for a project that follows Diogenes of Sinope in advocating sharing across paradigms. For pragmatic ends of survival if no other, the theoretical model developed in this final part of the paper recommends identifying the function of a concept in current use and then contemplating whether it could more preferably perform that function were it slightly altered under the influence of an external school of thought. Of course, human flourishing enlists conceptual resources for objectives vastly exceeding scientific explanation and prediction, so in the name of progress and pragmatic cosmopolitanism, these aims too could conceivably benefit from transparadigmatic reconceptualization, or so this paper argues.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #pragmatism #cosmopolitanism
Tony Ross-Hellauer. Reframing Peer Review: Bias, Reflexivity, Quality Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-08 | Tony Ross-HellauerReframing Peer Review: Bias, Reflexivity, QualityMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.Peer review processes are central to academic quality assurance and resource allocation. When broadly conceived, as the engagement of experts in a given domain ("peers") to assess the competence, quality or integrity of scholars or their scholarly works, peer review governs our publications, conferences, book proposals, funding applications, promotion and tenure decisions, and even prize-giving. Its functions are not only epistemic (related to validation and improvement of knowledge and its authors), but also economic (related to allocation of resources) and even socio-political (related to academic self-governance). Yet, as a fundamentally human endeavour, peer review is far from perfectly suited to fulfil these functions.In this talk I will examine the role of bias in peer review in the context of its social epistemology. Bias, defined as prejudice or distortion, can impact peer review in various ways. “Quality” is notoriously hard to define, even in the quantitative sciences and may be judged via sometimes ill-suited proxies. Rates of error-detection cam vary wildly, while inter-rater reliability amongst reviewers is often low. Attenuation to the current reward system can disfavour null or negative findings or more incremental work. Social biases like sexism, racism, homophily or prestige bias can endanger ideals of universalism. Confirmation bias and conservatism might limit recognition for novelty or interdisciplinary contributions. Evidence regarding such issues is often limited and derives heavily from quantitative traditions (Tennant & Ross-Hellauer, 2020).Following an overview of these issues, I consider varieties of peer review system related to academic publications. I first note that our language for interrogating peer review is often imported whole-sale from more quantitative subjects (Derrick & Ross-Hellauer, 2024). Through an examination of “reflexivity” as a way of reframing notions regarding bias, I consider the need for epistemic diversity in peer review systems. Considering the epistemic features of research in Humanities and Social Sciences, and via considerations of “anonymisation” and arguments for “opening” peer review, I hence propose pathways to equity, fairness and (above all) quality in peer review.Derrick, G. & Ross-Hellauer, T. (2024). De-legitimising the social sciences and humanities through peer review. In: Handbook of Meta-Research, Oancea, A., Derrick, G., Nuseibeh, N., & Xu, X. (eds.). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 235–250Tennant, J. P., & Ross-Hellauer, T. (2020). The limitations to our understanding of peer review. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 5(1), 6, doi:10.1186/s41073-020-00092-1#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #peerreview #peerreviewed #bias
Lorenzo Casini: High-level Causation and Causal Inference Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-06 | Lorenzo CasiniHigh-level Causation and Causal InferenceMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.Experimental methods for causal inference (e.g. randomized controlled trials) are believed to conclusively identify causal relations in virtue of realizing “ideal conditions” (Woodward, 2003, 2022) that must be in place to confidently conclude that a change in one variable (a "cause") directly leads to a change in another variable (an "effect"). In particular, they should avoid confounding, namely the existence of a third, unmeasured factor influencing the supposed effect along a path not depending on the supposed cause. This would create a misleading association, making it seem like the cause influences the effect, when in reality, the confounder is responsible. Example: Imagine a study testing if a new drug (X) reduces blood pressure (Y). An ideal condition would be that the only difference between the group receiving the drug and the group receiving a placebo is the drug itself. No other factors (e.g., diet, age, other medications) should systematically differ between the groups. Now, if patients in the treatment group happen to exercise more than the placebo group, exercise becomes a confounder. The observed reduction in blood pressure might be due to the drug or the increased exercise, or both. Satisfaction of ideal conditions is meant to rule out such scenarios and thereby render the interpretation of the experiment's results unambiguous.Here, we observe that many high-level “aggregate” variables can create a problem for causal inference, due to the heterogeneous causal roles of their components (Spirtes and Scheines, 2004). To explain, such variables represent a combination of several underlying components, which may themselves have distinct causal effects. Example: Total cholesterol is an aggregate of "good" cholesterol and "bad" cholesterol, which have opposite effects on, say, heart disease. We argue that, when heterogeneity is present—as in the cholesterol case—and when data on individual units are unavailable—namely, the ratio of good to bad cholesterol is unknown—, experiments provide a much weaker inferential leverage. The reason is that the ideal conditions on which a conclusive inference would depend are in principle unrealizable. Contrary to the case of variables with homogeneous causal roles, the evidence may not conclusively validate an experiment because confounding may never be ruled out.Granting that causal inference may be warranted in such contexts, the problem arises of how exactly it should be justified. We propose a rationalization based on a form of abductive reasoning, namely a form of reasoning where one infers the truth of a hypothesis because it provides the best explanation of the evidence, even though there exists no conclusive evidence in support of the truth of that explanation vis-a-vis empirically equivalent alternatives.Spirtes, P. and Scheines, R. (2004). Causal inference of ambiguous manipulations. Philosophy of Science, 71(5):833–45.Woodward, J. (2003). Making things happen. A theory of causal explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.Woodward, J. (2022). Modeling interventions in multi-level causal systems: supervenience, exclusion and underdetermination. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 59(12): 1–34.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #causalinference #clinicaltrials #trials #abduction #causation
Gerhard Schurz: Inductive Metaphysics and its Abductive Methodology Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-03 | Gerhard SchurzInductive Metaphysics and its Abductive MethodologyMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.In this talk the methodology of inductive metaphysics (IM) is explained, as understood in the DFG research group FOR2495, including a discussion of IM's relation to a priori metaphysics. The methodological principles of IM consist of (1) the employment of inductive and in particular abductive methods and (2) making use of empirical sources. Important philosophical challenges for the methodology of IM stem from the highly theoretical and transdisciplinary nature of metaphysical principles and the corresponding difficulty of justifying abductive inferences from empirical knowledge to these principles. Two rationality criteria proposed for these abductive inferences are (a) the unification of many mutually independent empirical facts or laws and (b) the independently testability of metaphysical theories by entailing use-novel empirical consequences. At hand of two case studies it is shown how abduction to metaphysical theories can satisfy these two conditions: (i) the abductive justification of perceptual realism and (ii) the abductive justification of causality.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #induction #abduction #justification#causality
Paavo Pylkkänen. Dialogue to the rescue: Bohm’s take on the Bohr-Einstein debate Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2026-01-01 | Paavo PylkkänenDialogue to the rescue: Bohm’s take on the Bohr-Einstein debateMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.David Bohm (1917-1992) was a physicist-philosopher who is known, after discussions with Einstein, for presenting the first consistent ontological interpretation of quantum theory in 1952. The initial reception of Bohm’s interpretation was not enthusiastic, although it is today one of the main realist interpretations discussed in the foundations of physics (the others being e.g. Everett’s many-worlds and spontaneous collapse interpretations). Bohm felt that a major problem in physics is communication. For example, although Einstein and Bohr had a long- standing debate about quantum theory, they could not resolve their differences. Bohm claimed that this ‘failure of communication’ between them could have been avoided if Einstein and Bohr would have been able to have a genuine dialogue, where their very different underlying philosophical assumptions would have been addressed, over and above the technical issues in quantum mechanics. This talk presents what Bohm means by dialogue and considers what it might have meant for Einstein and Bohr to have such a dialogue. I will also consider whether a new type of dialogue could be used more broadly as a method in science and philosophy.Bohm, D. and Schumacher, D. (2020) On the Failure of Communication between Bohr and Einstein, in C. Talbot (ed.) David Bohm’s Critique of Modern Physics. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.Bohm, D. (2004) On Dialogue. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #quantumphysics #dialogue #nielsbohr #alberteinstein #debate
Ilkka Pättiniemi: How Philosophy Can Make Useful Progress Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2025-12-29 | Ilkka PättiniemiHow Philosophy Can Make Useful Progress.Paper prepared by Petri Turunen, Ilmari Hirvonen, and Ilkka Pättiniemi.METHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 4 2025. Metsätalo, Sali 1.Philosophy has been criticised for being practically irrelevant and lacking progress. In this talk, we explore the underlying motivations behind these criticisms and how one could address them. The central question is: What is required for philosophy to make useful progress? Here, we understand that something, like an assertion or method, is useful if it can make a difference in an evaluable manner. Useful progress, in turn, consists of the non-arbitrary justification of useful claims, methods, and such. We argue that for philosophy to make useful progress, its practice must be constrained in specific ways. To this end, we will outline a meta-methodology — a way of building and evaluating methods — for philosophical argumentation. Some philosophical doctrines, such as Woodward’s (2003) contrafactual theory of causal explanation, count as progressive according to our methodological criteria. We illustrate our (meta-)methodology by applying it to some issues in contemporary philosophical debates.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #progress #relevance #justification
Bendik Berntsen-Øybø: Why do we evaluate moral theories differently? Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2025-12-27 | Bendik Berntsen-ØybøWhy do we evaluate moral theories differently? — Is persistent disagreement on moral theory due to disagreement on criteria and data?METHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 3 2025. Small Hall F4050, University Main Building.Why is there persistent disagreement in the field of moral theory? In the field of moral theory, there is persistent disagreement on how plausible the different theories of ethically right and wrong are. As the decades have gone by, there has not been considerable convergence, and it is an open question why that is (Chalmers, 2015). In the same way physicists initially developed several different theories aimed at accurately describing the fundamental nature of light, ethicists have developed a rather long list of competing theories that all are aimed at providing an accurate account of the underlying nature of right and wrong action. The most famous examples of such theories are, perhaps, Kant’s moral theory and Bentham’s hedonistic utilitarianism, though there are many other theories and variations.Also in natural science, it is commonplace that there, for a period of time, is disagreement on which account of some phenomenon we are to believe (1st order disagreement). However, in the history of natural science, these situations are typically eventually resolved. What seems to happen in these fields is that the scientific community, to an increasing extent, agree in their evaluative judgements of the competing theories, judging one to have fewer weaknesses than all others.I start by making the case that a crucial reason for why this happens repeatedly in natural science, while it does not happen in moral theory, is because one in natural science have a broad (2nd order) agreement about how to resolve these 1st order disagreements, while in moral theory, there is (2nd order) disagreement about how to resolve them. More precisely, these natural scientists, implicitly, largely agree on a method for judging whether a theory is good, and better than its competitors, while ethicists, implicitly, have a much higher degree of disagreement on this. I argue that without such 2nd order agreement, 1st order agreement on what moral theory might be practically impossible to reach.I then move on to argue two things: First, that we have initial (pre-empirical) reason to suspect that differences in theory evaluation between ethicists often come down to disagreements about criteria or disagreements about data (including disagreements about emphasis), and second, that when we look at cases of normative ethicists evaluating moral theories, we do indeed find that their use of criteria, their selection of data, or both, differ considerably from one another. With regard to the former argument, I argue that 2nd order disagreement on the evaluation of moral theories is best seen as largely being disagreements about criteria and disagreements about data. In this discussion, I build on and reframe conceptions of certain criteria (or theoretical virtues), most importantly the accuracy criterion, as described by Kuhn (1977) and by Schindler (2018), and argue how they should be understood in the context of moral theory. I also build on and reframe the conception of philosophical data of Bengson et al. (2022). With regard to the latter argument, I look at four different cases of ethicist implicitly or explicitly proposing which criteria we should put emphasis on when evaluating moral theories, or which data we should take to be central. I conclude that we have good reason to think that a main reason for the lack of convergence on moral theory is due to ethicists evaluating theories based on different emphasis on different criteria and based on different selections of data.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #virtues #criteria #evaluation #evaluations #moralphilosophy
Uziel Awret: Naturalizing the Mind and the Ignorance Hypothesis Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2025-12-26 | Uziel AwretNaturalizing the Mind and the Ignorance HypothesisMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 3 2025. Small Hall F4050, University Main Building.Daniel Stoljar’s ‘Epistemic View’ is based on his ‘Ignorance Hypothesis’ holding that we are ignorant of (non-standard) physical facts whose knowledge would explain away our anti- physicalist problem intuitions. Nonstandard physical facts are ones discovered during scientific revolutions and that conflict with the manifest view. I argue that Stoljar’s Epistemic View is more relevant to the project of naturalizing the mind than either Chalmers’ dualistic naturalism or that of standard physicalism despite the fact that Stoljar himself does not think that the epistemic view is compatible with traditional naturalism because of its reliance on what we do not know and cannot imagine. However, while the more ambitious versions of the epistemic view, like the Russellian and Mysterian ones, do not seem compatible with naturalism (because of the way they set a priori epistemic limits on empirical investigation and make problematic metaphysical commitments), Stoljar’s nonstandard Epistemic View provides traditional naturalism a way to ‘naturalize’ novelty by accepting ignorance; one can believe both that there is nothing above and beyond the natural world and that we are ignorant about large parts of it.An interesting class of ‘less ambitious’ non-standard physical facts are generated by sciences that mature to the point of determining their own scope and limitations. One example is classical mechanics maturing to the point of producing quantum indeterminacy and Heisenberg’s uncertainty. Arithmetic’s maturing to the point of producing Godelian undecidability is another ‘internal’ epistemic limit, while the speed of light is an internal modal determination made by the maturation of Newtonian theory. In all these cases we discovered physical facts stranger than the imagination, if not downright impossible (see Pitowsky, 1994), whose emergence demandedpatience and suspension of premature ‘philosophical intervention’. Ibelieve the emergence of such non-standard facts shows naturalism’s commitment to the empirical at its best, especially when they defy common sense. Not only does the epistemic view minimize metaphysical commitments and is suspicious of a priori epistemic constraints on what’s empirically possible, it is also sympathetic to replacing strange metaphysics with strange physics, commensurate with the spirit ofnaturalism. It also strikes a good balance between the philosophical and the scientific and is compatible with a non-standard version of Ladyman and Ross’s (2007) principle of naturalistic closure and the way it relates metaphysical significance to fundamental physics without embracing total replacement of the philosophical. A question that arises from the above is: how does the epistemic status of that which is considered non-physical (because it cannot be known physically) change if physics itself is rich enough to show that it cannot be known physically? I will end with a ‘radical’ thought experiment by Leonard Susskind that shows that such ‘opaque’ mechanisms are conceivable and that that is enough to protect physicalism from Chalmers’ Conceivability Argument.Pitowsky, I. (1994) George Boole’s ‘Conditions of Possible Experience’ and the quantum puzzle, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45 (1), pp. 95– 125.Ladyman, J. & Ross, D. (2007) Every Thing Must Go, Oxford: Oxford University Press.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #naturalism #philosophyofmind #epistemilogy
Jouni-Matti Kuukkanen: Methodologism and functionalism as progressive philosophies Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2025-12-23 | Jouni-Matti KuukkanenMethodologism and functionalism as progressive philosophiesMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 3 2025. Studium 1 F3020, University Main Building.My talk is based on a new pragmatist approach to knowing and meaning called methodologism, which is detailed in my forthcoming book, Doing, Knowing, and Getting it Right: Methodologism as Pragmatism (Cambridge University Press). Applying the philosophies of Wilfrid Sellars (e.g., 2007), Robert Brandom (e.g., 1994), and Huw Price (e.g., 2011) in particular, methodologism focuses on how our practices produce knowledge and how the use of linguistic expressions creates meaning. Methodologism is both (neo)pragmatist and anti-representational.The significant issue is that neither knowledge nor meaning is understood representationally. Therefore, the criteria for both must be found in the use conditions, including assertibility conditions. Furthermore, the practice that produces knowledge is rule-bound, whether we are discussing linguistic knowledge, assertions, or non-linguistic knowledge. This entails that there are both correct and incorrect ways of practicing. Indeed, methodologism, the key notion of the book, refers to the etymological meaning of 'method' as a way. It is the stance according to which knowing requires doing correctly within the rules of the community.The purpose of this talk is first to outline the methodological approach and then to focus on how a particular use theory of meaning, functionalism, can improve our understanding of key philosophical notions. Functionalism here relates primarily to Wilfrid Sellars’s writings, although we can also name several other authors in this lineage, such as Michael Williams (2022) and Huw Price (e.g., 2011; Extended ed.). Functionalism instantiates the same principle that I call methodologism: doing, use, or practice as the key determinant of what a phenomenon or an object is. As in the use theories of meaning in general, the meaning of an expression is determined by its use or role in a language, as well as the rules that govern its use. In other words, functionalism examines the roles or functions of our linguistic items.More specifically, the purpose of the functionalist approach is to study the reasons why we have a particular term, deciphering its function in our practice. This can involve considering what difference it would make if we didn’t have this specific term. The pragmatist maxim states that if it makes no practical difference, it can be disregarded for philosophical purposes. I shall illustrate this approach with references to examples, such as the term ‘truth,’ as they are conceived within the framework of Sellars’s functionalist theory of meaning on one hand, and Huw Price’s expressivism on the other. The progress comes from acquiring a clearer understanding of why we have terms like these, that is, the kinds of functions that they serve. Another advantage is that this approach is fully naturalist and does not introduce non-natural and other mystical entities, such as meanings independent of use conditions. Brandom, R. (1994). Making it Explicit. Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Price, H. (2011). Naturalism without Mirrors. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Price, Huw, Facts and the Function of Truth, Extended Edition (draft).Sellars, W (2007). In the Space of Reasons. Selected Essays of Wilfrid Sellars. Edited by K Scharp,and R Brandom. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Williams, Bernard, (2002). Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #underdetermination#pragmatism
Sami Tayub. Epistemic Modality: Accounting for the Metaphysical Underdetermination of Science Todellisuus ja kuvajainen 2025-12-22 | Sami TayubEpistemic Modality: Accounting for the Metaphysical Underdetermination of ScienceMETHOD AND CONVERGENCE 2025International Conference on Methodology of Philosophy2-4 June 2025 University of Helsinki, Finland.June 3 2025. Small Hall F4050, University Main Building.A common criticism of metaphysics is that it is underdetermined by observable phenomena, especially from science. In that, if there are myriad, conflicting metaphysical theories which are compatible with the phenomena science discovers, then how are we to know which is correct? Metaphysicians have retorted that one can appeal to extra-empirical virtues, especially explanatory power, to determine which metaphysical theory is true. A notable critic is van Fraassen: who developed an empiricist program which rescinds any epistemic warrant for metaphysics because of concerns about this strategy. Contrary to common belief, van Fraassen is not entirely dismissive of metaphysics but views them as having pragmatic value. I argue that van Fraassen even makes room for metaphysical models within scientific theories in the form of extensions. Since these are models of scientific theories, van Fraassen would even argue that they inform us how reality might be relative to the truth of the scientific theory it constitutes. However, van Fraassen (1980) famously recommended that the empiricist should be agnostic about the truth of science, and instead should only commit to its empirical adequacy. Therefore, the empiricist would be agnostic about these possibilities and hence metaphysical knowledge in general. This is consonant with van Fraassen’s (1991, Ch. 12.5) rejection of 'metaphysical realism' where he claims ‘[t]here cannot be in principle... convergence to a single story about our world.’In this talk, I argue that van Fraassen’s empiricist response to the metaphysical underdetermination of science leads to scepticism and instead offer my own resolve without relying on appeals to explanatory power. I criticise van Fraassen’s empiricism; by arguing that it allows for empirically inadequate metaphysical models to constitute scientific theories. If the empiricist remains agnostic about these metaphysics and allows them to constitute the theory, then they would be agnostic about science’s empirical adequacy. This is because, they are then agnostic about models, that form part of scientific theories, with a conflicting empirical import to what is observed; hence his empiricism leads to scepticism. To escape scepticism, I argue we can only allow empirically adequate metaphysical models to constitute scientific theories. Therefore, we rule out, and so deem false, empirically inadequate metaphysical models to attain empirical adequacy. Then, I highlight that van Fraassen regards the models of a scientific theory to be possibilities of the way reality might be if the theory were true. Owing to the earlier concerns, we cannot be agnostic about the models a scientific theory consists of, and hence the possibilities it posits. Instead, I argue they are constrained by what even the empiricist concedes we know - the empirical content of science. Therefore, empirically adequate metaphysical theories are epistemically possible (the nature of which I explain in the talk) relative to what we observe in science. Contra van Fraassen, there is a prospect of ‘convergence to a single story about the world’ as our experimental findings grow, since we can rule out empirically inadequate metaphysics.Van Fraassen, B. (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford University Press.Van Fraassen, B. (1991). Quantum mechanics: an empiricist view. Oxford University Press.#philosophy #methodology #method #methods #conference #universityofhelsinki #underdetermination#metaphysics #empiricalevidence
