Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge CB2 3RH, United Kingdom.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2022 Dec;96:51-67. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2022.08.011. Epub 2022 Sep 22.
Derived measurements involve problems of coordination. Conducting them often requires detailed theoretical assumptions about their target, while such assumptions can lack sources of evidence that are independent from these very measurements. In this paper, I defend two claims about problems of coordination. I motivate both by a novel case study on a central measurement problem in the history of physical geodesy: the determination of the earth's ellipticity. First, I argue that the severity of problems of coordination varies according to scientists' predictive and experimental control over perturbations of the measurement process. Second, I identify a methodology by which scientists can solve hard problems of coordination and gradually increase their predictive control over perturbations. I dub this methodology 'operational pluralism' since it is driven by the introduction of alternative measurement operations that involve different physical indicators.
推导测量涉及协调问题。进行推导测量通常需要对其目标进行详细的理论假设,而这些假设可能缺乏与这些测量本身无关的证据来源。在本文中,我将捍卫关于协调问题的两个主张。我将通过对物理大地测量学历史上一个核心测量问题的新案例研究来证明这两个主张。首先,我认为协调问题的严重程度取决于科学家对测量过程中扰动的预测和实验控制。其次,我确定了一种方法,科学家可以通过这种方法解决协调困难的问题,并逐渐增加对扰动的预测控制。我将这种方法称为“操作多元主义”,因为它是通过引入涉及不同物理指标的替代测量操作来驱动的。