Physics Textbook on the Logical Categories
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Here’s an absolutely unique university physics textbook that grounds itself in "first principles." Traditional logic is not alien to the author Dr. Anthony Rizzi. It's likely the most philosophical textbook out there on physics.
We'll preview it here! And in doing so, we'll again review The Categories.
Physics needs philosophy and logic. There’s a lot of “first principles” that make physics intelligible. Anthony Rizzi, in Physics For Realists: Mechanics, explains that physics takes a lot for granted: that things actually exist, the principle of non-contradiction, the principle of causality, the distinction between substance and accident, et cetera.
Textbook on Amazon: amzn.to/3SHqJn1
As an Amazon Associate I earn some money from qualifying purchases.
The Categories: amateurlogicia...
• Become MORE LOGICAL wi...
The Amateur Logician Newsletter: amateurlogicia...
Follow me on "X" (Twitter): / logicianamateur
Buy me a Cup of Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
Very interesting: I've never seen a Physics text elaborate on its Philosophical basis.
Physics is actually Philosophy of Nature😇
@@vichupb My degrees are in Physics, and my day job is in Microwave Engineering, but my "WOW!" is still in nonlinear dynamical systems. Natural Philosopher is still my favorite moniker.
Over the years, it was disappointing that so many Physics Faculty would dismiss Philosophical/Metaphysical questions in class as not part of Physics.
@@vichupb When I discovered Physics in High School, I embraced the term "Natural Philosophy".
As I got into a Physics Major and subsequent Grad School, I was disappointed how the Faculty would evade metaphysical questions in class as "just Philosophy".
@@douglasstrother6584 I always wanted to be a Physicist but my parents pushed me to pursue Electronics and communication Engineering ..But I never quit my passion I was reading generic books of Stephen Hawkings and Interviews /Documentaries..
I very well remember that moment..On 2014 I was reading "Essays of Francis Bacon" and was googling as "What is skepticism" ..and one thing led to another I found the term "Metaphysics" which was a part of Philosophy syllabus in the Masters..
And that search led to another book called "Principia Mathematica " and 10yrs later Here I am lol😅😂
When I started to earn a living I pursued Msc Physics (Distance) while working in 2018.
@@douglasstrother6584 I'm still exploring the Metaphysical part while trying to relate that with Modern Physics.. My Ancestors here in India and also in China tried to understand the universe by experimenting a lot.. The problem is they could not come with a mathematical proof.. I was amazed to see a concept of Quantum entanglement by an old Hindu sage[Bogar] in a book that was written thousands of years ago..😅
The issue is my skeptical mind always looks for a proof or explanation by scientific methods though I wanted to learn with an open mind despite being an Atheist😅😂
Thank you for this video! Your channel is very needed! I really enjoy your reviewing of logic books!
Thank you! I really appreciate that. There are many more books I want to review with you all.
There's also a handbook of space and time by springer which is a very advanced handbook combining mathematical physics, theoretical physics (special relativity) and philosophy of space and time.
It's shocking to see a book like that. Definitely getting a copy.
On second thought, I'm pretty sure that book cannot be used in an introductory physics class at the undergraduate level. I don't think real physics professors these days would stomach even reading it😅
A book that is an absolute must if you want an introduction to physics is Physics for the Inquiring Mind, I forgot the name of author so just Google it. This book is great for getting a working understanding of scientific reasoning and current theoretical frameworks in physics and astronomy. Unlike standard physics textbooks that immediately get to experimental procedures and formulae without giving the reasoning behind it all.
Thanks for sharing Physics for Realists though.
Love your videos❤
Could you please make this available in digital format, pdf online. Please. I'm really interested in reading this book, because it's one of it's kind, but unable to find out in India. It's not available anywhere in my country.
So, could you possibly provide it's scanned copy in pdf form or maybe notes material.
It would be really helpful. Thanks.
The author has another edition of this book, but with the subtitle: Electricity and Magnetism. I wonder if the contents are different?
Hello, @kenfrank2730. It’s a different textbook. The one in the video deals with classical mechanics. You're referring to the second textbook, which is on electricity and magnetism. If you take University Physics at college, the first semester will be on classical mechanics (think of Newton's Laws of Motion) and the second semester will be on electricity and magnetism (think of Coulomb, Gauss, etc.).
Thanks for the update. I've taken all 3 physics courses. I'll put both editions on my "buy list"@@AmateurLogician
This is very interesting. It’s a philosophical science in the sense that physics and philosophy ought not to be dissociated. Reminds me of the works from the ancient Greeks up to and including Newton where the two are definitely not dissociated. I suppose after Newton, the study of science became increasingly ‘unadulterated’ by philosophy. Now we tend to know more and more about less and less.
People have become hyper-specialists. That's partly why it is so easy for people to embrace a naïve scientism and reject ontology or general philosophy. Indeed, some scientists have gone so far as to claim "[traditional] philosophy is dead!" But the thing is, there is so much physics takes for granted when it comes to ontology and epistemology. While we can "bracket off" that grounding such that we don't need to think about it when studying something like F=ma, that grounding is STILL there.
this is not physics btw. i have never seen any context where physics needed an axiomatic description.
The author, Dr. Anthony Rizzi, doesn't claim to be doing "physics" in the axiomatization. (Why would anyone think he does, btw?) Rather, he is looking into ontological or metaphysical presuppositions. My old physics professor did something similar with mathematics. He had us students study his "axioms" in order to better conceptually grasp kinematics.
@@AmateurLogician i dunno, i tried by real life example. like suppose you throw a ball it eventually slows down. or its harder to push heavy things than llighter things .and so on.
Ben Shapiro but smart
That’s funny! Who is "Ben Shaprio but smart"? Me or Anthony Rizzi? (Or both!?) If me, I should use that quote and put it on my website AmateurLogician.com. ;)