Hypotheses non fingo
Hypotheses non fingo ( Latin hypotheses I don't think of ) is a famous phrase by Isaac Newton . This statement is contained in his General Note , the General Scholium , which was added to the second edition of the Principia , and appeared in 1713.
In particular , Newton does not want to hypothesize the cause of the attraction of masses . Newton himself: I have so far explained the phenomena of the heavenly bodies and the movements of the sea by the force of gravity, but I have nowhere given the cause of the latter (see table for source). He is setting himself a limit beyond which it no longer makes sense for him to look for causes. Answering the question of why masses attract is not a goal for Newton. The general theory of relativity does not answer this question either, it only describes gravity as a property of masses differently than Newton, and more precisely, in that it does not treat gravity as a force in the sense of classical physics.
Original text
| Text in the Latin original | German translation by Jakob Philipp Wolfers |
|---|---|
| Hactenus Phænomena cælorum & maris nostri per Vim gravitatis exposui, sed causam Gravitatis nondum assignavi. Oritur utique hæc Vis a causa aliqua quæ penetrat ad usque centra Solis & Planetarum, sine virtutis diminutione; (...)
Rationem vero harum Gravitatis proprietatum ex Phænomenis nondum potui deducere, & Hypotheses non fingo . Quicquid enim ex Phænomenis non deducitur, Hypothesis vocanda est; & Hypotheses seu Metaphysicæ, seu Physicæ, seu Qualitatum occultarum, seu Mechanicæ, in Philosophia Experimentali locum non habent. In hac Philosophia Propositiones deducuntur ex Phænomenis, & redduntur generales per Inductionem. Sic impenetrabilitas, mobilitas, & impetus corporum & leges motuum & gravitatis innotuerunt. Et satis est quod Gravitas revera existat, & agat secundum leges a nobis expositas, & ad corporum cælestium & maris nostri motus omnes sufficiat. |
So far I have explained the phenomena of heavenly bodies and the movements of the sea by the force of gravity, but I have nowhere given the cause of the latter. This force arises from some cause which penetrates to the center of the sun and the planets without losing any of its effectiveness. (...)
I have not yet been able to deduce the reason for these properties of gravity from the appearances, and I do not think of hypotheses . Everything that does not follow from the phenomena is a hypothesis and hypotheses, be they metaphysical or physical, mechanical or those of hidden properties, must not be included in experimental physics . In this one derives the propositions from the phenomena and generalizes them by induction. In this way we got to know the impenetrability, the mobility, the impact of the body, the laws of movement and weight. It is enough that gravity exist, that it works according to the laws we have presented, and that it be able to explain all the movements of the heavenly bodies and the sea. |
Fingo
Since Newton wrote the Principia in Latin, there is some leeway in the translation. Fingo is the 1st person present tense of the Latin verb fingere , which has several meanings: shape, shape, invent, represent, form, fake, gently touch . This text is translated into German in different ways. In addition to Wolfert's translation of “I don't think up hypotheses”, for example “I don't pretend hypotheses”, “I don't make hypotheses” or “I don't invent hypotheses” are common.
Induction versus hypothesis
According to today's understanding, a hypothesis (literally “assumption”) is an assumption formulated in the form of a logical statement , the validity of which is believed to be possible, but which has not yet been proven . The hypothesis must be verifiable on the basis of its conclusions, whereby it would either be proven or refuted depending on the result . A hypothesis is usually seen as the preliminary stage of a theory , which it can become through repeatable observations , provided that no one can clearly refute it.
In this general sense, Hypotheses non fingo certainly does not stand for hypotheses of any kind. From today's perspective, Newton's law of gravity was initially a hypothesis that became a theory and has been brilliantly confirmed. But Newton took the term hypothesis more strictly: everything that does not follow from the phenomena is a hypothesis and hypotheses, be they metaphysical or physical, mechanical or those of hidden properties, must not be included in experimental physics. Newton thus elevates induction to the highest principle of experimental physics. Since Aristotle, this has meant the abstracting conclusion from observed phenomena to a more general knowledge , such as a law of nature.
William Whewell , a nineteenth-century philosopher of science, stated: It was through such use of hypotheses that both Newton himself and Kepler, on whose discoveries Newton's were based, made their discoveries. Whewell stated: What is required is that the hypotheses be close to the facts and not be combined with other arbitrary and untested facts; and that the philosopher should be willing to back off once the facts do not confirm the hypothesis.
Aftermath today
In the 20th century, theorists such as Hans Reichenbach and Rudolf Carnap tried to develop formally exact theories of inductive reasoning. Karl Popper, on the other hand, has always been of the opinion that induction is an illusion and that in reality only deduction is always used.
The German philosopher, science theorist and historian Helmut Pulte poses in his essay Hypothese (non) fingo? The understanding of science of the Enlightenment in the mirror of Newton's reception Newton's proposition. Although he already identifies his doubts in the heading, the work also shows how present Newton's sentence is still today in philosophy and the history of science.
The German philosopher Brigitte Falkenburg submitted the application for a project from 2001 to 2004 to the German Research Foundation under the title "Hypotheses non fingo": Newton's Scientific Methodology . In the project description, she assesses the status of the question of the relationship between induction and deduction in Newton as follows: "Although Newton's successes as a scientist are generally attributed to his consistent application of the inductive method and his strict rejection of hypotheses, there are controversial opinions about what is actually to be understood by induction at Newton. This is mainly due to the fact that in Newton's main works, the "Principia" and the "Opticks", only a few explicit statements on methodological questions are found, which, taken in isolation, are difficult to understand and require interpretation. "
Experimental physicists, on the other hand, seem to have "internalized" Newton's hypotheses non fingo . Some consider as the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics as well as other interpretations as hypotheses that the mathematical description of the Schrödinger equation , nachgeschoben were expendable. The pioneer of laser spectroscopy and Nobel laureate Theodor Hänsch said in an interview: "I am an experimental physicist, and I naively view the laws of quantum mechanics, as arithmetic rules, so to speak, that are empirically confirmed and with which we can also make extremely precise predictions."
Individual evidence
- ↑ The General Scholium to Isaac Newton's Principia, 2nd ed. (1713) , [accessed April 2, 2020].
- ↑ Sir Isaac Newton's Mathematical Principles of Nature: Edited with remarks and explanations by Prof. Dr. J. Ph. Wolfers . Oppenheim, Berlin 1872, p. 511 (VIII, 666, VI S., archive.org [accessed April 3, 2020]).
- ↑ Sir Isaac Newton's Mathematical Principles of Nature: Edited with remarks and explanations by Prof. Dr. J. Ph. Wolfers. 1872, Retrieved April 3, 2020 .
- ^ Roman Sexl, Herbert K. Schmidt: Space - Time - Relativity: Relativistic phenomena in theory and example . 4th edition. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013, ISBN 978-3-662-09673-4 , p. 5 (208 p., Limited preview in Google Book search).
- ^ William Whewell: The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences . London, 1840, p. 438. What is requisite is, that the hypotheses should be close to the facts, and not connected with them by other arbitrary and untried facts; and that the philosopher should be ready to resign it as soon as the facts refuse to confirm it.
- ^ Karl R. Popper, David W. Miller: A proof of the impossibility of inductive probability. In: Nature, 302: 687-688 (1983)
- ↑ Helmut Pulte: Hypotheses (non) fingo? The understanding of science in the Enlightenment as reflected in its Newtonian reception . In: Ryszard Różanowski (Ed.): Actuality of the Enlightenment (= Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis ). Wydawnisctwi Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław 2000, ISBN 83-229-2075-X , p. 77-106 ( ruhr-uni-bochum.de [PDF]).
- ^ Brigitte Falkenburg: "Hypotheses non fingo": Newton's scientific methodology. Retrieved April 3, 2020 .
- ↑ Interview with Nobel Laureate in Physics Prof. Dr. Theodor W. Hänsch. Retrieved April 3, 2020 .