On the Origin of Structure in the Universe
On the Origin of Structure in the Universe
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-78808-6_8
复制
发表时间：
1994
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Julian Barbour
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Julian Barbour
我们所处的宇宙最明显的就是它的结构。事实上，根据伯克利、莱布尼茨和马赫等思想家所采用的基本哲学观点，如果宇宙不表现出差异化的结构和性质，就根本不可能谈论宇宙。莱布尼茨的单子论将存在与多样性等同起来：单子是由其他单子定义的，同时也仅凭借其属性而与其他单子区分开来。你不能去掉一个事物的属性而留下一些神秘的“本性”（haeccity）。除去这些属性，什么也没有剩下。现代科学对结构化宇宙这一事实的态度是混乱和矛盾的。它当然不会正面攻击结构问题。其原因相当有趣并且可能具有启发性。在科学革命之前，思想家对感知结构存在的本能反应是寻找该结构的直接原因。这首先反映在毕达哥拉斯有序宇宙的概念中。宇宙有它现有的结构，因为那是它可以拥有的最好的结构。事实上，这就是宇宙这个词的真正含义，主要是秩序，但也有装饰、点缀或服饰（化妆品有相同的起源）。开普勒和伽利略与毕达哥拉斯一样对世界之美着迷，并在有序宇宙概念的整体框架中阐述了他们的思想。事实上，两人都认为自己的工作对阐明开普勒（1596）的柏拉图固体这一思想做出了重大贡献，而伽利略（1632）则认为重力下的自由落体是“将放错位置的物体（从地面升起的石头）返回到正确的位置”。
The most obvious thing about the universe in which we find ourselves is its structure. Indeed, according to the basic philosophical viewpoint adopted by thinkers such as Berkeley, Leibniz and Mach, it would not really be possible to speak of the universe at all if it did not exhibit differentiating structure and qualities. Leibniz's monadology equates existence with variety: monads are defined by and simultaneously distinguished from other monads by virtue of their attributes and nothing else. You cannot remove the attributes of a thing and leave some mysterious" thisness"(haeccity). Remove the attributes and nothing is left.The approach of modern science to the fact of the structured universe is confused and ambivalent. It certainly does not make a frontal attack on the problem of structure. The reason for this is rather interesting and possibly instructive. Before the scientific revolution, the instinctive reaction of thinkers to the existence of perceived structure was to find a direct reason for that structure. This is reflected above all in the Pythagorean notion of the wellordered cosmos. The cosmos has the structure it does because that is the best structure it could have. In fact, that is what the word cosmos really meansprimarily order, but also decoration, embellishment, or dress (cosmetic has the same origin). Kepler and Galileo were no less entranced by the beauty of the world than Pythagoras and formulated their ideas in the overall framework of the notion of the well-ordered cosmos. Indeed, both saw their work as contributing significantly to the articulation of the idea-Kepler (1596) with his Platonic solids, while Galileo (1632) regarded free fall under gravity as" returning a misplaced object [a stone raised from the ground] to its proper place)."