In this article, I explain how dimensions, units, and quantities are involved in the design of coherent systems of units; the account involves the equations of physics. When the use of a coherent system of units can be presumed, dimensional analysis is a powerful logico-mathematical method for deriving equations and relations in physics, and for parameterizing equations in terms of dimensionless parameters, which allows identifying physically similar systems. The source of the information yielded by dimensional analysis is not yet well understood in philosophy of physics.

We provide a faithful translation of Hans Richter’s important 1949 paper “Verzerrungstensor, Verzerrungsdeviator und Spannungstensor bei endlichen Formänderungen” from its original German version into English, complemented by an introduction summarizing Richter’s achievements.

In this paper, I consider the issue of how two mathematical models of modern physics, the variational principles and the quantum path integral formalism, relate to reality. I assume that the observed phenomena are consistent with the calculations because both of these models have some common ontological foundations. According to the hypothesis of the summation of coexisting alternative possibilities, at the quantum level, the system at once moves along all histories that possible in given boundary conditions.

Energy has an ambiguous status in general relativity. For systems embedded in asymptotically flat space-times it is possible to construct an integral invariant that corresponds to total energy, however there is no local differential invariant that can be identified with energy density. Moreover, in cosmological ‘big-bang’ scenarios there is an energy gain of about 70 orders of magnitude between the initial detonation and final inflation. Nevertheless, there is a widespread belief that all physical systems, irrespective of their size or complexity, can be associated with a unique scalar measure — their energy.

A partir de una discusión con algunas de las concepciones más extendidas acerca de qué significa trabajar con textos de la historia de la filosofía, este artículo explora el propósito y las estrategias fundamentales que guían a Heidegger en esa tarea. El propósito de esta discusión es mostrar que algunas de las premisas que subyacen a esas concepciones hegemónicas suelen dificultar la comprensión del proceder heideggeriano y que, en este sentido, la discusión directa entre Heidegger y dichas concepciones puede ayudar a precisar la singularidad y el significado de la confrontación del filósofo alemán con la historia de la filosofía.

This article summarizes some of the most important scientific contributions of Murray Gell-Mann (1929-2019).

The purpose of this book is to give an exposition of geometry, from a point of view which complements Klein’s Erlangen program. The emphasis is on extending the classical Euclidean geometry to the finite case, but it goes beyond that. After a brief introduction, which gives the main theme, I present the main results, according to a synthetic view of the subject, rather that chronologically

Reductionism is a prevalent viewpoint in science according to which all physical phenomena can be understood from fundamental laws of physics. Anderson [Science, 177, 393 (1972)], Laughlin and Pines [PNAS, 97, 28 (2000)], and others have countered this viewpoint and argued in favour hierarchical structure of the universe and laws. In this paper we advance the latter perspective by showing that some of the complex flow properties derived using hydrodynamic equations (macroscopic laws) are very difficult, if not impossible, to describe in microscopic framework—kinetic theory. These properties include Kolmogorov’s theory of turbulence, turbulence dissipation and diffusion, and dynamic pressure. We also provide several other examples of hierarchical description.

In this paper, from the historical point of view, we present short anecdotes about the development of the object that we well known as complex numbers.

The ontology proposed in this paper is aimed at demonstrating that it is possible to understand the counter-intuitive predictions of quantum mechanics while still retaining much of the framework underlying classical physics, the implication being that it is better to avoid wandering into unnecessarily speculative realms without the support of conclusive evidence. In particular, it is argued that it is possible to interpret quantum mechanics as simply describing an external world consisting of familiar physical entities (e.g., particles or fields) residing in classical 3-dimensional space (not configuration space) with Lorentz covariance maintained.