mteb/BrightProPsychologyRetrieval huggingface dataset:
In addition, Maxwell's equations required that all electromagnetic waves in 
vacuum  propagate at a fixed speed, _ c
 _ . As this can only occur in one 
reference frame  in Newtonian
physics (see  Galilean relativity  ), the aether was hypothesized as the absolute and unique frame
of reference in which Maxwell's equations hold. That is, the aether must be
"still" universally, otherwise _c_ would vary along with any variations that
might occur in its supportive medium. Maxwell himself proposed several
mechanical models of aether based on wheels and gears, and  George Francis
FitzGerald  even
constructed a working model of one of them. These models had to agree with the
fact that the electromagnetic waves are  transverse  but never  longitudinal  .
Personal life  |
James Clerk Maxwell  began
working on  Michael Faraday  's 
lines of force  . In his 1861 paper _
On Physical Lines of Force  _ he modelled these magnetic lines of
force using a sea of molecular vortices that he considered to be partly made
of aether and partly made of ordinary matter. He derived expressions for the
dielectric constant and the magnetic permeability in terms of the transverse
elasticity and the density of this elastic medium. He then equated the ratio
of the dielectric constant to the magnetic permeability with a suitably
adapted version of Weber and Kohlrausch's result of 1856, and he substituted
this result into Newton's equation for the speed of sound. On obtaining a
value that was close to the speed of light as measured by  Hippolyte Fizeau
 , Maxwell concluded that light
consists in undulations of the same medium that is the cause of electric and
magnetic phenomena.  [B 1]  [B 2]  [B 3]  [B 4]
Qualia  

Another problem for the eliminativist is the consideration that human beings
undergo subjective  experiences  and hence
their conscious mental states have  qualia  . Since
qualia are generally regarded as characteristics of mental states, their
existence does not seem compatible with eliminativism.  [58]  Eliminativists
such as Dennett and Rey respond by rejecting qualia.  [59]  [60]  Opponents of
eliminativism see this response as problematic, since many claim that
existence of qualia is perfectly obvious. Many philosophers consider the
"elimination" of qualia implausible, if not incomprehensible. They assert
that, for instance, the existence of pain is simply beyond denial.  [58]

Admitting that the existence of qualia seems obvious, Dennett nevertheless
holds that "qualia" is a theoretical term from an outdated metaphysics
stemming from  Cartesian  intuitions. He argues that a precise analysis shows that the
term is in the long run empty and full of contradictions. Eliminativism's
claim about qualia is that there is no unbiased evidence for such experiences
when regarded as something more than  propositional attitudes
 .  [25]  [61]  In
other words, it does not deny that pain exists, but holds that it exists
independently of its effect on behavior. Influenced by Wittgenstein's _
Philosophical Investigations  _ , Dennett and Rey have defended
eliminativism about qualia even when other aspects of the mental are accepted.
c  n  \+  (  1  −  1  n  2  )  v  .  {\displaystyle {\frac
{c}{n}}+\left(1-{\frac {1}{n^{2}}}\right)v.}
The two most important models, which were aimed to describe the relative
motion of the Earth and aether, were  Augustin-Jean Fresnel  's (1818) model of the (nearly)
stationary aether including a partial aether drag determined by Fresnel's
dragging coefficient,  [A 4]  and  George Gabriel Stokes
 ' (1844)  [A 5]  model
of complete aether drag. The latter theory was not considered as correct,
since it was not compatible with the  aberration of light
 , and the auxiliary
hypotheses developed to explain this problem were not convincing. Also,
subsequent experiments as the  Sagnac effect  (1913) also showed that this model is untenable. However, the most
important experiment supporting Fresnel's theory was  Fizeau
 's 1851  experimental
confirmation  of  Fresnel
 's 1818 prediction that a medium with  refractive
index  _n_ moving with a velocity
_v_ would increase the speed of light travelling through the medium in the
same direction as _v_ from _c_ / _n_ to:  [E 1]  [E 2]
*  Alemannisch   "Äther \(Physik\) – Alemannic")
*  العربية  
*  Беларуская   "Эфір \(фізіка\) – Belarusian")
*  Български   "Етер \(физика\) – Bulgarian")
*  Català   "Èter \(física\) – Catalan")
*  Чӑвашла   "Эфир \(физика\) – Chuvash")
*  Čeština   "Éter \(fyzika\) – Czech")
*  Dansk   "Æter \(fysikhistorie\) – Danish")
*  Deutsch   "Äther \(Physik\) – German")
*  Eesti   "Eeter \(füüsika\) – Estonian")
*  Español   "Éter \(física\) – Spanish")
*  Esperanto  
*  Euskara   "Eter \(fisika\) – Basque")
*  فارسی   "اتر \(فیزیک\) – Persian")
*  Français  
*  Gaeilge   "Éitear \(teoiriciúil\) – Irish")
*  한국어   "에테르 \(물리\) – Korean")
*  Հայերեն   "Եթեր \(ֆիզիկա\) – Armenian")
*  Hrvatski   "Eter \(fizika\) – Croatian")
*  Bahasa Indonesia   "Eter \(medium\) – Indonesian")
*  Italiano  
*  ಕನ್ನಡ   "ಈಥರ್ \(ಭೌತಶಾಸ್ತ್ರದಲ್ಲಿ\) – Kannada")
*  Қазақша   "Эфир \(физика\) – Kazakh")
*  Latina   "Aether \(physica\) – Latin")
*  Lietuvių   "Eteris \(fizika\) – Lithuanian")
*  Magyar   "Éter \(fizika\) – Hungarian")
*  Nederlands   "Ether \(medium\) – Dutch")
*  日本語   "エーテル \(物理学\) – Japanese")
*  Norsk bokmål   "Eter \(fysikk\) – Norwegian Bokmål")
*  Occitan   "Etèr \(fisica\) – Occitan")
*  Oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  
*  پښتو  
*  Piemontèis  
*  Polski   "Eter \(fizyka\) – Polish")
*  Português  
*  Română  
*  Русский   "Эфир \(физика\) – Russian")
*  Simple English  
*  Slovenčina   "Éter \(fyzika\) – Slovak")
*  Slovenščina   "Eter \(fizika\) – Slovenian")
*  Српски / srpski   "Етар \(физика\) – Serbian")
*  Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски   "Etar \(fizika\) – Serbo-Croatian")
*  Suomi  
*  Svenska   "Eter \(fysik\) – Swedish")
*  Українська   "Ефір \(фізика\) – Ukrainian")
*  Tiếng Việt   "Ête \(vật lý\) – Vietnamese")
*  中文
Moreover, in another paper published the same month in 1905, Einstein made
several observations on a then-thorny problem, the  photoelectric effect
 . In this work he
demonstrated that light can be considered as particles that have a "wave-like
nature". Particles obviously do not need a medium to travel, and thus, neither
did light. This was the first step that would lead to the full development of
 quantum mechanics  , in which
the wave-like nature _and_ the particle-like nature of light are both
considered as valid descriptions of light. A summary of Einstein's thinking
about the aether hypothesis, relativity and light quanta may be found in his
1909 (originally German) lecture "The Development of Our Views on the
Composition and Essence of Radiation".  [A 19]
###  Types of mental states
###  Particles vs. waves
####  First order experiments
###  Bradley suggests particles
###  Secondary sources
> It is obvious from what has gone before that it would be hopeless to attempt
> to solve the question of the motion of the solar system by observations of
> optical phenomena at the surface of the earth.
>
> —  A. Michelson and E. Morley. "On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the
> Luminiferous Æther". _ Philosophical Magazine
>  _ S. 5. Vol. 24.
> No. 151. December 1887.  [10]
The apparent need for a propagation medium for such  Hertzian waves
 (later called  radio
waves  ) can be seen by the fact that they
consist of orthogonal electric (E) and magnetic (B or H) waves. The E waves
consist of undulating dipolar electric fields, and all such dipoles appeared
to require separated and opposite electric charges. Electric charge is an
inextricable property of  matter  , so it appeared
that some form of matter was required to provide the alternating current that
would seem to have to exist at any point along the propagation path of the
wave. Propagation of waves in a true vacuum would imply the existence of 
electric fields  without associated 
electric charge  , or of electric
charge without associated matter. Albeit compatible with Maxwell's equations,
 electromagnetic induction  of electric fields could not be demonstrated in vacuum, because
all methods of detecting electric fields required electrically charged matter.
Alternatives  |
*  Fizeau experiment 
*  Sagnac experiment 
*  Michelson–Gale–Pearson experiment
The Michelson–Morley
experiment compared the time for light to reflect from mirrors in two
orthogonal directions.
* _ Quaestiones  _ (1661–1665)
* "  standing on the shoulders of giants  " (1675)
* _ Notes on the Jewish Temple  _ (c. 1680)
* "  General Scholium  " (1713; _" hypotheses non fingo  " _ )
* _ Ancient Kingdoms Amended  _ (1728)
* _ Corruptions of Scripture  _ (1754)
Lorentz invariance  |
*  Calculus 
*  fluxion 
*  Impact depth 
*  Inertia 
*  Newton disc 
*  Newton polygon 
*  Newton–Okounkov body 
*  Newton's reflector 
*  Newtonian telescope 
*  Newton scale 
*  Newton's metal 
*  Spectrum 
*  Structural coloration
##  Academia
We can focus internally or externally.
*  Aether theories 
*  Aether (classical element)  "Aether \(classical element\)")
*  Aether drag hypothesis 
*  Astral light
*  _Newton_ by Blake  "Newton \(Blake\)") (monotype)
*  _Newton_ by Paolozzi  "Newton \(Paolozzi\)") (sculpture)
* _ Isaac Newton Gargoyle  _
* _ Astronomers Monument  _
An influential classification of mental states is due to  Franz Brentano
 . He argues that there are three
basic kinds: _presentations_ , _judgments_ , and _phenomena of love and hate_
.  [78]  [79]  [80]  [81]  All mental states either belong to one of these
kinds or are constituted by combinations of them. These different types differ
not in content or what is presented but in mode or how it is presented. The
most basic kind is _presentation_ , which is involved in every mental state.
Pure presentations, as in imagination, just show their object without any
additional information about the veridical or evaluative aspects of their
object. A _judgment_ , on the other hand, is an attitude directed at a
presentation that asserts that its presentation is either true or false, as is
the case in regular perception. _Phenomena of love and hate_ involve an
evaluative attitude towards their presentation: they show how things ought to
be, and the presented object is seen as either good or bad. This happens, for
example, in desires.  [78]  [79]  More complex types can be built up through
combinations of these basic types. To be disappointed about an event, for
example, can be construed as a judgment that this event happened together with
a negative evaluation of it.  [78]  Brentano's distinction between judgments,
phenomena of love and hate, and presentations is closely related to the more
recent idea of  direction of fit 
between mental state and world, i.e. mind-to-world direction of fit for
judgments, the world-to-mind direction of fit for phenomena of love and hate
and null direction of fit for mere presentations.  [78]  Brentano's tripartite
system of classification has been modified in various ways by Brentano's
students.  Alexius Meinong  , for
example, divides the category of phenomena of love and hate into two distinct
categories: feelings and desires.  [82]   Uriah Kriegel
") is a contemporary defender of Brentano's approach to the
classification of mental phenomena.  [83]
By this point the mechanical qualities of the aether had become more and more
magical: it had to be a  fluid  in order to fill space,
but one that was millions of times more rigid than steel in order to support
the high frequencies of light waves. It also had to be massless and without 
viscosity  , otherwise it would visibly affect
the orbits of planets. Additionally it appeared it had to be completely
transparent, non-dispersive,  incompressible  , and continuous at a very small scale.  [9]  Maxwell
wrote in _Encyclopædia Britannica_ :  [A 3]
The negative outcome of the  Michelson–Morley experiment

(1887) suggested that the aether did not exist, a finding that was confirmed
in subsequent experiments through the 1920s. This led to considerable
theoretical work to explain the propagation of light without an aether. A
major breakthrough was the  special theory of relativity
 , which
could explain why the experiment failed to see aether, but was more broadly
interpreted to suggest that it was not needed. The Michelson–Morley
experiment, along with the  blackbody radiator  and  photoelectric effect  , was a key experiment in the development of  modern
physics  , which includes both
relativity and  quantum theory 
, the latter of which explains the particle-like nature of light.
By the early 20th century, aether theory was in trouble. A series of
increasingly complex experiments  had been carried out in the late 19th
century to try to detect the motion of the Earth through the aether, and had
failed to do so. A range of proposed aether-dragging theories could explain
the null result but these were more complex, and tended to use arbitrary-
looking coefficients and physical assumptions. Lorentz and FitzGerald offered
within the framework of  Lorentz ether theory  a more elegant solution to how the motion of an
absolute aether could be undetectable (length contraction), but if their
equations were correct, the new  special theory of relativity
 (1905)
could generate the same mathematics without referring to an aether at all.
Aether fell to  Occam's Razor  .  [B
1]  [B 2]  [B 3]  [B 4]
Relations  |
Wikisource  has original text related to
this article:
Eliminative materialism

20 languages

*  العربية  
*  Azərbaycanca  
*  Català  
*  Deutsch  
*  Eesti  
*  Español  
*  فارسی  
*  Français  
*  한국어  
*  Íslenska  
*  Italiano  
*  Nederlands  
*  پښتو  
*  Português  
*  Русский  
*  Suomi  
*  Svenska  
*  Türkçe  
*  Українська  
*  中文  

[ Edit links
](https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:EntityPage/Q1329497
Namesake  |
##  Aether concepts
Intuitive reservations  

The thesis of eliminativism seems so obviously wrong to many critics, who find
it undeniable that people know immediately and indubitably that they have
minds, that argumentation seems unnecessary. This sort of intuition-pumping is
illustrated by asking what happens when one asks oneself honestly if one has
mental states.  [49]  Eliminativists object to such a rebuttal of their
position by claiming that intuitions often are mistaken. Analogies from the
history of science are frequently invoked to buttress this observation: it may
appear obvious that the sun travels around the earth, for example, but this
was nevertheless proved wrong. Similarly, it may appear obvious that apart
from neural events there are also mental conditions, but that could be false.
[23]

But even if one accepts the susceptibility to error of people's intuitions,
the objection can be reformulated: if the existence of mental conditions seems
perfectly obvious and is central to our conception of the world, then
enormously strong arguments are needed to deny their existence. Furthermore,
these arguments, to be consistent, must be formulated in a way that does not
presuppose the existence of entities like "mental states", "logical
arguments", and "ideas", lest they be  self-contradictory
 .  [50]  Those who accept
this objection say that the arguments for eliminativism are far too weak to
establish such a radical claim and that there is thus no reason to accept
eliminativism.  [49]
In 1887–1889,  Heinrich Hertz  experimentally demonstrated the electric magnetic waves are identical
to light waves. This unification of electromagnetic wave and optics indicated
that there was a single luminiferous aether instead of many different kinds of
aether media.  [8]
In 1918, Einstein publicly alluded to that new definition for the first time.
[A 21]  Then, in the early 1920s, in a lecture which he was invited to give at
Lorentz's university in Leiden, Einstein sought to reconcile the theory of
relativity with  Lorentzian aether  . In this lecture Einstein stressed that special relativity
took away the last mechanical property of the aether: immobility. However, he
continued that special relativity does not necessarily rule out the aether,
because the latter can be used to give physical reality to acceleration and
rotation. This concept was fully elaborated within  general relativity
 , in which physical
properties (which are partially determined by matter) are attributed to space,
but no substance or state of motion can be attributed to that "aether" (by
which he meant curved space-time).  [B 13]  [A 22]  [20]
Criticism  

Illusionists generally hold that once it is explained why people believe and
say they are conscious, the hard problem of consciousness will dissolve.
Chalmers agrees that a mechanism for these beliefs and reports can and should
be identified using the standard methods of physical science, but disagrees
that this would support illusionism, saying that the datum illusionism fails
to account for is not reports of consciousness but rather first-person
consciousness itself.  [70]  He separates consciousness from beliefs and
reports about consciousness, but holds that a fully satisfactory theory of
consciousness should explain how the two are "inextricably intertwined" so
that their alignment does not require an inexplicable coincidence.  [70]
Illusionism has also been criticized by the philosopher  Jesse Prinz
 .  [71]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to   Luminiferous aether
 .
*  Behaviorism 
*  Biological naturalism 
*  Dualism 
* Eliminative materialism
*  Emergent materialism 
*  Epiphenomenalism 
*  Functionalism  "Functionalism \(philosophy of mind\)")
*  Idealism 
*  Interactionism  "Interactionism \(philosophy of mind\)")
*  Materialism 
*  Monism 
*  Naïve realism 
*  Neurophenomenology 
*  Neutral monism 
*  New mysterianism 
*  Nondualism 
*  Occasionalism 
*  Parallelism 
*  Phenomenalism 
*  Phenomenology  "Phenomenology \(philosophy\)")
*  Physicalism 
*  Type physicalism 
*  Property dualism 
*  Representational 
*  Solipsism 
*  Substance dualism 

Concepts  |

*  Abstract object 
*  Artificial intelligence 
*  Chinese room 
*  Creativity 
*  Cognition 
*  Cognitive closure  "Cognitive closure \(philosophy\)")
*  Concept 
*  Consciousness 
*  Hard problem of consciousness 
*  Hypostatic abstraction 
*  Idea 
*  Identity  "Identity \(philosophy\)")
*  Intelligence 
*  Intentionality 
*  Introspection 
*  Intuition 
*  Language of thought 
*  Mental event 
*  Mental image 
*  Mental process 
*  Mental property 
*  Mental representation 
*  Mind 
*  Mind–body problem 
*  Pain  "Pain \(philosophy\)")
*  Problem of other minds 
*  Propositional attitude 
*  Qualia 
*  Tabula rasa
An important distinction among mental states is between  sensory
 and non-sensory states.  [46]  Sensory states involve
some form of sense impressions like visual perceptions, auditory impressions
or bodily pains. Non-sensory states, like thought, rational intuition or the
feeling of familiarity, lack sensory contents.  [47]  Sensory states are
sometimes equated with qualitative states and contrasted with  propositional
attitude states  .
[7]  [8]  Qualitative states involve  qualia  , which
constitute the subjective feeling of having the state in question or what it
is like to be in it.  [7]  Propositional attitudes, on the other hand, are
relations a subject has to a proposition. They are usually expressed by verbs
like  believe  ,  desire  ,
fear or hope together with a that-clause.  [48]  [49]  [8]  So believing that
it will rain today, for example, is a propositional attitude. It has been
argued that the contrast between qualitative states and propositional
attitudes is misleading since there is some form of subjective feel to certain
propositional states like understanding a sentence or suddenly thinking of
something.  [50]  This would suggest that there are also non-sensory
qualitative states and some propositional attitudes may be among them.  [50]
[51]  Another problem with this contrast is that some states are both sensory
and propositional. This is the case for perception, for example, which
involves sensory impressions that represent what the  world
 is like. This representational
aspect is usually understood as involving a propositional attitude.  [52]
[53]
###  Einstein's views on the aether
Criticism  

Edward Feser objects to Dennett's position as follows. That you need to appeal
to third-person neurological evidence to determine whether your memory of your
qualia has been tampered with does not seem to show that your qualia
themselves—past or present—can be known only by appealing to that evidence.
You might still be directly aware of your qualia from the first-person,
subjective point of view even if you do not know whether they are the same as
the qualia you had yesterday—just as you might really be aware of the article
in front of you even if you do not know whether it is the same as the article
you saw yesterday. Questions about memory do not necessarily bear on the
nature of your awareness of objects present here and now (even if they bear on
what you can justifiably claim to know about such objects), whatever those
objects happen to be. Dennett's assertion that scientific objectivity requires
appealing exclusively to third-person evidence appears mistaken. What
scientific objectivity requires is not denial of the first-person subjective
point of view but rather a means of communicating inter-subjectively about
what one can grasp only from that point of view. Given the relational
structure first-person phenomena like qualia appear to exhibit—a structure
that  Carnap  devoted great effort to
elucidating—such a means seems available: we can communicate what we know
about qualia in terms of their structural relations to one another. Dennett
fails to see that qualia can be essentially subjective and still relational or
non-intrinsic, and thus communicable. This communicability ensures that claims
about qualia are epistemologically objective; that is, they can in principle
be grasped and evaluated by all competent observers even though they are
claims about phenomena that are arguably not metaphysically objective, i.e.,
about entities that exist only as grasped by a subject of experience. It is
only the former sort of objectivity that science requires. It does not require
the latter, and cannot plausibly require it if the first-person realm of
qualia is what we know better than anything else.  [63]
Between 1892 and 1904,  Hendrik Lorentz  developed an electron–aether theory, in which he avoided making
assumptions about the aether. In his model the aether is completely
motionless, and by that he meant that it could not be set in motion in the
neighborhood of ponderable matter. Contrary to earlier electron models, the
electromagnetic field of the aether appears as a mediator between the
electrons, and changes in this field cannot propagate faster than the speed of
light. A fundamental concept of Lorentz's theory in 1895 was the "theorem of
corresponding states" for terms of order v/c.  [A 6]  This theorem states that
an observer moving relative to the aether makes the same observations as a
resting observer, after a suitable change of variables. Lorentz noticed that
it was necessary to change the space-time variables when changing frames and
introduced concepts like physical  length contraction
 (1892)  [A 7]  to explain the
Michelson–Morley experiment, and the mathematical concept of  local time
 (1895) to
explain the  aberration of light  and the  Fizeau experiment  . This resulted in the formulation of the so-called  Lorentz
transformation  by 
Joseph Larmor  (1897, 1900)  [A 8]  [A
9]  and Lorentz (1899, 1904),  [A 10]  [A 11]  whereby (it was noted by
Larmor) the complete formulation of local time is accompanied by some sort of
 time dilation  of electrons moving in
the aether. As Lorentz later noted (1921, 1928), he considered the time
indicated by clocks resting in the aether as "true" time, while local time was
seen by him as a heuristic working hypothesis and a mathematical artifice.  [A
12]  [A 13]  Therefore, Lorentz's theorem is seen by modern authors as being a
mathematical transformation from a "real" system resting in the aether into a
"fictitious" system in motion.  [B 7]  [B 3]  [B 8]