Loyd S. Swenson

Bio: Loyd S. Swenson is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Aether. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 77 citations.

Drawing the line between kinematics and dynamics in special relativity

Abstract: In his book, Physical Relativity, Harvey Brown challenges the orthodox view that special relativity is preferable to those parts of Lorentz’s classical ether theory it replaced because it revealed various phenomena that were given a dynamical explanation in Lorentz’s theory to be purely kinematical. I want to defend this orthodoxy. The phenomena most commonly discussed in this context in the philosophical literature are length contraction and time dilation. I consider three other phenomena of this kind that played a role in the early reception of special relativity in the physics literature: the Fresnel drag eect in the Fizeau experiment, the velocity dependence of electron mass in -ray deflection experiments by Kaufmann and others, and the delicately balanced torques on a moving charged capacitor in the Trouton-Noble experiment. I oer historical sketches of how Lorentz’s dynamical explanations of

One hundred third critical bibliography of the history of science and its cultural influences (to January 1978).

Abstract: The present CriticalTBibliography,* which includes 2636 citations, is the twenty-fourth to be classified according to the system established in 1953. The main purpose of the classification has always been, in the words of its founder, George Sarton, "to satisfy the needs of historians of science in general rather than those of historians of particular sciences". While the classification is both chronological and by subject, preference is given to the former. The reader who wishes to find all references to a particular subject, therefore, must examine several sections of the bibliography.

One Hundred Seventh Critical Bibliography of the History of Science and Its Cultural Influences (to January 1982)

Abstract: The classification system for the annual Critical Bibliography is based on that developed by George Sarton in 1913 and revised by committee in 1953. In the first two sections will be found references to histories of science in general and to historiographical, philosophical, sociological, and humanistic aspects of science. Section C indexes general books and articles relating to specific sciences. Section D contains all references that relate to the sciences in specific historical periods. Preference is given to the latter, so that historians interested in a particular science, biology, for example, must look in both the general section on the biological sciences (24) as well as the biological section under each of the historical periods.

Statistics and the Scientific Method

Abstract: Regression models have not been so useful in the social sciences. In an attempt to see why, such models are contrasted with successful mathematical models in the natural sciences, including Kepler’s three laws of motion for the planets.

Critical Literature Review

Abstract: Q: Why do a review of the literature? 1. As a way to frame and focus a research project  When research questions are formed without sustained reference to the literature, the study is likely to be marred by 1. Naïve research instruments that lack conceptual underpinnings 2. Problems with sense-making because the researcher is not alert to themes that may be identifiable 3. Problems with claims-making because the researcher lacks the knowledge to state its significance for theory, policy or practice.  Knowledge of the literature can help: 1. Tighten research questions 2. Enhance conceptual sensitivity 3. Provide a source for making comparisons 4. Provide a cache of descriptive data 5. Provide questions for initial observations and interviews 6. Stimulate questions during the analysis 7. Suggest areas for theoretical sampling 8. Confirm findings, or, findings can be used to show where current literature is incorrect, simplistic, or partial 9. Model ways of making claims about the possible significance of your work