A Survey of the Problems of a Dynamic Theory of Production

1965 ◽  
pp. 293-294
Author(s):  
Ragnar Frisch
Author(s):  
B. R. Ahn ◽  
N. J. Kim

High energy approximation in dynamic theory of electron diffraction involves some intrinsic problems. First, the loss of theoretical strictness makes it difficult to comprehend the phenomena of electron diffraction. Secondly, it is difficult to believe that the approximation is reasonable especially in the following cases: 1) when accelerating voltage is not sufficiently high, 2) when the specimen is thick, 3) when the angle between the surface normal of the specimen and zone axis is large, and 4) when diffracted beam with large diffraction angle is included in the calculation. However, until now the method to calculate the many beam dynamic electron diffraction without the high energy approximation has not been proposed. For this reason, the authors propose a method to eliminate the high energy approximation in the calculation of many beam dynamic electron diffraction. In this method, a perfect crystal with flat surface was assumed. The method was applied to the calculation of [111] zone axis CBED patterns of Si.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-271
Author(s):  
Tamás Demeter

This paper sketches a recently emerging divide between two interpretations of Hume's methodology and philosophy of science. On the first interpretation Hume relies on an inductive methodology and provides a (Newtonian) dynamic theory of the mind, and his philosophy of science reflects this methodology. On the second, Hume relies on inferences to the best explanation via comparative analysis of instances, and offers an anatomy of the mind relying on a chemical and organic imagery. The paper also aspires to lean the reader's sympathies toward the latter interpretation while outlining some of its potential consequences for the character of Hume's psychology, the limits of associationism, and his empiricism.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 273-287

The article examines the impact of the discourses concerning idleness and food on the formation of “production art” in the socio-political context of revolutionary Petrograd. The author argues that the development of the theory and practice of this early productionism was closely related to the larger political, social and ideological processes in the city. The Futurists, who were in the epicenter of Petrograd politics during the Civil War (1918–1921), were well acquainted with both of the discourses mentioned, and they contrasted the idleness of the old art with the dedicated labor of the “artist-proletarians” whom they valued as highly as people in the “traditional” working professions. And the search for the “right to exist” became the most important goal in a starving city dominated by the ideology of radical communism. The author departs from the prevailing approach in the literature, which links the artistic thought of the Futurists to Soviet ideology in its abstract, generalized form, and instead elucidates ideological influences in order to consider the early production texts in their immediate social and political contexts. The article shows that the basic concepts of production art (“artist-proletarian,” “creative labor,” etc.) were part of the mainstream trends in the politics of “red Petrograd.” The Futurists borrowed the popular notion of the “commune” for the title of their main newspaper but also worked with the Committees of the Rural Poor and with the state institutions for procurement and distribution. They took an active part in the Fine Art Department of Narkompros (People’s Commissariat of Education). The theory of production art was created under these conditions. The individualistic protest and “aesthetic terror” of pre-revolutionary Futurism had to be reconsidered, and new state policy measures were based on them. The harsh socio-economic context of war communism prompted artists to rethink their own role in the “impending commune.” Further development of these ideas led to the Constructivist movement and strongly influenced the extremely diverse trends within the “left art” of the 1920s.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document