________________
50
TULASI-PRAJNA, Dec., 1990
that we are dealing with subjective arbitrariness only; the concept of geometry of real space was called meaningless. This is a misunderstanding. Although the statement about the geometry is based upon certain arbitrary definitions, the statement itself does not become arbitrary : once the definitions have been formulated, it is determined through objective reality alone which is the actual geometry. Let us use our previous example : although we can define the scale of temperature arbitrarily, the indication of the temperature of a physical object does not become a subjective matter. By selecting a certain scale we can stipulate a certain arbitrary number of degrees of heat for the respective body, but this indication has an objective meaning as soon as the coordinative of the scale is added. On the contrary, it is the significance of coordinative definitions to lend an objective meaning to physical measurements."22 It means : whether we regard the temperature of a certain body to be 15°C. or 59° F. depends upon our choice of measuring system, but it does not mean that the temperature of a substance is in itself dependent upon our choice; temperature remains an objeetive property of matter. In the same way, whatever system of geometry we choose, the objective characteristics of space remain unchanged. Reichenbach has considered that the formulation of spatial visualization as a developmental adaptation is itself already based on an epistemological assertion, which it merely tends to emphasize, namely, the assertion that there exists a real space independent of those spaces represented by mathematics, that it is a scientificaly meaningful question to ask which of the mathematically possible types of spaces corresponds to physical space, and that the "harmony" of nature and reason does not depend on an inner priority of Euclidean space, but that, on the contrary, the priority depends on this "harmony".23
Refuting the wrong belief of some scientists regarding the concept of time, Reichenbach writes : "Whereas the conception of space and time as a four-dimensional manifold has been very fruitful for mathematical physics, its effect in the field of epistemology has been only to confuse the issue. Calling time the fourth dimension gives it an air of mystery".24 Reichenbach believes that just as we determine any colour by the three basic colours viz. red, green and blue, by stating how much it contains of each of these three components, sɔ also the meaning of combining space and time in four dimensions is only that we can describe any event by means of four co-ordinates-three of space and one of time. He, therefore, says : "Our schematization of time as a fourth dimension, therefore does not imply any changes in the conception of time”25.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
