Schola quantorum: progress, rationality and inconsistency in the old atomic theory. Part II: critique of Lakatos’ interpretation

Abstract

In this paper, taking as a starting point the historical panorama sketched in the first article of this series (Bezerra, 2003), I undertake a critical analysis of the reconstruction of the early atomic theory performed by Imre Lakatos (1970), and show it to be inadequate in several respects. The present text begins by an exposition of Lakatos' model, the so-called methodology of scientific research programmes. The main problems confronting the Lakatosian reconstruction are then discussed, referring to aspects such as: the status of the correspondence principle; the omission of Sommerfeld's quantization condition; the omission of various important developments occurred in the period 1921-1924; and the unsatisfactory treatment given to the concept of spin. The main difficulty confronting a reconstruction of Lakatosian type, however, refers to the Bohr-Kramers-Slater theory of radiation (BKS) and to Kramers' theory of dispersion which are mostly ignored by Lakatos, but are discussed here in detail. As a result of such problems, the Lakatosian account of the "degenerating phase" of the early atomic theory is itself seriously called into question. In the closing section of the paper, one is led to conclude that some of the difficulties are of a historiographical nature, resulting basically from a bad application of the model; others, however, point to a deeper inadequacy of the methodology of research programmes itself. Towards the end, the possible causes of such inadequacy are discussed including, in particular, the Lakatosian concept of the hard core of a research program, and the unsatisfactory analysis of the conceptual aspects of science and possible paths for their overcoming are suggested.