To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The answer to the question, “Is Roger Bacon’s scientific practice scientific?” concerns an assessment of whether Bacon’s scientific practice exhibits traits of modern science. This paper uses the theoretical framework proposed by Hon and Goldstein (2023) for defining modern science, which identifies three salient, constitutive features: commitment, methodology and technique. These features function together as a skeleton of the argumentative structure which combines presuppositions and rules of inference to reach a conclusion. The fundamental assumption is that scientific knowledge is argumentative. Against this background we examine three scientific results that Bacon included in his Opus majus. Although Bacon’s methodology involves the use of geometrical proofs and his technique employs diagrams and geometrical analysis of the relations embedded in them—both features seemingly indicative of modern scientific practice—a characteristic alien to modern practice surfaces in the feature Hon and Goldstein refer to as “commitment.” Specifically, Bacon’s commitment is rooted in theology and its dependence on sacred scripture. It is this characteristic that sets Bacon’s scientific practice apart from modern science. In a nutshell, Bacon’s commitment implies that final causes are not directly and fully known from the natural world but are revealed through scripture. Consequently, since understanding the nature of a thing requires knowing all four Aristotelian causes, those ignorant of sacred scripture cannot grasp the final cause and thus miss the true nature of the thing. It thus follows that Bacon’s approach is not what we associate with modern science.
We investigate the existence of a rainbow Hamilton cycle in a uniformly edge-coloured randomly perturbed digraph. We show that for every $\delta \in (0,1)$ there exists $C = C(\delta ) \gt 0$ such that the following holds. Let $D_0$ be an $n$-vertex digraph with minimum semidegree at least $\delta n$ and suppose that each edge of the union of $D_0$ with a copy of the random digraph $\mathbf{D}(n,C/n)$ on the same vertex set gets a colour in $[n]$ independently and uniformly at random. Then, with high probability, $D_0 \cup \mathbf{D}(n,C/n)$ has a rainbow directed Hamilton cycle.
This improves a result of Aigner-Horev and Hefetz ((2021) SIAM J. Discrete Math.35(3) 1569–1577), who proved the same in the undirected setting when the edges are coloured uniformly in a set of $(1 + \varepsilon )n$ colours.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.