Arguments (inferences) in physics

[Steven French]

Pentcho, Pentcho, Pentcho,

As I have told you elsewhere, there have been numerous discussions in 
the literature concerning inconsistency in science (eg the book edited 
by J. Meheus helpfully entitled,  Inconsistency in Science!) and the 
likes of Newton da Costa, Graham Priest, Joel Smith, John Norton, 
Diderik Batens, Joke Meheus and others would answer your question

> Should a physical theory that has been proved to be an
> inconsistency be rejected?

with a firm 'no', or at least 'not necessarily'!

Why don't you do some reading instead of posting these mad missives to 
philos-l? In particular why don;t you take a look at Prof. Meheus' work 
on Carnot, since that may be more to your thermodymanical taste.

cheers,
Steven
Steven French
Professor of Philosophy of Science
Division of History and Philosophy of Science
School of Philosophy
University of Leeds
Leeds LS2 9JT

Tel: 0113 3433279
Fax: 0113 343 3265
Email: s.r.d.french at leeds.ac.uk
http://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/Staff/SF/Index.htm

Editor-in-Chief, Metascience
http://www.kluweronline.com/issn/0815-0796/current

"Reality is that which when you stop believing in it does not go away." 
(Philip K, Dick)

_______________________________________________________
Mail group "philphys"
ESF Network for Philosophical and
Foundational Problems of Modern Physics
Help & Archive: http://philosophy.elte.hu/philphys.html
_______________________________________________________