 doing, and examples in physics are abundant. This is the case in the work of Helmholtz, Boltzmann, Clausius, and Maxwell (Laranjeiras 2002; Laranjeiras and Chiappin 2006). Helmholtz employed the mechanistic program according to the analytic method, where the hypothesis of a system of hidden masses in motion assumes the form of monocyclic systems, generated by Lagrange's equations, to build up mechanical illustrations, for instance of the second law of thermodynamics (Laranjeiras and Chiappin 2008). Helmholtz's work was the source for Boltzmann, Clausius, and Gibbs. Therefore, for Duhem, physicists such as Poincaré methodologically interpret incorrectly the incompatibility between mechanism and facts. There is no possible incompatibility between mechanism and experimental facts. The mechanistic method based on Lagrange's mechanics and on the indeterminacy and arbitrariness of the system of hidden masses in motion is not falsifiable in any way (Duhem 1905, 182). This, for Duhem, is the correct interpretation of the analytic approach to the mechanistic method. Thus, he points out that the consequence of using this hypothesis will be the unfalsifiable character of mechanical theories constructed by the analytic approach. He seeks then to preserve the mathematical formulation of D'Alembert's principle. He argues that, from the algebraic viewpoint, modifications and generalizations of the equations of dynamics by introducing the term of first degree in the velocities are easy to notice (Duhem 1980, 76). Thus, Duhem preserves the basic principles of Lagrangian mechanics and redirects the difficulties and obstacles raised against the mechanistic program to its two presuppositions: the atomistic hypothesis of matter and its ultimate demand that physical concepts be reduced to a restricted number of primitive mechanical magnitudes such as mass, motion, shape and/or force (Duhem 1903, 270). The goal of unifying the whole of physics (the principle of logical unity) by the analytic approach to the mechanistic program, with its restricted mechanical conceptual basis (mass, motion, forces), is attained at the cost of a large indeterminacy of its parameters of masses and motions. And the consequence of the large indeterminacy and arbitrariness of this system of hidden masses in motion is the unfalsifiability of mechanical theories. In the analytic approach, mass and motion are mere parameters in mathematical equations, without the realistic or figurative connotations they have in the synthetic approach. The synthetic approach to mechanical explanation involves specifications
doing, and examples in physics are abundant. This is the case in the workplace of Helmholtz, Boltzmann, Clausius, and Maxwell (Laranjeiras 2002; Laranjeiras and Chiappin 2006). Helmholtz use the mechanistic program according to the analytic method, where the guess of a system of hidden masses in gesture assumes the form of monocyclic organization, generated by Lagrange's equations, to build up up mechanical illustrations, for instance of the second jurisprudence of thermodynamics (Laranjeiras and Chiappin 2008). Helmholtz's work was the source for Boltzmann, Clausius, and Gibbs. Therefore, for Duhem, physicists such as Poincaré methodologically interpret incorrectly the incompatibility between mechanism and fact. There is no possible incompatibility between mechanism and experimental facts. The mechanistic method acting based on Lagrange's mechanics and on the indefiniteness and arbitrariness of the organization of hidden mass in motion is not falsifiable in any way (Duhem 1905, 182). This, for Duhem, is the right interpretation of the analytic approach to the mechanistic method. Thus, he points out that the consequence of using this guess will be the unfalsifiable fictional character of mechanical theories constructed by the analytic approach. He seeks then to preserve the mathematical formulation of D'Alembert's principle. He argues that, from the algebraic point of view, modifications and generalizations of the equation of dynamics by introducing the term of first academic degree in the velocities are comfortable to notice (Duhem 1980, 76). Thus, Duhem preserves the basic rationale of Lagrangian mechanics and redirects the difficulties and obstacles raised against the mechanistic broadcast to its two presuppositions: the atomistic hypothesis of matter and its ultimate demand that forcible concepts be reduce to a restricted number of primitive mechanical magnitudes such as mass, motion, form and/or force (Duhem 1903, 270). The goal of unifying the whole of physics (the principle of logical unity) by the analytic approach to the mechanistic course of study, with its restricted mechanical conceptual basis (multitude, motion, forces), is achieve at the cost of a bombastic indeterminacy of its parameter of masses and motion. And the consequence of the large indeterminacy and flightiness of this system of hidden masses in motion is the unfalsifiability of mechanical theories. In the analytic approach, mass and motion are mere parameters in mathematical equations, without the naturalistic or figurative connotations they hold in the synthetic approach. The synthetic approach to mechanical explanation involves specifications
 dolng, and examples in physlcs are abundant. This iv the dase in ghe work of Helmholtz, Boltzmenn, Xlausuus, and Maxwell (Laranjdiras 2002; Laganjeiras and Xhiappin 2006). Islmholtd empmlyed vhe mechanistic program awcording to tha xnclytic method, where the hypothesis os a sysyel of hidden mafses yn mkniin assumes the form of monocydlic syvtems, generatrd by Lagrange's equations, ho bkild up mechanical illustratiins, sir instance uf the second law of tgermodynamics (Laranjeiras and Cfiappnn 2008). Helmholjv'w wltk was the siurce for Boltzmakm, Clauvius, anc Gibbs. Therefpre, foe Duhem, physicists surh as Poincaré methodjlogicallf nnterpret incorrectly tye inwompdtibkoith bttwxen mechajisj and facta. There is bo possible incompauibyoity between jechanysi and experimental facts. The mechanistib mefhod based on Lagrange's mechanics and on the indetermynacy and arbitrariness of the system of hidden mdsses kn nobion us not falsifiable in any way (Duhem 1905, 182). This, for Qhhtm, ps the correct inberpretation of thr wnsjytic approacf to tks jechanistic method. Thus, hg poinrs out thwt tne consequence of using thiw hypothesis qill be the unfalsnfiable charccter pf mevhanical theories constxucted by the anapytic appduach. He seeks thdn no pseserve ufe mathematical fjrmulatioi of B'Alemberg's ptinciplq. He argued thab, from the algebraif viecpoind, modificahions and generalizations of thx equations og gyndmics by intrpducing the tqrm of first dggree in che veuocities age easy tm notice (Durem 1980, 76). Thus, Duvgm preserves vhe basic pribcipoes of Uxgrangian mechsnics and redirects the difficulties end ugstacles raised agqinst the mechamisgic pgogcam tj its two prevuppusigoons: ghe atomistlc fypoyhesis of matter and its ultimate demand tnab physicao concepes be reduced to a restricted nkmber of primotide mechanical magnitudes such zs mass, mltijn, shape and/jr firce (Duhem 1903, 270). The goal of unifying the whole of physmcs (the principle of lotical unity) by the cnslytic apprpach eo the mewhanistic program, wirh its restricted mechanical conceptuam basiv (masd, motion, forces), is attained at the cost of a large indeterminacy of its pqrametxrf of masses and motimnf. And tre clisequence of the karge indeterminacy and arbitraciness of dhns system of hidden masses in mution is the onfalsifiability of mechanjcal thepries. In the analytic approach, kass and motion are mere parametwrs ih mathvjavical equations, withput thz realustic oe finurative connogatooks they hage ii tke synthetic approach. The synthetuc appeowch to mechanican explanatilk invomves skecifications
doing, and examples in physics are abundant. the in the of Helmholtz, Boltzmann, Laranjeiras Chiappin 2006). Helmholtz the mechanistic program to the analytic method, where the of a system of hidden masses in motion assumes the form of monocyclic generated by Lagrange's equations, to build up mechanical illustrations, for instance of the law thermodynamics and 2008). Helmholtz's work was the source for Boltzmann, Clausius, and Gibbs. Therefore, for Duhem, physicists such Poincaré methodologically interpret incorrectly the incompatibility between mechanism facts. There is no incompatibility between mechanism and experimental The method based Lagrange's and the indeterminacy and of the system of hidden masses in motion is not falsifiable in any way (Duhem 1905, 182). for Duhem, correct interpretation the approach the mechanistic method. points out that the consequence of will be the unfalsifiable character of mechanical theories by the approach. He seeks then to preserve mathematical formulation of D'Alembert's principle. He argues that, the algebraic viewpoint, modifications and generalizations of the equations of dynamics by introducing the term degree in the velocities easy to notice 1980, Thus, preserves basic principles Lagrangian mechanics and redirects the difficulties and obstacles raised against the program to its two presuppositions: the atomistic hypothesis of matter ultimate that physical concepts reduced to a restricted of mechanical magnitudes such as shape force The of the whole of physics principle of logical unity) by analytic approach to the mechanical conceptual basis (mass, motion, forces), is attained the cost of a large indeterminacy of parameters of masses and motions. And the consequence of the large indeterminacy arbitrariness of of hidden masses in motion is the unfalsifiability mechanical theories. In the approach, mass and motion are mere parameters in mathematical without realistic or connotations they have the synthetic approach. synthetic approach to involves specifications
 doing, and examples in physics Are abundanT. This Is tHe cAsE in tHe woRk of Helmholtz, BOLtzmAnn, Clausius, and Maxwell (LAranjEiRAs 2002; LaRAnJeiraS and ChiAPpIN 2006). helMhOlTz eMpLOyEd the MecHanistiC program acCorDiNg to the analyTIc Method, wherE thE hypothesis oF a sYstem oF hIddEN massEs iN motiOn assuMEs the fOrm of monoCyCLic sysTEms, geneRATeD by LAgrange's equations, TO bUIld up mechanicaL illusTrATiONS, foR inStance of thE sEcond LAw of theRMoDYNAmiCS (Laranjeiras aNd Chiappin 2008). HELmhOltz's wOrK waS The souRce foR BOLtzMann, ClausiuS, and gibbs. TherEfore, fOR Duhem, pHYsicistS such aS PoIncAré mEThOdOloGiCAllY InTerPRet IncorrecTlY tHe incOmpaTIBILity BetWeen MechaNism and facts. THerE is nO PosSible IncomPatiBiLity bEtween MechaNiSm and experimentAl faCts. The mecHanIsTic MeThod bASed on LAgrAngE's mechaNics and ON thE iNDETeRminacy and arbitrarInESS oF the systEm of hiDDeN mASses in moTiOn iS not FALsifiAble IN aNy way (DuhEm 1905, 182). This, FOr duHem, is thE cOrrect InTerPreTatioN Of thE analyTic approAch to THe mechanistic mEThod. Thus, he poiNTs OUT tHAt thE coNsequence of UsinG This HypoTHeSis WIll be The unFaLSiFIable character of mecHaNical tHeoriEs constructed By the analyTIC Approach. he seEKs THen to preserve tHe matHematical fORmulatioN of D'ALembert's Principle. hE Argues thAt, fRom The AlgEBRaIc viewpoint, moDIFicaTiOns and gEneRalizatIonS of The EquAtIons of dynAmics by iNtRoDuCiNg tHe terM Of first dEgRee In The VelocITies arE easy To noTiCe (dUheM 1980, 76). Thus, DuHEm PREserVeS tHe baSic PrIncipLes oF lagRangian Mechanics And REdirEcTs The diffIculties and obStAcles raiseD aGaiNst the MEChanistiC program to its two presuppOSitions: The AtomiStic HypothesiS of Matter And ITs ultiMate deMand tHaT phYSIcal cONCePts Be Reduced to a REStrIcted NuMber Of primiTive mechanical magnITudEs such as mass, mOtiOn, shAPE aNd/oR FoRCe (DUhEM 1903, 270). ThE GOal of unifying thE whole of phYsICs (The principLE of LoGical unIty) by thE analYTic apprOach to the MechanistIc ProgRAM, wiTh its restrIcted mecHanical coNCeptuAL bAsis (mAss, Motion, FoRceS), is atTained AT thE cost Of a larGe IndeteRminaCy Of its parAmeters of masses and motioNs. And tHe conSeqUence of thE laRGe iNdeterminAcy aNd arbitrarIneSs oF this SysTEm of hIddeN MaSseS In motIon iS The unfalsIFiAbiLITy Of mechanicaL THEorIes. In The ANalytiC appRoach, mass and motioN Are mere parametErs iN MAthEmaTIcal EqUations, without The ReALIstic or fIgUrative connOtations ThEY have In the sYnthetIc approACH. THE synthEtic AppRoach to meChaNiCAl explaNaTiON involVes sPeCificaTions
 doing, and examples in ph ysics areabund ant . T hi s is  the  case in the w o rk o f Helmholtz, Boltzmann , Cla us i us,a nd  Maxw ell (La r an j e ira s20 02;  L a ra njeir asand Chi appin 2006 ).He lmholtz empl o ye d the mech ani stic program  ac cordin gtot he an aly tic m ethod, wherethe hypot he s is ofa  system o fhidd en masses in moti o na ssumes the for m of m on o cy c l icsys tems, gene ra ted b y  Lagran g e' s e qua t ions, to buil d up mechan i cal  illus tr ati o ns, fo r ins ta n ceof the seco nd l aw of the rmodyn a mics (L a ranjeir as and  Ch iap pin2 00 8) . H el m hol t z' s w o rkwas theso ur ce fo r Bo l t z m ann,  Cl ausi us, a nd Gibbs. The ref ore, for  Duhe m, ph ysic is ts su ch asPoinc ar é methodologica llyinterpret  in co rre ct ly th e  incom pat ibi lity be tween m e cha ni s m an d facts. There isno p os sible in compat i bi li t y betwee nmec hani s m  andexpe r im ental fa cts. T h eme chanist ic  metho dbas edon La g rang e's me chanicsand o n  the indetermi n acy and arbit r ar i n es s  ofthe  system ofhidd e n ma sses in  mo t ion i s not  f a ls i fiable in any way ( Du hem 19 05, 1 82). This, fo r Duhem, i s t he corre ct i n te r pretation of t he an alytic app r oach tothe m echanist ic method . Thus, he  po int s o utt h at  the conseque n c e of  u sing th ishypothe sis  wi llbeth e unfalsi fiable c ha ra ct er  of  mech a nical th eo rie scon struc t ed bythe a naly ti ca ppr oach. H e  s e e ks t he nto p res er ve th e ma t hem aticalformulati ono f D' Al em bert'sprinciple. He  a rgues that ,fro m thea l gebraicviewpoint, modification s  and ge ner aliza tion s of theequ ations  of dynami cs byintro du cin g the t e r moffi rst degree i n t he ve lo citi es areeasy to notice (Du h em1980, 76). Th us,  Duh e m  p res e rv e s t he bas i c  principles ofLagrangian  m e ch anics andr edi re cts the  diffic ultie s  and ob stacles r aised aga in st t h e  me chanisticprogramto its tw o  pres u pp ositi ons : theat omi stichypoth e sis  of m atteran d itsultim at e demand  that physical concepts  be re duced  to  a restri cte d  nu mber of p rimi tive mecha nic almagni tud e s suc h as ma ss, motio n, s h ape and/o r  f orc e (D uhem 1903,2 7 0 ).The g oal of uni fyin g the whole of ph y sics (the prin cipl e oflog i calun ity) by the an aly ti c approach  t o the mecha nistic p ro g ram,with i ts res tricted m ec h anical  con cep tual basi s ( ma s s, moti on ,f orces) , is  a ttaine d at t h e co s t  of a large inde termi n a cy of its  para me ters of mass es and mot ions. And t he con sequ enceof thela rge in det er minacy and arbitrari nessof this  s yste m o f hidd en m a s ses i n mo ti onis the un f a ls i fi ab i lit y of  mech an ical  theories .  In theana l ytic ap pr oac h ,  massa nd m otion aremer e par a m eters in m a them a ti c al eq uation s, wit hout th e  re al istic o r f i g urative c onnotatio n s t he y ha ve in th esynt he tic  a pproach. The sy ntheticapproach t o mech ani c al e x planat io n involves s pecif ic a tions
 doing,_and examples_in physics are abundant._This is_the_case in_the_work of Helmholtz,_Boltzmann, Clausius, and_Maxwell (Laranjeiras 2002; Laranjeiras_and Chiappin 2006)._Helmholtz_employed the mechanistic program according to the analytic method, where the hypothesis of a_system_of hidden_masses_in_motion assumes the form of_monocyclic systems, generated by Lagrange's_equations, to_build up mechanical illustrations, for instance of the_second_law of thermodynamics_(Laranjeiras and Chiappin 2008). Helmholtz's work was the source_for Boltzmann, Clausius, and Gibbs. Therefore,_for Duhem, physicists_such_as_Poincaré methodologically interpret incorrectly_the incompatibility between mechanism and facts._There is no possible incompatibility between_mechanism and experimental facts. The mechanistic method_based on Lagrange's mechanics and on_the indeterminacy and arbitrariness of_the system_of hidden masses in motion_is not falsifiable_in any_way (Duhem 1905,_182). This, for Duhem, is the_correct interpretation of_the analytic approach to the mechanistic_method._Thus, he points_out_that_the consequence_of using this_hypothesis_will be_the_unfalsifiable character of mechanical theories constructed_by_the analytic approach. He seeks then to_preserve the mathematical formulation_of_D'Alembert's principle. He argues_that, from the algebraic viewpoint,_modifications and generalizations of the equations_of dynamics_by introducing_the term of first degree in the velocities are easy to_notice (Duhem 1980, 76). Thus, Duhem_preserves the basic principles_of Lagrangian_mechanics_and redirects the_difficulties_and obstacles_raised against the mechanistic program to its_two presuppositions:_the atomistic hypothesis of matter and_its ultimate demand that_physical_concepts be reduced to a restricted_number of primitive mechanical magnitudes such_as mass, motion, shape and/or_force_(Duhem_1903, 270). The goal of_unifying the whole of physics (the_principle of logical_unity) by the analytic approach to the_mechanistic_program, with its restricted mechanical conceptual_basis_(mass, motion, forces), is attained at_the_cost_of a large indeterminacy of_its parameters of masses and motions._And the consequence of the large indeterminacy and arbitrariness_of this system_of hidden masses in motion_is_the_unfalsifiability of mechanical theories. In the analytic approach, mass and_motion are_mere parameters in_mathematical equations, without the realistic or figurative connotations they have_in the synthetic approach. The synthetic approach_to mechanical explanation involves specifications