 word, this is to construct models which imitate in their laws of motion the equations that are discussed. Aided by the theory of monocyclic systems, Boltzmann has illustrated the views of Maxwell on the analogy between Lagrange's equations and the laws of electrodynamics within such models (Duhem 1980, 72). Duhem draws attention to the difference between a truly mechanical explanation, which would be the real causal explanation of the physical phenomena, and mechanical illustrations/models, which are mechanisms with the similar potential and kinetic energy of the system studied. Further, we would like to point out that Duhem's view of the generality and extendibility of the Lagrangian method underlies his criticism of the thesis of equivalence. Duhem considers that the Lagrangian method is a mathematical structure that can be applied to different domains of physical quantities and kinds of forces where the generalized system of coordinates receives different physical interpretations. Mechanical interpretation would be only one particular interpretation. Duhem himself applies Lagrangian formalism to make thermodynamics an axiomatic system, without mechanically interpreting the phenomenon of heat. The conditions of the extendibility of the Lagrangian method is the subject of his article "Sur quelques extensions récentes de la statique et de la dynamique" (Duhem 1901, 130-157) and is also his preoccupation in the second part of his book The Evolution of Mechanics (Duhem 1980, 105-189; 1905). His conception of physical theory arises from his understanding of this generality of Lagrangian mechanics. His view of the scientific development as pursuing more comprehensive abstract theories is based upon the transition from Newton's vectorial mechanics to Lagrangian mechanics. This objection is not, however, the only objection that he raises against the mechanistic interpretation of the analytic approach. Duhem points out a methodological problem in this method of constructing physical theory. The analytic method constructs unfalsifiable mechanistic theories, and leads the mechanistic method to a process of infinite regression. The analytic approach to the mechanistic method, which aims to make mechanical theory a unifying principle of physics, gives rise to the following question "can all physical laws be put into the form of Lagrange's equations?" (Duhem 1980, 73). In other words, can the analytic approach to the mechanistic program provide the means to accomplish the aim of unifying the whole of physics? There are two answers to the above question. The first is pursued by some physicists, like Poincaré, who state that "There exists a radical incompatibility between Lagrange's mechanics and the laws of physics" (Duhem 1980, 73; Poincaré
word, this is to construct models which imitate in their laws of apparent motion the equation that are discussed. Aided by the theory of monocyclic system, Boltzmann has illustrated the views of Maxwell on the doctrine of analogy between Lagrange's equations and the laws of electrodynamics within such models (Duhem 1980, 72). Duhem absorb attention to the difference between a in truth mechanical explanation, which would be the real causal explanation of the physical phenomenon, and mechanical illustrations / models, which are mechanisms with the similar potential and energizing energy of the system studied. far, we would like to point out that Duhem's horizon of the generality and extendibility of the Lagrangian method acting underlies his criticism of the dissertation of equivalence. Duhem considers that the Lagrangian method is a mathematical social organization that can be applied to different domains of physical quantities and kinds of forces where the generalized system of coordinates receives different physical interpretations. Mechanical interpretation would be only one particular interpretation. Duhem himself apply Lagrangian formalism to make thermodynamics an axiomatic system, without mechanically interpret the phenomenon of heating system. The conditions of the extendibility of the Lagrangian method is the subject of his article " Sur quelques extensions récentes de la statique et de la dynamique " (Duhem 1901, 130 - 157) and is also his preoccupation in the second part of his bible The Evolution of Mechanics (Duhem 1980, 105 - 189; 1905). His conception of physical theory arises from his sympathy of this generality of Lagrangian mechanics. His view of the scientific development as quest for more comprehensive abstract theories is establish upon the transition from Newton's vectorial mechanics to Lagrangian mechanics. This objection is not, however, the only expostulation that he raises against the mechanistic interpretation of the analytic approach. Duhem target out a methodological problem in this method of constructing physical hypothesis. The analytic method constructs unfalsifiable mechanistic theories, and leads the mechanistic method to a procedure of infinite arrested development. The analytic approach to the mechanistic method, which aims to make mechanical hypothesis a unifying principle of physics, give rise to the following motion " can all physical laws be put into the form of Lagrange's equations? " (Duhem 1980, 73). In other words, can the analytic approach to the mechanistic program supply the means to accomplish the bearing of unifying the whole of physics? There be two answers to the above question. The first is pursue by some physicists, like Poincaré, who state that " There exists a radical incompatibility between Lagrange's mechanics and the laws of purgative " (Duhem 1980, 73; Poincaré
 wogd, this is to construct oodels which imnrate ii their laws of motion the equations that ace duscuswed. Aided by the theorh of monobyclic sywtemw, Boltzmann has illmftrafcd thz tiews of Maxwelk on the atalogy between Lxgxange's equations and the laws of elestrodynsmlcs within sucr mocqls (Slhtm 1980, 72). Duhem draws attention to the differtnce between a truky mechanical explanation, ahicj would be the reap causal exkmanwrion of the ohysical phenomena, and mechanical illustrations/models, whick are mechabiwms fith the sinilar potential akc kinedic enetgy of the sysbem svudiwd. Further, we would lmke to point out thaj Duhem's vhec of the generality abd extetdibhlith of tht Legrzngian mevhod underljes his criricism of the thesix jd equivalence. Duhem cjnsiders that the Lagrangian method is d mzthematical structure tyat can be applied to differene domains of physical quantities and kinds of forwes wiefe uhc ewnfralized system of coordinates receives diffewsnu pmysical interprebations. Mechanical ijtrtpretation wouud be onlg one particular ijterprejation. Duhem hiiselg applies Lagrangian formalusm to make nhernodynamics an axiolatic systeo, wijhout kechanically interpretiug the phenomenon of heat. Ffe conditions of thv exdendibility of the Lagrangyan methov is che subjdct pf his article "Skr qucnques extensions réfented ge la statlque et de la dynamique" (Duhem 1901, 130-157) and is also hos prvoccupatijn in the second pwrt of his bool The Erolutiun of Mechznics (Dnhem 1980, 105-189; 1905). His sonception of khysical theocy arises fron hiw underrganding of thix generalptv of Lagrqngian mechanics. Hls vigw of the scientiync development as pufsuynh kowa comprehenshve xbsgtact gheories is casec upon the transitiot frkm Newton's vectorisl mechanixs to Ladrangian mechsnics. This objectiln is nov, howefer, the only objection that he rajses agaijst the mechaniftic interpretatnon of the analytic approach. Duhem pointw out a methodologucal problem in thix method of ronstrtcting phfsical theory. The anqlytic method conxtructs unfalsifiable mechatistif theories, and leads the mechanistic method to a process of infinite regrwssion. The analytid aplroacv co che mecranidvic method, which sims to make mechanical theory e unifying pxinciple of physics, gives risr go the followkng question "can all phyaical laes be put into the form of Lagrsnge's equations?" (Duhem 1980, 73). Ln other qords, can the aialytic approach to yhe meehanisric protram provide the oeams to accomolisi tke aim of unifying the whole of pyysics? Tjere are two ansxers to the wnove qoestion. Jhe first is purshed gj somg physicists, loke Poincaré, whp state that "There eqises a radical ibbompatibility betwgzt Lagrange's kechanics atd the laws of physics" (Duhem 1980, 73; Poincaré
word, this is to construct models which their of motion equations that are of systems, Boltzmann has the views of on the analogy between Lagrange's equations the laws of electrodynamics within such models (Duhem 1980, 72). Duhem draws attention the difference between a truly mechanical explanation, which would be the real causal of physical and illustrations/models, which are mechanisms with the similar potential and kinetic energy of the system studied. Further, would like to point out that Duhem's view the generality and extendibility the Lagrangian method underlies his of thesis of Duhem that Lagrangian method is mathematical structure that can be applied to different domains of physical quantities and kinds of forces where generalized system receives different interpretations. interpretation be only one Duhem himself applies Lagrangian formalism to axiomatic system, without mechanically interpreting the phenomenon of The conditions the extendibility of the Lagrangian method the subject of his article "Sur quelques extensions de la statique et de la dynamique" (Duhem 1901, 130-157) and is also his preoccupation second part of his The Evolution of (Duhem 105-189; His of physical arises from his understanding of this generality of Lagrangian mechanics. His of the scientific development as pursuing more comprehensive abstract theories upon transition from Newton's mechanics to Lagrangian mechanics. objection not, however, the only he against of analytic Duhem points out a problem in this method of physical theory. The analytic and leads the mechanistic method to a process infinite regression. The analytic approach to the method, which aims to make mechanical theory a unifying principle of physics, rise to question "can all physical laws be put into form of Lagrange's equations?" 1980, 73). In other words, can the analytic approach the program provide means to accomplish aim of unifying whole of physics? two answers the question. pursued by some physicists, like Poincaré, state "There exists a radical incompatibility Lagrange's the laws of physics" (Duhem 1980, 73; Poincaré
 word, this is to construct modeLs which imiTate iN thEir LaWs of MotiOn the equations THat aRe discussed. Aided by the tHeory Of MOnocYClIc sysTems, BolTZmANN haS iLlUstRaTEd The viEws Of MaxweLl on the anaLogY bEtween LagranGE's Equations aNd tHe laws of elecTroDynamiCs WitHIn sucH moDels (DUhem 1980, 72). DuHEm drawS attentioN tO The difFErence bETWeEn a tRuly mechanical expLAnATion, which would Be the rEaL CaUSAl eXplAnation of tHe PhysiCAl phenoMEnA, AND meCHanical illustRations/modeLS, whIch are MeChaNIsms wiTh the SiMIlaR potential aNd kiNetic enerGy of thE System sTUdied. FuRther, wE woUld Like TO pOiNt oUt THat dUhEm's VIew Of the genErAlIty anD extENDIBiliTy oF the lagraNgian method unDerLies HIs cRiticIsm of The tHeSis of EquivaLence. duHem considers thaT the lagrangiaN meThOd iS a MatheMAtical StrUctUre that Can be apPLieD tO DIFfErent domains of physIcAL QuAntities And kinDS oF fORces wherE tHe gEnerALIzed sYsteM Of CoordinaTes recEIvEs DiffereNt PhysicAl IntErpRetatIOns. MEchaniCal interPretaTIon would be only ONe particular iNTeRPReTAtioN. DuHem himself aPpliES LagRangIAn ForMAlism To makE tHErMOdynamics an axiomatiC sYstem, wIthouT mechanically InterpretiNG THe phenomEnon OF hEAt. The conditionS of thE extendibiLIty of the lagraNgian metHod is the sUBJect of hiS arTicLe "SUr qUELqUes extensions RÉCentEs De la staTiqUe et de lA dyNamIquE" (DuHeM 1901, 130-157) and is alsO his preoCcUpAtIoN in The seCOnd part oF hIs bOoK ThE EvolUTion of mechaNics (duHeM 1980, 105-189; 1905). his ConceptIOn OF PhysIcAl TheoRy aRiSes frOm hiS UndErstandIng of this GenERaliTy Of lagrangIan mechanics. HIs View of the sCiEntIfic deVELopment aS pursuing more comprehensIVe abstrAct TheorIes iS based upoN thE transItiON from NEwton's VectoRiAl mECHanicS TO LAgrAnGian mechanICS. ThIs objEcTion Is not, hoWever, the only objectIOn tHat he raises agAinSt thE MEcHanIStIC inTeRPreTATion of the analytIc approach. duHEm Points out a MEthOdOlogicaL probleM in thIS method Of construCting physIcAl thEORy. THe analytic Method coNstructs uNFalsiFIaBle meChaNistic ThEorIes, anD leads THe mEchanIstic mEtHod to a ProceSs Of infiniTe regression. The analytic ApproaCh to tHe mEchanistiC meTHod, Which aims To maKe mechanicAl tHeoRy a unIfyINg priNcipLE oF phYSics, gIves RIse to the fOLlOwiNG QuEstion "can alL PHYsiCal laWs bE Put intO the Form of Lagrange's eqUAtions?" (Duhem 1980, 73). In oTher WORds, Can THe anAlYtic approach to The MeCHAnistic pRoGram provide The means To ACcompLish thE aim of UnifyinG THe WHole of PhysIcs? there are tWo aNsWErs to thE aBoVE questIon. THe First iS pursuED by sOME physicists, like POincaRÉ, Who stATe tHat "ThErE exists A RadiCal incompaTibility betWeen LaGranGe's meChanics AnD the laWs oF pHysics" (DuheM 1980, 73; poincaré
 word, this is to construc t models w hichimi tat ein t heir  laws of motio n  the  equations that are di scuss ed .  Aid e dby th e theor y  o f mon oc yc lic  s y st ems,Bol tzmannhas illust rat ed  the views o f  M axwell onthe  analogy bet wee n Lagr an ge' s  equa tio ns an d thel aws of  electrod yn a mics w i thin su c h  m odel s (Duhem 1980, 72 ) .D uhem draws att ention  t o  t h e  di ffe rence betw ee n a t r uly mec h an i c a l e x planation, wh ich would b e  th e real  c aus a l expl anati on ofthe physica l ph enomena,and me c hanical illustr ations /mo del s, w h ic hare  m e cha n is msw ith  the sim il ar  pote ntia l a n d ki net ic e nergy  of the syste m s tudi e d.Furth er, w e wo ul d lik e to p ointou t that Duhem'sview  of the g ene ra lit yand e x tendib ili tyof theLagrang i anme t h o dunderlies his crit ic i s mof the t hesiso feq u ivalence .Duh em c o n sider s th a tthe Lagr angian me th od is a  m athema ti cal  st ructu r e th at can  be appl ied t o  different dom a ins of physic a lq u an t itie s a nd kinds of  for c es w here th e g e neral izedsy s te m  of coordinates rec ei ves di ffere nt physical i nterpretat i o n s. Mecha nica l  i n terpretation w ouldbe only on e  particu lar i nterpret ation. Du h e m himsel f a ppl ies  La g r an gian formalis m to m ak e therm ody namicsanaxi oma tic  s ystem, wi thout me ch an ic al lyinter p reting t he  ph en ome non o f  heat.  Thecond it io n s o f the e x te n d ibil it yof t heLa grang ianm eth od is t he subjec t o f  his  a rt icle "S ur quelques e xt ensions ré ce nte s de l a statique  et de la dynamique" (D u hem 190 1,130-1 57)and is al sohis pr eoc c upatio n in t he se co ndp a rt of h is  bo ok  The Evolu t i onof Me ch anic s (Duhe m 1980, 105-189; 1 9 05) . His concept ion  ofp h ys ica l  t h eor ya ris e s  from his under standing o ft hi s generali t y o fLagrang ian mec hanic s . His v iew of th e scienti fi c de v e lop ment as pu rsuing m ore compr e hensi v eabstr act  theor ie s i s bas ed upo n  th e tra nsitio nfrom N ewton 's  vectori al mechanics to Lagrang ian me chani cs.  This obj ect i onis not, h owev er, the on lyobj ectio n t h at he  rai s es  ag a instthem echanisti c  i nte r p re tation of t h e ana lytic  ap p roach.  Duh em points out a m e thodological p robl e m  in  th i s me th od of construc tin gp h ysical t he ory. The an alytic m et h od co nstruc ts unf alsifia b l em echani stic  th eories, a ndle a ds theme ch a nistic  met ho d to a  proce s s of i nfinite regressi on. T h e  anal y tic  appr oa ch to t h e me chanisticmethod, whi ch aim s to  make  mechan ic al the ory  a  unifyingp rincipleof ph ysics,gi vesris e to t he f o l lowin g qu es tio n "can al l ph y si ca l  la ws b e put  i ntothe formo f Lagran ge' s  equati on s?" ( Duhem1 98 0 ,  73). In o the r wor d s , can thea naly t ic appro ach to  the m echanis t icpr ogram p rov i d e the mea ns to acc o mpl is h th e aim of  u nify in g t he  whole of physi cs? Ther e are tw o answer s t o  the abovequ estion. Thefirst  i s  pursue d bysome ph y sic ist s,like  Po inca r é, who state that "There  exi sts a rad icalincom pa tibility betw een Lagr a nge's mechani cs and the laws ofp hysi cs" (D uh em 1980,73; Poinc aré
 word,_this is_to construct models which_imitate in_their_laws of_motion_the equations that_are discussed. Aided_by the theory of_monocyclic systems, Boltzmann_has_illustrated the views of Maxwell on the analogy between Lagrange's equations and the laws_of_electrodynamics within_such_models_(Duhem 1980, 72). Duhem draws_attention to the difference between_a truly_mechanical explanation, which would be the real causal_explanation_of the physical_phenomena, and mechanical illustrations/models, which are mechanisms with the_similar potential and kinetic energy of_the system studied._Further,_we_would like to point_out that Duhem's view of the_generality and extendibility of the Lagrangian_method underlies his criticism of the thesis_of equivalence. Duhem considers that the_Lagrangian method is a mathematical_structure that_can be applied to different_domains of physical_quantities and_kinds of forces_where the generalized system of coordinates_receives different physical_interpretations. Mechanical interpretation would be only_one_particular interpretation. Duhem_himself_applies_Lagrangian formalism_to make thermodynamics_an_axiomatic system,_without_mechanically interpreting the phenomenon of heat._The_conditions of the extendibility of the Lagrangian_method is the subject_of_his article "Sur quelques_extensions récentes de la statique_et de la dynamique" (Duhem 1901,_130-157) and_is also_his preoccupation in the second part of his book The Evolution_of Mechanics (Duhem 1980, 105-189; 1905)._His conception of physical_theory arises_from_his understanding of_this_generality of_Lagrangian mechanics. His view of the scientific_development as_pursuing more comprehensive abstract theories is_based upon the transition_from_Newton's vectorial mechanics to Lagrangian mechanics._This objection is not, however, the_only objection that he raises_against_the_mechanistic interpretation of the analytic_approach. Duhem points out a methodological_problem in this_method of constructing physical theory. The analytic_method_constructs unfalsifiable mechanistic theories, and leads_the_mechanistic method to a process of_infinite_regression._The analytic approach to the_mechanistic method, which aims to make_mechanical theory a unifying principle of physics, gives rise_to the following_question "can all physical laws_be_put_into the form of Lagrange's equations?" (Duhem 1980, 73). In_other words,_can the analytic_approach to the mechanistic program provide the means to accomplish_the aim of unifying the whole of_physics? There are two answers to the above question. The first_is pursued by some physicists, like Poincaré, who_state that "There exists a radical incompatibility_between Lagrange's mechanics and_the_laws of physics" (Duhem 1980, 73; Poincaré