Leibniz on intra-substantial causation and change

Leibniz argued that in natural world, only intra-substantial or immanent causation is possible— the causation that takes place within an individual, when an individual brings about a change in itself. In this dissertation, I address issues arising from Leibniz’s arguments against the rival view that posits a world of causally interacting substances and issues pertaining to Leibniz’s own positive metaphysics of immanent causation and change. Chapter 1 is devoted to stage setting for the remainder of the dissertation. I first offer a historically informed overview of efficient causation and change before introducing Leibniz’s novel views, including his criticisms of competing accounts and his own positive account. After presenting a detailed roadmap of my project, I articulate the idealistic interpretation of Leibniz assumed in this dissertation, where the only genuine substances are simple monads. Finally, I articulate the methodological approaches I employ. In Chapters 2 and 3, I reconstruct and assess Leibniz’s most frequent argument against transeunt causation (the causation that occurs when a substance produces a property in a numerically distinct substance), what I call the “Transference Argument.” Leibniz argued that a created substance’s causing an accident in a numerically distinct substance is possible only if the agent transfers the accident from itself to the patient, where upon transference the agent no longer possesses the accident it transferred. Call the transeunt causal requirement that the agent transfer the accident produced from itself to the patient the “Transference Condition.” Chapter 2 is devoted to two problems with Leibniz’s transference condition. First, Leibniz stated the transference condition throughout his career, but offered little argument for it. Second, God is a transeunt cause in Leibniz’s metaphysics yet God’s causation does not consist in transference. Thus, Leibniz needs a principled way to require transference for creaturely causation while denying that divine transeunt causation consists in transference. Finally, I close off chapter 2 by drawing attention to an important weakness with the transference condition that has not yet been recognized by Leibniz scholars. In Chapter 3, I argue that there is nothing in Leibniz’s ontology that could be transferred from the cause to the recipient of the effect. I first argue that Leibniz’s ontology consists of simple non-corporeal substances and their modifications. Second, I present and articulate a number of important theses Leibniz affirmed about substances and their modifications, which entail that neither could be transferred. I also show that most of these theses were not unique to Leibniz, but were in fact widely endorsed by his predecessors who defended the possibility of creaturely transeunt causation. In chapter 4, I continue the study of the nature of Leibnizian accidents, shifting the focus from their role in Leibniz’s critique of creaturely transeunt causation to their positive role in change and as causal relata, where such accidents are the effects of immanent causation. I shall argue that Leibniz’s thesis that accidents are modifications or limitations allowed him to posit mereologically simple substance that have a multitude of accidents at a time and change accidents over time. In Chapter 5, I address an issue that has divided Leibniz scholars concerning the precise relata in Leibnizian immanent efficient causation. In many passages, Leibniz writes as if it is the substance or individual itself that efficiently causes its later properties or accidents. Call this the “Efficacious-substance” account. The efficacious-substance account is difficult to reconcile with Leibniz’s requirements that change be intelligible and deterministic. In plenty of other passages, he writes as if it is the substances earlier properties or accidents that cause its later accidents. Call this the “Efficacious-accident” account. The efficacious-accident account explains how change is intelligible and deterministic but it faces a “plurality of agents” objection. If a substance’s accidents are the efficient causes of later accidents, then prima facie there is a plurality of efficient causal agents in a substance. This view is incompatible with Leibniz’s requirement that substances be simple, unified entities. Drawing upon a Scholastic distinction made between two kinds of efficient causes— principle quod efficient causes and principle quo efficient causes, I shall argue that for Leibniz, substances are principle quod efficient causes and their appetitions are principle quo efficient causes. This interpretation combines the strengths of the Efficacious-substance and Efficacious-accident accounts while overcoming their weaknesses. There is just one causal agent, the substance, but change is both intelligible and deterministic because as what an agent produces is explained by its appetitions. (Abstract shortened by ProQuest.

Flexible Dye-Sensitized Solar Cell Based on Vertical ZnO Nanowire Arrays

Flexible dye-sensitized solar cells are fabricated using vertically aligned ZnO nanowire arrays that are transferred onto ITO-coated poly(ethylene terephthalate) substrates using a simple peel-off process. The solar cells demonstrate an energy conversion efficiency of 0.44% with good bending tolerance. This technique paves a new route for building large-scale cost-effective flexible photovoltaic and optoelectronic devices

Measurement of the inclusive and dijet cross-sections of b-jets in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector

The inclusive and dijet production cross-sections have been measured for jets containing b-hadrons (b-jets) in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of sqrt(s) = 7 TeV, using the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The measurements use data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 34 pb^-1. The b-jets are identified using either a lifetime-based method, where secondary decay vertices of b-hadrons in jets are reconstructed using information from the tracking detectors, or a muon-based method where the presence of a muon is used to identify semileptonic decays of b-hadrons inside jets. The inclusive b-jet cross-section is measured as a function of transverse momentum in the range 20 < pT < 400 GeV and rapidity in the range |y| < 2.1. The bbbar-dijet cross-section is measured as a function of the dijet invariant mass in the range 110 < m_jj < 760 GeV, the azimuthal angle difference between the two jets and the angular variable chi in two dijet mass regions. The results are compared with next-to-leading-order QCD predictions. Good agreement is observed between the measured cross-sections and the predictions obtained using POWHEG + Pythia. MC@NLO + Herwig shows good agreement with the measured bbbar-dijet cross-section. However, it does not reproduce the measured inclusive cross-section well, particularly for central b-jets with large transverse momenta.Comment: 10 pages plus author list (21 pages total), 8 figures, 1 table, final version published in European Physical Journal

Measurement of the cross-section for b-jets produced in association with a Z boson at root s=7 TeV with the ATLAS detector ATLAS Collaboration

A measurement is presented of the inclusive cross-section for b-jet production in association with a Z boson in pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of root s = 7 TeV. The analysis uses the data sample collected by the ATLAS experiment in 2010, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of approximately 36 pb(-1). The event selection requires a Z boson decaying into high P-T electrons or muons, and at least one b-jet, identified by its displaced vertex, with transverse momentum p(T) > 25 GeV and rapidity vertical bar y vertical bar < 2.1. After subtraction of background processes, the yield is extracted from the vertex mass distribution of the candidate b-jets. The ratio of this cross-section to the inclusive Z cross-section (the average number of b-jets per Z event) is also measured. Both results are found to be in good agreement with perturbative QCD predictions at next-to-leading order

Drons col·laboratius

La robòtica col·laborativa és senzillament robots dissenyats per dur a terme treballs de col·laboració amb els humans. Els robots col·laboratius o cobots són cada cop més utilitzats a les indústries. La robòtica col·laborativa és un dels àmbits d'actualitat en aquests moments. Però també és un dels més interessants en més d'un sentit. Com es comuniquen dos drons autònoms que col·laboren per fer una tasca? Com són aquests missatges que s'envien? Que poden fer que no podrien fer sols? Aquestes són algunes de les preguntes que ens volem respondre en aquest projecte. En aquest treball es presenta un disseny i implementació de dos drons terrestres que es comuniquen per col·laborar entre ells per resoldre una tasca.Collaborative robotics is simply robots designed to perform collaborative work with humans. Collaborative robots or cobots are increasingly used in industries. Collaborative robotics is one of the current topics now. But it is also one of the most interesting in more ways than one. How do two autonomous drones that collaborate to perform a task communicate? How are these messages sent? What can they do that they could not do alone? These are some of the questions we want to answer in this project. This work presents a design and implementation of two ground drones that communicate to collaborate with each other to solve a task.La robótica colaborativa es sencillamente robots diseñados para llevar a cabo trabajos de colaboración con los humanos. Los robots colaborativos o cobots son cada vez más utilizados en las industrias. La robótica colaborativa es uno de los ámbitos de actualidad. Pero también es uno de los más interesantes en más de un sentido. ¿Cómo se comunican drones autónomos que colaboran para hacer una tarea? ¿Cómo son estos mensajes que es envían? ¿Qué pueden hacer que no lo podrían hacer solos? Estas son algunas de las preguntas que queremos responder con este proyecto. En este trabajo se presenta un diseño e implementación de dos drones terrestres que se comunican para colaborar entre ellos para resolver una tarea