Texte remanié de: Diss.--Evangelisch-Theologischen Fakultät--Heidelberg--Ruprecht-Karls-Universität, 1992. / Notes bibliogr. Index.

Thesis (D.M.A.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2006. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-07, Section: A, page: 2388. Adviser: Charles McNeill. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 110-113) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.

The Dykstra-Parsons model describes layer 1-D oil displacement by water in multilayered reservoirs. The main assumptions of the model are: piston-like displacement of oil by water, no crossflow between the layers, all layers are individually homogeneous, constant total injection rate, and injector-producer pressure drop for all layers is the same. Main drawbacks of Dykstra-Parsons method are that it does not take into account Buckley-Leverett displacement and the possibility of different oil-water relative permeability for each layer. A new analytical model for layer 1-D oil displacement by water in multilayered reservoir has been developed that incorporates Buckley-Leverett displacement and different oilwater relative permeability and water injection rate for each layer (layer injection rate varying with time). The new model employs an extensive iterative procedure, thus requiring a computer program. To verify the new model, calculations were performed for a two-layered reservoir and the results compared against that of numerical simulation. Cases were run, in which layer thickness, permeability, oil-water relative permeability and total water injection rate were varied. Main results for the cases studied are as follows. First, cumulative oil production up to 20 years based on the new model and simulation are in good agreement. Second, model water breakthrough times in the layer with the highest permeability-thickness product (kh) are in good agreement with simulation results. However, breakthrough times for the layer with the lowest kh may differ quite significantly from simulation results. This is probably due to the assumption in the model that in each layer the pressure gradient is uniform behind the front, ahead of the front, and throughout the layer after water breakthrough. Third, the main attractive feature of the new model is the ability to use different oil-water relative permeability for each layer. However, further research is recommended to improve calculation of layer water injection rate by a more accurate method of determining pressure gradients between injector and producer.

Zugl.: Dresden, Techn. Univ., Diss., 2008 u.d.T.: Hein, Stephan: Soziologie als sedimentierte Rationalität

Diss. Univ. Dresden, 2008. / Originaltitel: Soziologie als sedimentierte Rationalität, Titel der Diss. Originaltitel: Soziologie als sedimentierte Rationalität.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin, 1966. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Texte remanié de: Th. Ph.D.--Melbourne--La Trobe university, 1985.

Talcott Parsons, generally acclaimed to be one of the paramount sociological theorists at present, frequently asserts that he is seeking to develop an abstract scientific theory of social phenomena. There is, however, a corpus of notions, principles, and stratagems regarding scientific theory called the hypothetico-deductive approach. It is generally recognized as perhaps the most logically tenable and empirically revealing approach as regards the formulation of significant statements about the world. The problem, therefore, in this study centers on the question: How do Talcott Parsons' conception of the Mature and functions of scientific theory (his metatheory) and the basic structure of his substantive theory stand if they are compared with the various aspects of a hypothetico-deductive approach. To accomplish this, several lines of attack are initially pursued. Parsons' early intellectual influences and contacts are roughly traced out in an attempt to illumine the connections between Parsons and certain theorists who imparted a definite direction to Parsons' theoretical thinking. It is discovered that, the influences on Parsons were wide, diverse and, on the whole of a European speculative approach toward social theory. A discussion of the nature and functions of scientific theory and explanation in terms of a hypothetico-deductive approach is, then, carried out. Following this, an extensive elaboration and criticism of Parsons' conception of scientific theory, as revealed in a number of published essays and volumes, particularly The Structure of Social Action, is undertaken. It is found that many of Parsons' views, in this respect, are vague and logically untenable, with an extraordinary emphasis on concept development rather than the formulation of general statements (or laws) which form the heart of all scientific theory. An examination of the basic structure of Parsons' substantive theory reveals that it is structurally modelled in the light of what he conceives scientific theory to be and, consequently, is found to be decidedly lacking in a logical sense, thereby impairing its empirical applicability. It is concluded that Parsons' conception of scientific theory is inadequate and that his substantive theory is not theory if viewed from a hypothetico-deductive perspective. It is suggested, moreover, that Parsons has provided orientations in his substantive work rather than theory. / Arts, Faculty of / Sociology, Department of / Graduate

Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-12T18:05:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 arquivo869_1.pdf: 1122917 bytes, checksum: e91e75d215262d9d681c151f85ef9506 (MD5) license.txt: 1748 bytes, checksum: 8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / O objetivo deste trabalho é o exame do debate entre os comentadores Jaakko Hintikka e Charles Parsons acerca de questões da filosofia da matemática de Kant. Estes comentadores propõem leituras divergentes para dois problemas centrais para a teoria kantiana da matemática: o problema do sentido exato do termo intuição (Anschauung) e a questão do papel que a intuição desempenha no método da matemática. Além de exibir os argumentos empregados no debate entre estes comentadores, pretendemos avaliar seus méritos a partir da Crítica da Razão Pura. Para tanto, iniciaremos nosso trabalho realizando uma leitura pormenorizada do tratamento de Kant para a matemática, elucidando as duas características principais que o filósofo de Königsberg atribui a esta ciência: a sinteticidade a priori de seus juízos e seu método de construção de conceitos. Após este primeiro passo, trataremos das interpretações de Hintikka e de Parsons que geraram seu debate acerca do sentido do termo intuição . O ponto focal deste debate é se a intuição deve ser compreendida como uma representação apenas singular ou singular e imediata. A seguir, exporemos as interpretações divergentes destes comentadores acerca do papel que a intuição desempenha no método da matemática, elucidando tanto a posição formal lógica defendida por Hintikka quanto a tese fenomenológica e heurística de Parsons. A partir da leitura realizada sobre o tema da matemática na Crítica e da exposição dos argumentos de Hintikka e de Parsons, realizamos, por fim, uma avaliação crítica dos principais argumentos destes comentadores