On a Recent Critique of Complementarity: Part I | Philosophy of Science | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

Discussions of the interpretation of quantum theory are at present obstructed by (1) the increasing axiomania in physics and philosophy which replaces fundamental problems by problems of formulation within a certain preconceived calculus, and (2) the decreasing (since 1927) philosophical interest and sophistication both of professional physicists and of professional philosophers which results in the replacement of subtle positions by crude ones and of dialectical arguments by dogmatic ones. More especially, such discussions are obstructed by the ignorance of both opponents, and also defenders of the Copenhagen point of view, as regards the arguments which once were used in its defence. The publication of Bunge's Quantum Theory and Reality and especially of Popper's contribution to it are taken as an occasion for the restatement of Bohr's position and for the refutation of some quite popular, but surprisingly naive and uninformed objections against it. Bohr's position is distinguished both from the position of Heisenberg and from the vulgarized versions which have become part of the so-called “Copenhagen Interpretation” and whose inarticulateness has been a boon for all those critics who prefer easy victories to a rational debate. Einstein's main counterargument is discussed, and Bohr's refutation restated. The philosophical background and earlier forms of Bohr's views are stated also. Considering that these views are more detailed, better adapted to the facts of the microdomain than any existing alternative it follows that fundamental discussion must first return to them. Their uniqueness is not asserted, however. Here the author still maintains that a hundred shabby flowers are preferable to a single blossom, however exquisite. But a hundred shabby flowers plus an exquisite blossom are more desirable still.

References

[6] Bohr, N., Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature, Cambridge. 1932.Google Scholar

[10] Bohr, N., Kramers, H. A., and Slater, J. C., Philosophical Magazine, vol. 47, 1924, pp. 785–802.Google Scholar

[11] Bohr, N., and Rosenfeld, L., Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Mathematisk-fysike Meddelelser, vol. 12, 1933, pp. 1–65.Google Scholar

[16] Bunge, M. (ed.), The Critical Approach, Essays in Honour of Karl Popper, New York, 1964.Google Scholar

[18] Caldirola, P. (ed.), Ergodic Theories, New York, 1961.Google Scholar

[19] Colodny, R. (ed.), Frontiers of Science and Philosophy, Pittsburgh, 1962.Google Scholar

[20] Colodny, R. (ed.), Mind and Cosmos, Pittsburgh, 1966.Google Scholar

[23] Daneri, A., Loinger, A., and Prosperi, G. M., Nuclear Physics, vol. 33, 1962, p. 297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[24] Daneri, A., Loinger, A., and Prosperi, G. M., Nuovo Cimento, vol. 44B, 1966, p. 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[25] Dirac, P. A. M., The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Oxford, 1947.Google Scholar

[26] Einstein, A., Physikalische Zeitschrift, vol. 28, 1917, pp. 121–136.Google Scholar

[32] Feyerabend, P. K., and Maxwell, G. (eds.), Mind, Matter and Method, Essays in Honor of Herbert Feigl, Minneapolis, 1966.Google Scholar

[33] Fock, W. A., Philosophische Probleme der Modernen Naturwissenschaft, Berlin, 1962.Google Scholar

[34] Hanson, N. R., Patterns of Discovery, Cambridge, 1961.Google Scholar

[35] Hegel, G. W. F., Philosophie der Geschichte (ed. Brunstaedt), Leipzig, 1908.Google Scholar

[38] Heisenberg, W., The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, Chicago, 1930.Google Scholar

[39] Heitler, W., The Quantum Theory of Radiation, Oxford, 1954.Google Scholar

[40] Jammer, M., The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics, New York, 1966.Google Scholar

[41] Jauch, J. M., Helvetica Physika Acta, vol. 37, 1964, p. 193.Google Scholar

[42] Jauch, J. M., Wigner, E. P., and Yanase, M. M., Nuovo Cimento, vol. 48, 1967, pp, 144–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[43] Koerner, S. (ed.), Observation and Interpretation, London, 1957.Google Scholar

[45] Kuhn, T. S., Heilbronn, J. L., and Forman, P. L., Sources for History of Quantum Theory Am. Phil. Soc., 1967.Google Scholar

[46] Lakatos, I., and Musgrave, A., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Amsterdam, 1968.Google Scholar

[47] Landau, L., and Lifshitz, S., Quantum Mechanics, New York, 1958.Google Scholar

[49] Landé, A., Foundations of Quantum Theory, New Haven, 1955.Google Scholar

[52] Meyer-Abich, K. M., Korrespondenz, Individualitaet, und Komplementaritaet, Wiesbaden, 1965.Google Scholar

[54] Neumann, J. von, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik, Berlin, 1932.Google Scholar

[55] Pauli, W. (ed.), Niels Bohr and the Development of Physics, London, 1955.Google Scholar

[57] Popper, K. R., Conjectures and Refutations, New York, 1962.Google Scholar

[59] Rozenthal, S. (ed.), Niels Bohr, His Life and Work as Seen by His Friends and Colleagues, New York, 1967.Google Scholar

[60] Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, Evanston, 1948.Google Scholar

[63] Schroedinger, E., Nuovo Cimento, vol. 36, 1955, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar

[64] Scientific Papers Presented to Max Born, Edinburgh, 1953.Google Scholar

[66] Solvay Conference, Proceedings of Vth, Paris, 1928.Google Scholar

[67] Solvay Conference, Proceedings of VIth, Paris, 1930.Google Scholar

[68] Solvay Conference, Proceedings of XIIth, New York, 1962.Google Scholar

[69] Sommerfeld, A., Atombau Und Spektrallinien, Leipzig, 1922.Google Scholar

[70] Stern, O., and Gerlach, W., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 11, 1922, pp. 31–57.Google Scholar

[71] Van der Waerden, B. L., Sources of Quantum Mechanics, Amsterdam, 1967.Google Scholar