Abstract
Erwin Schrödinger was undoubtedly one of the greatest physicists of our time, if not of all times. He was a philosopher who dealt with metaphysical and existential problems and tried to connect his philosophical views with his physics. And even if this is disputed by some, he was a central force behind the emergence of modem molecular biology. On the other hand, Schrödinger is almost never referred to as a historian, even though he explored the history of Western culture and wrote a remarkable book on the Greeks.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Preface to Science and Humanism, Cambridge 1952.
ibid., p. 4, quoting Plotinus: (Enn VI 414)
ibid.,p.4.
ibid., p. 8.
ibid., p. 53.
ibid., p. 60.
ibid.
ibid., p. 62.
ibid., p. 67, Cassirer is quoted from his Determinismus und Indeterminismus in der modernen Physik, Göteborg 1937.
“Nature,” July 4, 1936, reprinted Ges. Abh. 4 (2984) 364-5.
E. Schrödinger, What is Life?, Cambridge 1967, p. 93.
The lecture was held on February 18, 1932 at the Phys. Math. Klasse der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, and an augmented version published by Verlag Johann Ambrosius Barth in the same year, together with „Der Indeterminismus in der Physik“ (held in 1931). Tbe booklet is dedicated to Frank Exner. A somewhat misleading, almost free translation into English was done by James Murphy, who edited a volume of Schrödinger essays (Science and Human Temperament) in 1935. The essay in question here is divided into parts with two quite tendentious titles: „Is Science a Fashion of the Tirnes“ and „Physical Science and the Temper of the Age.“ Both are quite different from „milieubedingt“ .
Schrödinger is probably quoting from memory. In a study of Prouction and Courbet, Zola says: „Une oeuvre d’art est un coin de la crtéation vu a travers un temperament.“ Mes Haines, 1866, in E. Zola, Le Bon Combat, Collection Savoir, Hermann 1974, p. 38.
The English version, from the 1957 Dover edition titled „Seience Theory and Man,“ p. 86.
The Gennan original from 1932 Barth pamphlet, op. cit., pp. 35-36.
ibid., pp. 37-38.
ibid., pp. 50-51.
Ges. Abh. 3 (1984), p. 711.
This is not the context to go into detail. However, the above thesis is, in my opinion, the central theme in Klimt and Schiele, Schönberg and Mahler, Schnitzler and Karl Kraus, Mauthner and Wittgenstein.
One of the best comprehensive short papers is Dieter Flamm: „Boltzmann’s Influence on Schrödinger“ in C. U. Kilmister (ed.), Schrödinger, C.U.P. 1987, pp. 4-15. Flamm, who teaches at the Technische Universität in Vienna, is Boltzmann’s grandson.
Franz Exner, “Über Gesetze in Naturwissenschaft und Humanistik.” Die Feierliche Inauguration des Rektors der Wiener Universität für das Studienjahr 1908/1909 (Vienna 1909), pp. 43–87, delivered on October 15, 1908.
Paul A. Ranle, “Indeterminacy before Heisenberg: The Case of Franz Exner and Erwin Schrödinger” HSPS (1979), pp. 225–269.
ibid., p. 226.
„The Statistical Law in Nature,“ Nature 153 (1944), p. 704, reprinted in Ges. Abh. 1 (1984) p. 452.
ibid., pp. 451-452.
Dieter Flamm, op.cit.
It is a thought-provoking fact that many great physicists, who have and proudly acknowledge a world-view, had one main teacher teach them the „whole“ of physics! In his inaugural lecture in Berlin on July 4, 1929, Schrödinger, referring to Hasenöhrl’s inaugural lecture in Vienna 1907, said: „Hasenöhrl...dem ich die Grundlage meiner wissenschaftlichen Persoenlichkeit danke.“ from „Antrittsrede des Herrn Schrödinger,“ Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wiss. Physikalischmathematische Klasse (1929), reprinted in: Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), pp. 303-309. Parts of this speech are translated by James Murphy in bis biographical introduction to the 1935 „Science and the Human Temperament,“ op. cit. There is a strange and telling mistranslation of the above quotation: „Hasenöhrl to whom I owe my whole scientific outlook.“ ’Scientific outlook’ differs considerably from the ’basis’ or ’foundations’of my scientific personality!
F. Exner, op. cit., quoted here from Paul Hanle, op. cit., p. 238 and his translation. The original reads: “Waeren wir im Stande die Molekularbewegung so ungeheuer zu verlangsamen, dass wir den einzelnen Vorgaengen folgen koennten, so wuerden wir nichts wahrnehmen als ein Chaos zufaeJliger Ereignisse, indem wir vergeblich nach einer Gesetzmaessigkeit suchen wuerden.” p. 55.
D. Flamm, op. cit., p. 10, quoting from E. Schrödinger, “Irreversibility,” Proc. R. Irish A. 53 (1950), pp. 189-195, reprinted in: Erwin Schrödinger, Gesammelte Abhandlungen in 4 Bde., Verlag der Oesterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna 1984. Ges. Abh. 1 (1984), pp. 485–491. The quotation is on page 191 in the original.
Exner, Über Gesetze ... , op.cit., p. 50.
See my „A Programmatic Attempt towards an Anthropology of Knowledge,“ in: E. Mendelsohn and Y. Elkana (eds.), Sciences and Cultures, Reidel, 1981, pp. 1-76.
On this see the illuminating paper by Yemina Ben-Menachem, „Struggling with Causality: Schrödinger’s Cat,“ St. H. P. S., September 1989.
It is strange that Schrödinger did not contribute to the Schilpp volume on Einstein. Yet, in a 1929 article („Einstein Explained“) in a popular American periodical it was reported that Einstein himself suggested that Schrödinger be asked to interpret bis theories. Einstein explained in „World’s Work“ (1929), pp. 52-56, reprinted in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), pp. 298-302.
„Might perhaps energy be a merely statistical concept?“ Based on a lecture, delivered in Vienna on March 26,1958 at a joint meeting of the Austrian Physical Society and the Chemical-Physical Society,“ as the editor ofthe Ges. Abh.1 (1984), p. 502 says.
Quoted by Hanle, op.cit. p. 236.
F. Exner, “Vorlesungen über die physikalische Grundlage der Naturwissenschaften”, 1919, lectures 88 and 89. These lectures were much more widely read than his 1908 Rektoratsrede.
„Woher stammt nun der allgemein verbreitete Glaube an die absolute, kausale Determiniertheit des molekularen Geschehens ... ? Einfach aus der von Jahrtausenden erhaltenen Gewohnheit, kausal zu denken ... “ in: „Was ist ein Naturgesetz?“ inaugural lecture at the University of Zurieh, held on “ December 9, 1922, repr. in a collection of essays bearing the same title, Munich 1987, p. 15.
ibid., the English translation appeared in: Science, Theory and Man, op.cit., p. 147.
ibid., p. 146.
Y. Elkana, “A Programmatie Attempt”, op. cit.
E. S., „Anmerkungen zu Kausalproblemen - a letter to Reichenbach, “ published in Erkenntnis III (1932) 55-70 reprinted in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), 335-340.
More on that again, Hanle op. cit., and Hanle’s doctoral dissertation. The exchange continued both in articles and in private eorrespondenee. See: Bohr, Kramers, Slater: „The Quantum Theory of Radiation“, E. S., „Bohr’s neue Strahlungshypothese und der Energiesatz.“ Die Naturwissenschaften 12 (1924), pp. 720-724. R. Stuewer, „The Compton Effect“. E. S., to Bohr, May 24,1924, Bohr Sei. Corresp. Microfilm 16, section 2 (Archive for History of Quantum Physics).
E. S., „Über das Compton effect,“ Ann. d. Phys. 82 (1927).
E. S., „Might perhaps Energy be a merely Statistical Concept?“ in: Il Nuovo Cimento 9 (1958), pp. 162-70, repr. Ges. Sch. 1 (1984), pp. 502-520.
Y. Elkana, “A Programmatie Attempt”, op. cit.
E. S., „Anmerkungen zu Kausalproblemen - a letter to Reiehenbaeh“ published in Erkenntnis III (1932), pp. 55-70, reprinted in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), pp. 335 - 340.
„Antrittsrede des Herrn Schrödinger“, Sitzungsberichte der Preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. 4. Juli 1929, reprinted in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), p. 304. Planek responded in his capacity as Secretary to the Aeademy, firmly representing the causal view of nature.
ibid.
„Ist die Naturwissenschaft milieubedingt?“, op.cit., pp. 50-51.
Preface to What is Life? (based on lectures held in 1943), op. cit.
Linus Pauling, “Schrödinger’s contribution to chemistry and biology” in C. W. Kilmister (ed.), Schrödinger C.U.P. (1987), p. 228.
M. F. Perutz, “Erwin Schrödinger’s What is Life?’ and Molecular Biology” in C. W. Kilmister (ed.) op.cit., p. 243 (he, too, analyzes Schrödinger’s failure-to be taken up below). Against this background see a letter written by Francis Crick to Erwin Schrödinger on August 12, 1953: “Dear Professor Schrödinger, Watson and I were once discussing how we came to enter the field of molecular biology and we discovered that we had both been influenced by your little book What is Life? We thought you might be interested in the enclosed reprints-you will see that it looks as though your term ’aperiodic crystal is going to be a very apt one.” In: G. Kerber, A. Dieck, W. Kerber (eds.), Erwin Schrödinger. Documents. etc., Fassbaender, Vienna 1987, p. 119.
What is Life?, preface, C.U.P. 1967, p. 1. Incidentally not to refer to this apology when making their attack is, to say the least, uncharitable on the part of Pauling and Perutz.
ibid., p. 5. Perutz, op. cit., does not want to understand the point and criticizes Schrödinger even for the term: „This leads him to suggest that the gene is a linear one-dimensional erystal, but lacking a periodic repeat: an aperiodic crystal. I find it strange that he does not eall it a polymer, as Delbrüek did.“ p. 241.
ibid., p. 5
What is Life?, op. cit., p. 5.
What is Life?, op. cit., p. 79.
ibid., p. 9.
„The Spirit of Science“ in Eranos Yearbook: Spirit and Nature, Bollingen Series XXV (1954).
ibid., p. 324.
Festrede, gehalten bei der Eröffnung der fünften Weltkraftkonferenz, Wien 1956. Reprinted in Ges. Abh.4 (1984), p. 585.
ibid., p. 586.
Interviewed by J. W. N. Sullivan, „The Observer“, Sunday, January 11, 1931, reprinted Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), p. 334.
E. S., „Autobiographische Skizze,“ (Les Prix Nobel 1933, pp. 86-88), Stockholm, Norstedt and Soener, 1935, reprinted Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), pp. 361-363.
Science and Humanism, op. cit., p. 53.
Science and Humanism: Physics in our Time, op. cit., pp. 40–41.
ibid., p. 5.
ibid., p. 608.
op. cit.
„Ist die Naturwissenschaft milieu-bedingt?“ op. cit., p. 32.
ibid., p. 42.
„Conceptual Models in Physics and Their Philosophical Value“ (lecture delivered to the Physical Society of Frankfurt, December 8, 1928, reprinted in: Seience, Theory and Man, Dover 1957, p. 160; reprinted in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), p. 288).
ibid., p. 164-165.
Nature and the Greeks, Cambridge University Press, 1954. These were the Sherman lectures Schrödinger held at the University College London on May 24, 26 and 31,1948.
ibid., p. I.
„Are there Quantum Jumps?,“ in: BJPS 3 (1952) 3-17; pp. 19-28, reprinted in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), pp. 478-502.
ibid., pp. 3-4.
ibid., pp. 19-20.
ibid., p. 6.
Published by C.U.P. in English as My View ofthe World and the two parts as „Seek for the road“ and „Which is real?“, op. cit.
ibid., p. VIII.
ibid.
ibid.
ibid., p. 18.
ibid., p. 37.
R. Semon, Die Mneme, Leipzig, 1904 and Die Menschlichen Empjindingen, Leipzig, 1909.
ibid., p. 44.
ibid., p. 51.
ibid., p. 105. The inherent tension between self and the world, the real and the thought-world, linked by language is as true in physics as it is in philosophy. Discussing „reality“ of matter-waves in his 1928 „4 Lectures on Wave Mechanics“ held at the Royal Institution in London on the 5th, 7th, 12th and 14th of March 1928 and published in London in 1928, he says: „The statement that what really happens is correctly described by describing a wave-motion does not necessarily mean exactly the same thing as: what really exists is the wave-motion. We shall see later on that in generalizing it as an arbitrary mechanical system we are led to describe what really happens in such a system by a wave-motion in the generalized space of its coordinates (q-space). Though the latter has quite a definite physical meaning, it cannot very well be said to „exist;“ hence a wave-motion in the space cannot be said to „exist“ in the ordinary sense of the word either. It is merely an adequate mathematical description of what happens.“
Bruno Bertotti, “The Later Work of E. Schrödinger,” S. H. P. Sei. 16 (1985), p. 83.
K. R. Popper, Unended Quest, p. 135. Our relations had been somewhat stormy. Nobody who knew hirn will be surprised at this. We disagreed violentlyon many things. Originally, I had taken it almost for granted that he, with his admiration for Boltzmann, would not hold a positivist epistemology, but our most violent clash was sparked off when I criticized one day (around 1954 or 1955) the Machian view now usually called “neutral monism”-even though we both agreed that, contrary to Mach’s intentions, this doctrine was a form of idealism.
„Unhappily Lamarckism is untenable. The fundamental assumption on which it rests, viz. that our acquired properties can be inherited, is wrong. To the best of our knowledge they are not. The single steps of evolution are those spontaneous and fortuitous mutations which have nothing to do with the behaviour of the individual during its life-time. And so we appear to be thrown back on the gloomy aspect of Darwinism that I have depicted above. I now wish to show you that this is not quite so. Without changing anything in the basic assumptions of Darwinism, we can see that the behaviour of the individual, the way it makes use of its innate faculties, plays a relevant part, nay, play the most relevant part in evolution. There is a very true kernel in Lamarck’s view, namely that there is an irrescindable causal connexion between the functioning, the actuality being put to profitable use, of a character - an organ, any property or ability or bodily feature - and its being developed in the course of generations, and gradually improved for the purposes for which it is profitably used. This connexion, I say, between being used and being improved was a very correct cognition ofLamarck’s, and it subsists in our present Darwinistic outlook, but it is easily overlooked on viewing Darwinism superficially. The course of events is almost the same as ifLamarckism were right, only the “mechanism” by which things happen is more complicated than Lamarck thought. The point is not quite easy to explain or grasp, and so it may be useful to summarize the results in advance. To avoid vagueness,let us imagine an organ, though the feature in question might be any property, habit, device, behaviour, or even any small addition to, or modification of, such a feature. Lamarck thought that the organ (a) is used, (b) is thus improved and (c) the improvement is transmitted to the offspring. This is wrong. We have to think that the organ (a) undergoes chance variations, (b) the profitably used ones are accumulated or at least accentuated by selection, (c) this continues from generation to generation, the selected mutations constituting a lasting improvement. The most striking simulation of Lamarckism occurs - according to J ulian Huxley - when the initial variations that inaugurate the process are not true mutations, not yet of the inheritable type. Yet, if profitably, they may be accentuated by what he calls organic selection, and, so to speak, pave the way for true mutations to be immediately seized upon when they happen to turn up in the „desirable“ direction.“ In the 1950 BBC talks: „The Future ofUnderstanding,“ reprinted in Mind and Matter and in Ges. Abh. 4 (1984), p. 469.
Festrede, held at the opening of the fifth Weltkonferenz’ in Vienna 1956, op. cit.
’The Spirit of Science’ in Eranos Yearbook: op.cit.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1992 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Elkana, Y. (1992). Erwin Schrödinger as Historian — Notes Towards An Interpretation. In: Götschl, J. (eds) Erwin Schrödinger’s World View. Theory and Decision Library, vol 16. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2428-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2428-7_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-5071-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-2428-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive