Abstract
The dialogue between Bohr and Pauli was to be central to the development of the new quantum mechanics, but it could be so only once it had been incorporated into the technical problem complex of quantum theory, and this was no easy matter. Pauli’s ideas, developed outside the quantum context, seemed strange to some of his colleagues and could have little impact until applied to detailed quantum problems. Even Bohr’s views, though developed in the quantum context, lacked the precision conferred by concrete application. Moreover, there was a further complicating factor in the anti-causal pressures of the Weimar intellectual milieu. That such pressures existed, were strong, and were recognised and to some extent accommodated to by German physicists in the early 1920s has been clearly demonstrated by Forman.1 And at first sight their existence would seem to offer support for Bohr’s views on the absence of causality in quantum theory. But so far as the mainstream quantum physicists were concerned, the pressures do not seem to have been anything like so strong as has sometimes been suggested, and their existence tends historically to conceal as much as it reveals.2 Not only for Bohr and Pauli but also for most of the main quantum atomic physics community, causality was an issue, but only a secondary one, a decision on which was to be derived from other more fundamental considerations.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Forman, ‘Weimar culture’.
Hendry, ‘Weimar culture’.
A. Sommerfeld, Atombau und Spektrallinien (Braunschweig, 1922), translated as Atomic Structure and Spectral Lines (London, 1923), 253. See also Heisenberg to Landé, 28 November 1921, SHQP 6, 2.
A. Einstein and P. Elirenfest, ‘Quantentheoretische Bemerkung zum Experiment von Stern und Gerlach’, Zeit. Phys. 11 (1922), 31–34.
M. Born and W. Heisenberg, ‘Die Elektronenbahnen im angeregten Heliumatom’, Zeit. Phys. 16 (1923), 229–243.
Heisenberg to Bohr, 2 February 1923, BSC.
Heisenberg to Pauli, 19 February 1923,PB, 79–81 (Item 31).
A. Landé, ‘Schwierigkeiten in der Quantentheorie des Atombaues, besonders magnetischer Art’, Phys. Zeit. 24 (1923), 441–444. M. Born, ‘Quantentheorie und Störungstheorie’, Naturwissenschaften 11 (1923), 537–542. See also F. Paschen, ‘Die spektroscopische Erforschung des Atombaus’, Phys. Zeit. 24 (1923), 401–407, who wrote that “the present contradiction must be augmented by further incomprehensible problems”.
Born,’Quantentheorie’, 542.
W. Heisenberg, ‘Zur Quantentheorie der Linienstruktur und der anomalen Zeemaneffekte’, Zeit. Phys. 8 (1922), 273–297, esp. 281.
P. S. Epstein and P. Ehrenfest, ‘The quantum theory of the Fraunhofer diffraction’, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 10 (1924), 133–139, and ‘Remarks on the quantum theory of diffraction’, ibid., 13 (1927), 400–408; A. H. Compton, ‘The total reflexion of X-rays’, Phil Mag. 45 (1923), 1121–1131, esp. 1130.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1984 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hendry, J. (1984). The Technical Problem Complex. In: The Creation of Quantum Mechanics and the Bohr-Pauli Dialogue. Studies in the History of Modern Science, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6277-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6277-4_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-6279-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-6277-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive