Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:40:45.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Idealization and Formalism in Bohr's Approach to Quantum Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Scott Tanona
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I reinterpret Bohr's attitude towards quantum mechanical formalism and its empirical content, based on his understanding of the correspondence principle and its approximate applicability. I suggest that Bohr understood complementarity as a limitation imposed by the commutation relations upon the applicability of the idealizations which had grounded the use of the correspondence principle. By discussing this interpretation against the contemporary background of discussions regarding “naïve realism” about operators (as observables), I suggest that a Bohrian view on the empirical content of quantum mechanical operators may provide a middle ground between complete contextualism and an untenable realism about quantum properties.

Type
Bohr's Philosophy of Quantum Theory: A New Look
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 71 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers , December 2004 , pp. 683 - 695
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bohr, Niels ([1920] 1976), “On the Series Spectra of the Elements”, in Udden, A. D. (ed.), The Theory of Spectra and Atomic Constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 20–60. Reprinted in Collected Works, Léon Rosenfeld (ed.), Vol. 3, The Correspondence Principle (1918–1923), Klaus Stolzenburg (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 241–282.Google Scholar
Bohr, Niels ([1922] 1977), “Seven Lectures on the Theory of Atomic Structure”, in Collected Works, Léon Rosenfeld (ed.), Vol. 4, The Periodic System (1920–1923), J. Rud Nielsen (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 341–419.Google Scholar
Bohr, Niels ([1924a] 1976), “On the Application of the Quantum Theory to Atomic Structure, Part I: The Fundamental Postulates”, On the Application of the Quantum Theory to Atomic Structure, Part I: The Fundamental Postulates 22 (supplement). Reprinted in Collected Works, Léon Rosenfeld (ed.), Vol. 3, The Correspondence Principle (1918–1923), Klaus Stolzenburg (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 455–500.Google Scholar
Bohr, Niels ([1924b] 1976), “Theory of Series Spectra”, Theory of Series Spectra 113:223–224. Reprinted in Collected Works, Léon Rosenfeld (ed.), Vol. 3, The Correspondence Principle (1918–1923), Klaus Stolzenburg (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 578–579.Google Scholar
Bohr, Niels ([1925] 1984), “Atomic Theory and Mechanics” Nature 116 (supplement): 845–852. Reprinted in Collected Works, Erik Rüdinger (ed.), Vol. 5, The Emergence of Quantum Mechanics (Mainly 1924–1926), Klaus Stolzenburg (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohr, Niels ([1928] 1985), “The Quantum Postulate and the Recent Development of Atomic Theory” Nature 121 (supplement): 580–590. Reprinted in Collected Works, Erik Rüdinger (ed.), Vol. 6, Foundations of quantum physics I (1926–1932), J⊘rgen Kalckar (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 148–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohr, Niels ([1939] 1996), “The Causality Problem in Atomic Physics”, in New Theories in Physics, 11–30. Reprinted in Reprinted in Collected Works, Erik Rüdinger (ed.), Vol. 7, Foundations of quantum physics II (1933–1958), J⊘rgen Kalckar (ed.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 299–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohr, Niels (1958), “Quantum Physics and Philosophy, Causality and Complementarity”, in Kilbansy, R. (ed.), Philosophy in the Mid-century. A Survey. Florence: La Nuova Italia Editrice, 308–314.Google Scholar
Born, Max, Heisenberg, Werner, and Jordan, Pascual ([1926] 1968), “Zur Quantenmechanik II”, Zur Quantenmechanik II 35: 557—615. Reprinted in van der Waerden 1968.Google Scholar
Bub, Jeffrey (1997), Interpreting the Quantum World. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Darrigol, Olivier (1992), From c-numbers to q-numbers: The Classical Analogy in the History of Quantum Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daumer, Martin, Dürr, Detlef, Goldstein, Sheldon, and Zanghì, Nino (1996), “Naive Realism about Operators”, Naive Realism about Operators 45(2 and 3): 379–397.Google Scholar
Howard, Don (1990), “‘Nicht sein kann was nicht sein darf’, or the Prehistory of the EPR, 1909–1935: Einstein’s Early Worries about the Quantum Mechanics of Composite Systems”, in Miller, Arthur I (ed.), Sixty-Two Years of Uncertainty: Historical, Philosophical, and Physical Inquiries into the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Plenum, 61–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Don (1994), “What Makes a Classical Concept Classical?”, in Faye, Jan and Folse, Henry J. (eds.), Niels Bohr and Contemporary Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 201–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomonaga, Sinichiro (1962), Quantum Mechanics, Vol. 1. Translated from the Japanese by Koshiba. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
van der Waerden, Bartel Leendert (ed.) (1968), Sources of Quantum Mechanics. Classics of Science, vol. 5. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar