Bringing physics to bear on the phenomenon of life: the divergent positions of Bohr, Delbrück, and Schrödinger

The received view on the contributions of the physics community to the birth of molecular biology tends to present the physics community as sharing a basic level consensus on how physics should be brought to bear on biology. I argue, however, that a close examination of the views of three leading physicists involved in the birth of molecular biology, Bohr, Delbrück, and Schrödinger, suggests that there existed fundamental disagreements on how physics should be employed to solve problems in biology even within the physics community. In particular, I focus on how these three figures differed sharply in their assessment of the relevance of complementarity, the potential of chemical methods, and the relative importance of classical physics. In addition, I assess and develop Roll-Hansen’s attempt to conceptualize this history in terms of models of scientific change advanced by Kuhn and Lakatos. Though neither model is fully successful in explaining the divergence of views among these three physicists, I argue that the extent and quality of difference in their views help elucidate and extend some themes that are left opaque in Kuhn’s model
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsc.2006.06.014
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,667
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Mara Beller (1992). The Birth of Bohr's Complementarity: The Context and the Dialogues. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 23 (1):147-180.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Phillip R. Sloan (2012). How Was Teleology Eliminated in Early Molecular Biology? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 43 (1):140-151.
Andrew T. Domondon (2009). Kuhn, Popper, and the Superconducting Supercollider. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40 (3):301-314.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Matthew J. Brown (2014). Quantum Frames. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 45 (1):1-10.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

5 ( #377,318 of 1,727,288 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #369,877 of 1,727,288 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.