Schrödinger's interpretation of quantum mechanics and the relevance of Bohr's experimental critique

E. Schrödinger's ideas on interpreting quantum mechanics have been recently re-examined by historians and revived by philosophers of quantum mechanics. Such recent re-evaluations have focused on Schrödinger's retention of space–time continuity and his relinquishment of the corpuscularian understanding of microphysical systems. Several of these historical re-examinations claim that Schrödinger refrained from pursuing his 1926 wave-mechanical interpretation of quantum mechanics under pressure from the Copenhagen and Göttingen physicists, who misinterpreted his ideas in their dogmatic pursuit of the complementarity doctrine and the principle of uncertainty. My analysis points to very different reasons for Schrödinger's decision and, accordingly, to a rather different understanding of the dialogue between Schrödinger and N. Bohr, who refuted Schrödinger's arguments. Bohr's critique of Schrödinger's arguments predominantly focused on the results of experiments on the scattering of electrons performed by Bothe and Geiger, and by Compton and Simon. Although he shared Schrödinger's rejection of full-blown classical entities, Bohr argued that these results demonstrated the corpuscular nature of atomic interactions. I argue that it was Schrödinger's agreement with Bohr's critique, not the dogmatic pressure, which led him to give up pursuing his interpretation for 7 yr. Bohr's critique reflected his deep understanding of Schrödinger's ideas and motivated, at least in part, his own pursuit of his complementarity principle. However, in 1935 Schrödinger revived and reformulated the wave-mechanical interpretation. The revival reflected N. F. Mott's novel wave-mechanical treatment of particle-like properties. R. Shankland's experiment, which demonstrated an apparent conflict with the results of Bothe–Geiger and Compton–Simon, may have been additional motivation for the revival. Subsequent measurements have proven the original experimental results accurate, and I argue that Schrödinger may have perceived even the reformulated wave-mechanical approach as too tenuous in light of Bohr's critique.
Keywords Quantum Mechanics  Erwin Shrödinger  Niels Bohr  Wave Mechanics  Complementarity  Electron Scattering
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsb.2005.09.007
 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
Paul W. Humphreys (1997). How Properties Emerge. Philosophy of Science 64 (1):1-17.
Paul Teller (1986). Relational Holism and Quantum Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (1):71-81.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Slobodan Perovic (2008). Why Were Matrix Mechanics and Wave Mechanics Considered Equivalent? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 39 (2):444-461.
Slobodan Perovic (2013). Emergence of Complementarity and the Baconian Roots of Niels Bohr's Method. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 44 (3):162-173.
S. Perovic (2008). Essay Review. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (3):694-699.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Slobodan Perovic (2008). Why Were Matrix Mechanics and Wave Mechanics Considered Equivalent? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 39 (2):444-461.
John T. Sanders (1998). Knowledge and Description: Bohr's Epistemology. In Jan Such & Malgorzata Szczesniak (eds.), Z epistemologii wiedzy naukowej. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Instytutu Filozofii
Michael Cuffaro (2010). The Kantian Framework of Complementarity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 41 (4):309-317.
Matthew J. Brown (2014). Quantum Frames. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 45 (1):1-10.
Sheldon Goldstein, Bohmian Mechanics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

70 ( #48,770 of 1,727,288 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

6 ( #111,957 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.