Authors
F. A. Muller
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Abstract
The author endeavours to show two things: first, that Schrödingers (and Eckarts) demonstration in March (September) 1926 of the equivalence of matrix mechanics, as created by Heisenberg, Born, Jordan and Dirac in 1925, and wave mechanics, as created by Schrödinger in 1926, is not foolproof; and second, that it could not have been foolproof, because at the time matrix mechanics and wave mechanics were neither mathematically nor empirically equivalent. That they were is the Equivalence Myth. In order to make the theories equivalent and to prove this, one has to leave the historical scene of 1926 and wait until 1932, when von Neumann finished his magisterial edifice. During the period 1926–1932 the original families of mathematical structures of matrix mechanics and of wave mechanics were stretched, parts were chopped off and novel structures were added. To Procrustean places we go, where we can demonstrate the mathematical, empirical and ontological equivalence of ‘the final versions of’ matrix mechanics and wave mechanics. The present paper claims to be a comprehensive analysis of one of the pivotal papers in the history of quantum mechanics: Schrödingers equivalence paper. Since the analysis is performed from the perspective of Suppes structural view (‘semantic view’) of physical theories, the present paper can be regarded not only as a morsel of the internal history of quantum mechanics, but also as a morsel of applied philosophy of science. The paper is self-contained and presupposes only basic knowledge of quantum mechanics. For reasons of length, the paper is published in two parts; Part I appeared in the previous issue of this journal. Section 1 contains, besides an introduction, also the papers five claims and a preview of the arguments supporting these claims; so Part I, Section 1 may serve as a summary of the paper for those readers who are not interested in the detailed arguments.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/s1355-2198(97)00001-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,192
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

Introduction to Logic.PATRICK SUPPES - 1957 - Dover Publications.
An Architectonic for Science.Wolfgang Balzer, C. Ulises Moulines & Joseph D. Sneed - 1990 - Philosophy of Science 57 (2):349-350.

View all 29 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Duality and Ontology.Baptiste Le Bihan & James Read - 2018 - Philosophy Compass 13 (12):e12555.
Derivative Properties in Fundamental Laws.Michael Townsen Hicks & Jonathan Schaffer - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 68 (2).
The Interpretation of String-Theoretic Dualities.James Read - 2016 - Foundations of Physics 46 (2):209-235.
Theoretical Equivalence as Interpretative Equivalence.Kevin Coffey - 2014 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65 (4):821-844.

View all 18 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Equivalence Myth of Quntum Mechanics.A. F. - 1999 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 30 (4):543-545.
The Equivalence Myth of Quantum Mechanics —Part I.F. A. Muller - 1997 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 28 (1):35-61.
The Equivalence Myth of Quntum Mechanics (Addendum).F. A. Muller - 1999 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 30 (4):543-545.
Explanation, Emergence, and Quantum Entanglement.Andreas Hüttemann - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (1):114-127.
On the Classical Limit of Quantum Mechanics.Valia Allori & Nino Zanghi - 2008 - Foundations of Physics 10.1007/S10701-008-9259-4 39 (1):20-32.
Quantum Mechanics Does Not Require the Continuity of Space.B. E. - 2003 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 34 (2):319-328.
Sensible Quantum Mechanics: Are Probabilities Only in the Mind?Don N. Page - 1996 - International Journal of Modern Physics D 5:583-96.
Review of R. Clifton, Quantum Entanglements. [REVIEW]Wayne C. Myrvold - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39:700-701.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-09-01

Total views
97 ( #94,445 of 2,329,865 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #582,921 of 2,329,865 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes