Why were matrix mechanics and wave mechanics considered equivalent?

A recent rethinking of the early history of Quantum Mechanics deemed the late 1920s agreement on the equivalence of Matrix Mechanics and Wave Mechanics, prompted by Schrödinger's 1926 proof, a myth. Schrödinger supposedly failed to prove isomorphism, or even a weaker equivalence (“Schrödinger-equivalence”) of the mathematical structures of the two theories; developments in the early 1930s, especially the work of mathematician von Neumann provided sound proof of mathematical equivalence. The alleged agreement about the Copenhagen Interpretation, predicated to a large extent on this equivalence, was deemed a myth as well. In response, I argue that Schrödinger's proof concerned primarily a domain-specific ontological equivalence, rather than the isomorphism or a weaker mathematical equivalence. It stemmed initially from the agreement of the eigenvalues of Wave Mechanics and energy-states of Bohr's Model that was discovered and published by Schrödinger in his first and second communications of 1926. Schrödinger demonstrated in this proof that the laws of motion arrived at by the method of Matrix Mechanics are satisfied by assigning the auxiliary role to eigenfunctions in the derivation of matrices (while he only outlined the reversed derivation of eigenfunctions from Matrix Mechanics, which was necessary for the proof of both isomorphism and Schrödinger-equivalence of the two theories). This result was intended to demonstrate the domain-specific ontological equivalence of Matrix Mechanics and Wave Mechanics, with respect to the domain of Bohr's atom. And although the mathematical equivalence of the theories did not seem out of the reach of existing theories and methods, Schrödinger never intended to fully explore such a possibility in his proof paper. In a further development of Quantum Mechanics, Bohr's complementarity and Copenhagen Interpretation captured a more substantial convergence of the subsequently revised (in light of the experimental results) Wave and Matrix Mechanics. I argue that both the equivalence and Copenhagen Interpretation can be deemed myths if one predicates the philosophical and historical analysis on a narrow model of physical theory which disregards its historical context, and focuses exclusively on its formal aspects and the exploration of the logical models supposedly implicit in it.
Keywords Quantum Mechanics  Wave Mechanics  Matrix Mechanics  Equivalence  Isomorphism  Niels Borh's Atom
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsb.2008.01.004
 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: 24,479
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
F. A. Muller (1999). The Equivalence Myth of Quntum Mechanics (Addendum). Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 30 (4):543-545.
F. A. Muller (1997). The Equivalence Myth of Quantum Mechanics —Part I. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 28 (1):35-61.
F. A. Muller (1997). The Equivalence Myth of Quantum Mechanics—Part II. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 28 (2):219-247.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
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.
Tjerk Gauderis (2014). To Envision a New Particle or Change an Existing Law? Hypothesis Formation and Anomaly Resolution for the Curious Case of the Β Decay Spectrum. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 45 (1):27-45.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
A. F. (1999). The Equivalence Myth of Quntum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 30 (4):543-545.
Henry Stapp (2009). Schrödinger's Cat. In Daniel Greenberger, Klaus Hentschel & Friedel Weinert (eds.), Compendium of Quantum Physics. Springer. pp. 685-689.
Sheldon Goldstein (2008). Bohmian Mechanics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

37 ( #130,238 of 1,925,764 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

9 ( #96,346 of 1,925,764 )

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.