Abstract
The eminent mathematical physicist Sir Hermann Bondi once said: “There is no more to science than its method, and there is no more to its method than Popper has said.” Indeed, many regard Sir Karl Raimund Popper the greatest philosopher of science in our generation. Much of what Popper “has said” refers to physics, but physicists, generally speaking, have little knowledge of what he has said. True, Popper's philosophy of science and, in particular, his realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics deviates considerably from the generally accepted doctrine. But as Popper, rightly I think, points out, it is precisely the proliferation of divergent theories which promotes the growth of scientific knowledge; it would be a danger for physics if physicists were dogmatically tied to a single theory or would not test their theory against alternatives. It is for this purpose that, on the occasion of the nonagenarian celebration of Popper's birthday, the present essay has been written.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
B. Magee,Karl Popper (Viking Press, New York, 1973), p. 2.
K. Popper, Autobiography, inThe Philosophy of Karl Popper, P. A. Schilpp, ed. (Open Court, LaSalle, Illinois, 1974), p. 23.
M. Jammer,The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1974), p. 57.
K. Popper,Logik der Forschung (Springer, Vienna, 1934);The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Hutchinson, London; Basic Books, New York, 1959).
Ref. 3, p. 176.
K. Popper,Br. J. Philos. Sci. 1, 117 (1950).
K. Popper,Br. J. Philos. Sci. 10, 28 (1959).
K. Popper, “The propensity interpretation of the calculus of probability, and the quantum theory,” inObservation and Interpretation, S. Körner, ed. (Butterworths, London, 1957), p. 65.
K. Popper, “Quantum mechanics without ‘The Observer,’” inQuantum Theory and Reality, M. Bunge, ed. (Springer, Berlin, 1967), p. 1.
K. Popper,Postscript to the Logic of Scientific Discovery—Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics, W. W. Bartley, III, ed. (Hutchinson, London, 1982).
R. Feynman,Lectures on Physics (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1965), Vol. 3, p. 1–1.
Ref. 10, p. 149.
Ref. 12, p. 19.
Ref. 12, p. 142.
Ref. 12, p. 27. Quotation in K. Popper, “Proposal for a simplified new variant of the experiment of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen,”V. Weizsäcker Festschrift (Hanser Verlag, Munich, 1982), p. 313.
Ref. 12, p. 20.
K. Popper,Nature (London) 177, 538 (1956);178, 382 (1956);179, 1297 (1957);181, 402 (1958);207, 233 (1965);213, 320 (1967);214, 322 (1967).
K. Popper,Philosophy and Physics (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1974).
Ref. 12, p. 36.
Ref. 2, p. 124.
H. E. Kyberg,Br. J. Philos. Sci. 25, 358 (1974).
H. Krips,Philos. Q. 39, 308 (1989).
Ref. 2, p. 760.
Ref. 2, p. 1132.
H. Keuth,J. Gen. Philos. Sci. 7, 99 (1976).
K. Popper,Nature (London) 219, 682 (1968).
Ref. 23.
E. Scheibe,Br. J. Philos. Sci. 25, 319 (1974).
W. W. Bartley, III,Philosophia 7, 686 (1977).
Ref. 3, p. 450.
Ref. 10, p. 155.
Ref. 9..
N. D. Mermin,Boojums All the Way Through (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990), p. 192.
M. Stöckler, “Abschied von Kopenhagen?” inVersuche und Widerlegungen—Offene Probleme im Werk Karl Poppers, K. Müller, F. Stadler, and F. Wallner, eds. (Geyer-Edition, Vienna, 1986), p. 353.
A. Sudbery,Philos. Sci. 52, 470 (1985).
Open Questions in Quantum Physics, G. Tarozzi and A. van der Merwe, eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1985), p. 26.
F. Selleri,Quantum Paradoxes and Physical Reality (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1990), p. 351.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jammer, M. Sir Karl Popper and his philosophy of physics. Found Phys 21, 1357–1368 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889648
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889648