Skip to main content

The Philosophy of the Physicists

  • Chapter
Between Rationalism and Empiricism
  • 291 Accesses

Abstract

It is a fact, generally accepted but still not sufficiently appreciated, that during the first half of our century the physicists, in connection with problems in their discipline, developed a philosophy of their own — some physicists only, of course, and not all in the same way. Nevertheless, the event is remarkable and deserves to be made the subject matter of a larger monograph. The modern physicist with Galileo as his prototype is inclined by nature to avoid philosophical questions, or at any rate to keep physics free of them. Therefore, whenever he violates this rule, there certainly must be good reasons for doing so. As is well known, for the movement under discussion the reasons were mainly the establishment of the special and general theory of relativity and, even more so, quantum theory. In the articles of Ch. II it is not so much these theories themselves but rather some consequences of their establishment that are selected for closer inspection: the clarification and securing of an appropriate concept of progress ([6] and [9]), Schrödinger’s reaction to the new physics ([7]), the endeavors of Einstein to obtain a physically justifiable understanding of reality ([8]) and incorporation of quantum theory into Planck’s idea of scientific realism ([10]).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. See also Scheibe 1997b, Ch. I.2 and 3, and 1999 passim

    Google Scholar 

  2. First published as Scheibe 1988b

    Google Scholar 

  3. Misner et al. 1973, Section 17.4.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rohrlich 1965, Ch. 1

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kuhn 21970; Kuhn 1977

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen 1985

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boltzmann 1905, pp. 94ff

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nernst 1893, pp. 2f

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nernst 1911, pp. 4f

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nernst 1922, pp. 489 and.491f

    Google Scholar 

  11. Einstein 1914, pp. 740f

    Google Scholar 

  12. Planck 1913, p. 164

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kienle 1933, pp. 115f; Lakatos 1970; for Kuhn see no. 3

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bondi 1983, pp. 89f. It has to be noticed that Bondi is influenced by Popper’s philosophy of science. I nonetheless quote him as a spokesman of physics because I feel ceratin that he is physicist enough to have rejected Popper’s view had he found obvious reasons for that from physics

    Google Scholar 

  15. One exception is Feyerabend, but only in a very incidental manner. See his 1965b, p. 271, and his 1970a, p. 300

    Google Scholar 

  16. Heisenberg 1975, p. 161

    Google Scholar 

  17. Heisenberg 1958, pp. 96f (1959a, p.84)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Heisenberg 1969, p. 135

    Google Scholar 

  19. Op.cit. in no. 15, pp. 97f (p. 85)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Heisenberg 1942, pp. 18f (my italics)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bohr 1934, p. 70

    Google Scholar 

  22. ibid. p. 87

    Google Scholar 

  23. ibid. p. 85

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bohr 1963, p. 9

    Google Scholar 

  25. Op. cit. in no. 15, p. 110

    Google Scholar 

  26. On matters controversial between Bohr and Heisenberg at times see Folse 1985, Ch. 3, sect. 7

    Google Scholar 

  27. Op. cit. in no. 15, Ch. III.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bohr 1958, p. 39

    Google Scholar 

  29. Heisenberg 1948, p. 335

    Google Scholar 

  30. Weizsäcker 1971, p. 208f (1980, p. 169f)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sambursky 1956, p. 97

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kemeny/ Oppenheim 1958

    Google Scholar 

  33. Popper 1972. On p. 202 Popper suggests calling ‘the demand that a new theory should contain the old one approximately... (following Bohr) the “principle of correspondence”’.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Shimony 1983, p. 215

    Google Scholar 

  35. 1954, p. 15

    Google Scholar 

  36. 1952, p. 481

    Google Scholar 

  37. op. cit. in no.3, p. 34

    Google Scholar 

  38. 1929a, p. 317

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bertotti 1985, p. 85

    Google Scholar 

  40. 1961a

    Google Scholar 

  41. ibid. p. 115ff; also op. cit. in no.7, p. 94

    Google Scholar 

  42. op. cit. in no. 8, pp. 153ff

    Google Scholar 

  43. ibid. p. 175

    Google Scholar 

  44. op. cit. in no. 3, and 1948

    Google Scholar 

  45. Locus classicus is Hertz 1894. In addition to Schrödinger’s papers referred to in no. 12 see also 1928

    Google Scholar 

  46. 1948, p. 425

    Google Scholar 

  47. ibid. p. 443

    Google Scholar 

  48. 1935a, p. 486

    Google Scholar 

  49. 1958. This idea, formed already early by Schrödinger, belongs to a consistent wave mechanical interpretation of the microphysical world.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Smoluchovski 1918; Born 1955; Born/Hooton 1955

    Google Scholar 

  51. Exner 1919, part IV, esp. pp. 691ff; 1929b; I find Forman’s description of the development, in which he includes also Weyl, Reichenbach and others, as being a turn towards acausality misleading. See Forman 1971, esp. III.3.

    Google Scholar 

  52. 1927b, p. 279. See also 1929c; 1929a; 1930, esp. p. 24; 1932

    Google Scholar 

  53. 1961b, p. 27

    Google Scholar 

  54. 1926, pp. 117f (Italics mine)

    Google Scholar 

  55. op. cit. in no. 17, p. 509

    Google Scholar 

  56. For a recent vindication see Dorling 1987. See also Wessels 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  57. It is not always clear which view Schrödinger is attacking. He seldom uses names or gives references. On the other hand, the views of the members of the Copenhagen school diverge. See op. cit. in no. 2 and E. Scheibe 1989b

    Google Scholar 

  58. op. cit. in no.21, p. 51

    Google Scholar 

  59. op. cit. 1930 in no.20, p. 26. This lecture, given in Munich 1930, was not published until after Schrödinger’s death.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Einstein et al. 1935. Schrödinger’s reaction was the paper referred to in no. 16.

    Google Scholar 

  61. 1935b and c; 1955

    Google Scholar 

  62. op. cit. in no. 16, p. 489

    Google Scholar 

  63. op. cit. in no.21, p. 51f

    Google Scholar 

  64. See op. cit. in no. 17, pp. 507ff

    Google Scholar 

  65. Schilpp 1949 (German Edition 1955

    Google Scholar 

  66. Prank 1949 (1955)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Holton 1981, pp. 203–255

    Google Scholar 

  68. Einstein 1949a, p. 21 (1955a, p. 8)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Holton 1981, p. 230f

    Google Scholar 

  70. Planck 1949, pp. 28–51

    Google Scholar 

  71. Holton 1981, p. 225

    Google Scholar 

  72. Einstein 1949a, p. 13 (1955a, p. 4); italics mine

    Google Scholar 

  73. Einstein 1919

    Google Scholar 

  74. Einstein 1907, p. 439; italics mine)

    Google Scholar 

  75. Schilpp 1949b, p. 679 (1955b, p. 504)

    Google Scholar 

  76. ibid. p. 674 (p. 500)

    Google Scholar 

  77. Einstein 31984, p. 65 (1954, p. 292)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Einstein 1916a, p. 102

    Google Scholar 

  79. Einstein 1989, p. 115 (1954, p. 272)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Quoted from Holton 1980, p. 57

    Google Scholar 

  81. Heisenberg 1969, pp. 90–100

    Google Scholar 

  82. Poincaré 1914, p. 51f

    Google Scholar 

  83. Einstein 1923; italics mine

    Google Scholar 

  84. Einstein/ Born 1969, pp. 25 f.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Einstein 1924

    Google Scholar 

  86. Einstein 1917; 231988; Sect.l; see also Einstein 1922; 31990; p. 11f.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Einstein 1989, p. 122f (1954, p. 236)

    Google Scholar 

  88. Cf. Howard 1990

    Google Scholar 

  89. Duhem 1962, p. 187f

    Google Scholar 

  90. Einstein 31984, p. 67 (1954, p. 293)

    Google Scholar 

  91. Einstein 1989, p. 123 (1954, p. 236f)

    Google Scholar 

  92. Weizsäcker 1971, pp. 195ff (1980, pp. 157ff)

    Google Scholar 

  93. Einstein l949a, pp. 58ff (1955, p. 22f)

    Google Scholar 

  94. Einstein 1989, pp. 110–113 (1954, pp. 220–3)

    Google Scholar 

  95. Einstein 1950, p. 15

    Google Scholar 

  96. Einstein 1989, p. 115 (1954, p. 272f)

    Google Scholar 

  97. Einstein 31984, pp. 67 ff (1954, pp. 293ff)

    Google Scholar 

  98. Einstein 1989, p. 116 (1954, p. 273f)

    Google Scholar 

  99. ibid. p. 109 ( p. 226f)

    Google Scholar 

  100. Einstein 1929, p 126. The following explanations refer to the so-called ‘constructive theories’ which Einstein wanted to distinguish from the so-called ‘principle theories’. See Einstein 1989, p. 127f

    Google Scholar 

  101. Einstein 31984, p. 69 (1954, p. 294f)

    Google Scholar 

  102. Hentschel 1986, p. 483f

    Google Scholar 

  103. Holton 1981, p. 233

    Google Scholar 

  104. Einstein 1989, p. 159 (1954, p. 266)

    Google Scholar 

  105. Einstein 1955c, p. 14; italics mine

    Google Scholar 

  106. The following quotations are from pp. 674, 669 and 680 of Einstein 1949b (pp. 500, 496 and 505 in 1955b resp.)

    Google Scholar 

  107. Einstein paraphrases an expression of Kant in the “Critique of Pure Reason”, B 526f. According to this, given something conditioned, in the realm of phenomena a regressus in the series of all conditions is only proposed (aufgegeben); however, in the realm of noumena it is already given (gegeben).

    Google Scholar 

  108. Einstein 1949b, p. 674 (1955, p. 500)

    Google Scholar 

  109. ibid. p. 669 (p. 496)

    Google Scholar 

  110. Cf. Scheibe 1986b

    Google Scholar 

  111. Einstein 1989, p. 116 f. (1954, p. 274)

    Google Scholar 

  112. Einstein 1949b, p. 684 (1955, p. 508)

    Google Scholar 

  113. Einstein 1950, p. 13

    Google Scholar 

  114. Einstein 1989, p. 17 (1954, p. 39)

    Google Scholar 

  115. Hoffmann/ Dukas 1972, p. VII

    Google Scholar 

  116. Heisenberg 1934, 1936, 1948, 1959, 1969 (Chap. 8), 1970, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  117. Heisenberg 1969, p. 131

    Google Scholar 

  118. Heisenberg 1989

    Google Scholar 

  119. Heisenberg 1969, p. 135

    Google Scholar 

  120. Heisenberg 1959, p. 84

    Google Scholar 

  121. Heisenberg 1936, p. 91; 1948, p. 333 f.; 1970 in 1971, p. 308; 1973, p. 141

    Google Scholar 

  122. Heisenberg 1973, p. 140

    Google Scholar 

  123. v. Weizsäcker 1971, p. 193 f., 213 ff., 232 ff. (1980, p. 156, pp. 173 ff., pp. 188 ff.)

    Google Scholar 

  124. Heisenberg 1959, p. 86 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  125. On the issue of how this fits in with the concept of progress developed by physi? cists themselves, see Scheibe 1988b

    Google Scholar 

  126. Heisenberg 1934, p. 701

    Google Scholar 

  127. Heisenberg 1959, p. 84

    Google Scholar 

  128. Heisenberg 1934, p. 701 (my emphasis)

    Google Scholar 

  129. Heisenberg 1934, p. 702

    Google Scholar 

  130. Heisenberg 1936, p. 91 (my emphasis)

    Google Scholar 

  131. Quine 1969, p. 21 f.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Leplin 1984

    Google Scholar 

  133. Seelig 1952, p.45; Sommerfeld 1955, p.37 (engl. transi. in 1949, p.99)

    Google Scholar 

  134. Ostwald 1902, p.3

    Google Scholar 

  135. Sommerfeld 1948, pp.640ff

    Google Scholar 

  136. Helmholtz 1862; Jungnickel/McCormmach 1986, vol.1, pp.23f

    Google Scholar 

  137. Quoted from Jaki 1966, p.341

    Google Scholar 

  138. Ostwald 1902, p.l

    Google Scholar 

  139. Boltzmann 1990, pp.l2ff, 152ff (engl. transi. in 1974, pp. 153-8); see also Einstein 1934, p. 113 (engl. transi. in 1954, p.270f)

    Google Scholar 

  140. Plato, Theaetetus 151d-186e

    Google Scholar 

  141. Descartes, Meditations, esp. Med.l and 6

    Google Scholar 

  142. Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, B XXXIX, B 274ff

    Google Scholar 

  143. Moore 1939, pp.127ff, 146

    Google Scholar 

  144. Helmholtz 1879, pp.l8f

    Google Scholar 

  145. There were also, of course, adherents of the corpuscular philosophical tradition, see the discussion in Du Bois-Reymond 1872

    Google Scholar 

  146. Blackmore 1982; see also Elkana 1971 and Brush 1990, pp.53ff

    Google Scholar 

  147. Boltzmann 1974, p.202

    Google Scholar 

  148. Kirchhoff 1872, Vorrede

    Google Scholar 

  149. Boltzmann 1905, pp.137f (engl. transi. in 1974, pp.90f)

    Google Scholar 

  150. ibid. p.144 (engl. transi. in 1974, p.96)

    Google Scholar 

  151. ibid. pp.78ff, 145 (engl. transi. in 1974, pp.41ff and 97)

    Google Scholar 

  152. Ostwald 1895, p.162

    Google Scholar 

  153. Boltzmann 1896, vol. I, p.4

    Google Scholar 

  154. Mach 1900, p.362f

    Google Scholar 

  155. Mach 1912, p.467 and Mach 1872, pp.17ff

    Google Scholar 

  156. Instrumentalistic views were common at that time, cf. Pearson 1892, pp.H4f

    Google Scholar 

  157. Mach 1922, p.256

    Google Scholar 

  158. Boltzmann 1905, p. 157

    Google Scholar 

  159. Boltzmann 1990, pp.152f (engl. transi. in Boltzmann 1974, pp.l53f)

    Google Scholar 

  160. Boltzmann 1905, p. 152 (italics mine)

    Google Scholar 

  161. Mach 1900, pp.363f

    Google Scholar 

  162. Einstein 1989, p. 113 (engl. transi. in 1954, p.270)

    Google Scholar 

  163. Scheibe 1988b (this vol. II.6)

    Google Scholar 

  164. Cf. Jost 1979

    Google Scholar 

  165. Planck 1949, p.48

    Google Scholar 

  166. “Die Einheit des physikalischen Weltbildes”, in Planck 1949, 28–51. The following quotations are from pp. 29–31, 45f and 49. See also the reprint in Heilbron 1988, 301–14, and Planck 1910a, pp. 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  167. Concerning this process see Wiener 1900

    Google Scholar 

  168. Planck’s view has been elaborated in Bavink 1947

    Google Scholar 

  169. Planck 1949, pp. 47–51. For the Planck-Mach controversy see also Heilbron 1986, Ch.II.1

    Google Scholar 

  170. Mach 1910; see also Adler 1909

    Google Scholar 

  171. Thiele 1968, p.90

    Google Scholar 

  172. Planck 1910b

    Google Scholar 

  173. Sommerfeld 1936, p.610

    Google Scholar 

  174. Planck never gave up his position. See his “Positivismus und reale Außenwelt” of 1930 in Planck 1949, pp.228–245, and a later controversy in Müller 1940 and Planck 1940

    Google Scholar 

  175. Sommerfeld 1929, p.l

    Google Scholar 

  176. Einstein 1955b, p.500 (engl. transi. in 1949b, p.674)

    Google Scholar 

  177. Einstein 1955c, p.14

    Google Scholar 

  178. Cf. Scheibe 1992b (this vol. II.8)

    Google Scholar 

  179. Einstein 1955a, p.8 (engl. transi. in 1949a, p.21)

    Google Scholar 

  180. Planck 1949, p.VI

    Google Scholar 

  181. The following three quotations are from Einstein 1955b, pp. 500, 496 and 505 (engl. transi. in 1949b, pp. 674, 668 and 680)

    Google Scholar 

  182. Einstein here paraphrases a statement of Kant’s in his Critique of Pure Reason, B 526f. It says that, given something conditioned, in the domain of appearances the regress in the series of its conditions is only put to us (aufgegeben) whereas in the domain of things-in-themselves it would already be given (gegeben).

    Google Scholar 

  183. Blanshard 1939, vol.11, p.264

    Google Scholar 

  184. Quoted from Holton 1968, p.660 (german original in Holton 1981, p.233)

    Google Scholar 

  185. Einstein 1924, p.1685f

    Google Scholar 

  186. Einstein 1955b, p.496 (engl. transi. in 1949b, p.669)

    Google Scholar 

  187. See for this Blanshard 1939, vol.11, pp.225ff

    Google Scholar 

  188. Einstein 1989, p. 131 (italics mine) (engl. transi. in 1954, p.232)

    Google Scholar 

  189. Einstein 1950, p.15 (italics mine)

    Google Scholar 

  190. Einstein 1929, pp.126f

    Google Scholar 

  191. Einstein 1984, pp.67ff (engl. transi. in 1954, pp.293ff)

    Google Scholar 

  192. Einstein 1950, p.15

    Google Scholar 

  193. Einstein 1989, p. 109 (engl. transi. in 1954, p.226)

    Google Scholar 

  194. Cf. Putnam 1984, pp.l40f

    Google Scholar 

  195. Einstein 1984, 65 (engl. transi. in 1954, p.292)

    Google Scholar 

  196. Einstein 1950, p. 13

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Scheibe, E. (2001). The Philosophy of the Physicists. In: Falkenburg, B. (eds) Between Rationalism and Empiricism. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0183-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0183-7_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-6555-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-0183-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics