Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Orthodox Quantum Mechanics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Interpreting Physics

Part of the book series: Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science ((BSPS,volume 289))

  • 1156 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter develops the measurement interpretation of quantum mechanics. This is an austere systematized version of the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation. Dirac used an analysis of the distinctive features of quantum measurements as a basis for developing the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics. Schwinger put this on a more systematic basis and extended the formalism to include quantum electrodynamics and basic quantum field theory. This measurement formulation does not accommodate further advances in quantum field theory or quantum cosmology, where there is no outside observer.

These things, therefore, having been expressed by us with the greatest accuracy and attention, the Holy Ecumenical Synod declares that no one shall be allowed to bring forward, nor to write, nor to put together, nor to frame a different faith, nor to teach others anything different.

Council of Chalcedon, 451 A. D.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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 EPUB and 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

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term ‘orthodox’ stems from the Council of Chalcedon, which set the standards of orthodoxy accepted by the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and mainstream Protestant Churches. By a curious turn some theologians are now using Bohr’s doctrine of complementarity to explain the Chalcedonian decrees. See Richardson and Wildman (1996), pp. 253–298.

  2. 2.

    Surveys of the problems treated by matrix mechanics may be found in Mehra-Rechenberg (1982, Vol. 4, Part 2); and in Max Born’s 1926 lectures (Born 1962, p. 68–129).

  3. 3.

    For more details see: Mehra-Rechenberg (1982, Vol. 5, Part 2, pp. 838–854); Hund (1974), chaps. 12–14; Jammer (1966), 362–365; Pauli (1947 [1932]), 161–214; Bethe (1999) and Kuhn et al. (1962).

  4. 4.

    This is a summary of ideas Bohr presented in October, 1931. A more detailed analysis is given in MacKinnon (1982a, chap. 8) and MacKinnon (1985).

  5. 5.

    “… the Copenhagen interpretation regards things and processes which are describable in terms of classical concepts, i.e., the actual, as the foundation of any physical interpretation” (Heisenberg 1958, p. 145).

  6. 6.

    Pauli, Bohr’s closest ally on interpretative issues, contrasted Reichenbach’s attempt to formulate quantum mechanics as an axiomatic theory with his own position: “Quantum mechanics is a much less radical procedure. It can be considered the minimum generalization of the classical theory which is necessary to reach a self-consistent description of micro phenomena, in which the finiteness of the quantum of action is essential” (Pauli 1947, p. 1404).

  7. 7.

    In an interview with Thomas Kuhn and others the day before his death Bohr claimed “There are all kinds of people, but I think it would be reasonable to say that no man who is called a philosopher really understands what one means by the complementary description. … They did not see that it was an objective description, and that it is the only possible objective description” (Bohr, AHQP, Interview 3, 5).

  8. 8.

    See Gomatam (2007) for a clarification of the difference between Bohr’s position and the standard Copenhagen interpretation.

  9. 9.

    Coecke et al. (2001) provides a good historical summary of the axiomatic approach.

  10. 10.

    Healey (1989), Hughes (1989), and Van Fraassen (1991) have developed interpretations of QM using the semantic method of interpretation.

  11. 11.

    The account of measurement was developed in von Neumann (1955 [1932], chap. 6). In a conversation with Abner Shimony, Eugene Wigner claimed “I have learned much about quantum theory from Johnny, but the material in his Chapter Six Johnny learned all from me.” (citation from Aczel 2001, p. 102)

  12. 12.

    Bub (1997), chap. 7 gives a technical treatment that examines Bohr’s position, the ‘von Neuman-Dirac orthodoxy’ and Bub’s own development based on the Bub-Clifton theorem.

  13. 13.

    Arguments supporting this evaluation are given in my 2007 and 2008 papers.

References

  • Accardi, L. 1995. Can Mathematics Help Solving the Interpretational Problems of Quantum Mechanics? Il Nuovo Cimento, 110B, 685–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aczel, Amir D. 2001. Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics. New York, NY: Four Walls Eight Windows.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bethe, Hans. 1999. Quantum Theory. Reviews of Modern Physics, 71, S1–S8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, Niels. 1963. Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, Niels, and Léon Rosenfeld. 1933. On the Question of the Measurability of Electromagnetic Field Quantities. In J. Wheeler, and W. Zurek (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement (pp. 478–522). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, Niels, and Léon Rosenfeld. 1950. Field and Charge Measurements in Quantum Electrodynamics. Physical Review, 78, 794–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Born, Max. 1962. Atomic Physics. New York, NY: Hafner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bub, Jeffrey. 1997. Interpreting the Quantum World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coecke, Bob, David Moore, and Alexander Wilce. 2001. Operational Quantum Logic: An Overview. ProCite field[12]: (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Darrigol, Olivier. 1991. Coherence et complétude de la mécanique quantique: l’exemple de Bohr. Review d’Histoire de Sciences, 44, 137–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirac, Paul. 1928. The Quantum Theory of the Electron, A117, 610–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirac, P. A. M. (ed.) 1935. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics (2nd ed). Cambridge: Cambridge Universiwty Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirac, Paul. 1958. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, (4th edn). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirac, Paul. 1964. Foundations of Quantum Theory. Lecture at Yeshiva University. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flato, M., C. Fronsdal, and K. A. Milton. 1979. Selected Papers (1937–1976) of Julian Schwinger. Dordrecht: Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gomatam, Ravi. 2007. Bohr’s Interpretation and the Copenhagen Interpretation – Are The Two Incompatible? In Cristina Bicchieri, and Jason Alexander (eds.), PSA06: Part I (pp. 736–748). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfried, Kurt. 1966. Quantum Mechanics. Volume I: Fundamentals. New York, NY: W. A. Benjamin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, Richard A. 1989. The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heisenberg, Werner. 1930. The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory. New York, NY: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heisenberg, Werner. 1958. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. New York, NY: Harper’s.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, Don. 2004. Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”: A Study in Mythology. In Sandra D. Mitchell (ed.), Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting (pp. 669–682). East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association. ProCite field[8]: ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. I. G. 1989. The Structure and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hund, Friedrich. 1974. The History of Quantum Theory. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jammer, Max. 1966. The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramers, H. A. 1957. Quantum Mechanics. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Thomas, John Heilbron, Paul Forman (eds.) 1962. AHQP: Archives for the History of Quantum Physics. Berkeley, CA: Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landau, L. D., and E. M. Lifshitz. 1965. Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory (2nd rev. edn). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landau, Lev Davidovich, and Rudolf Peierls. 1931. Extension of the Uncertainty Principle to Relativistic Quantum Theory. In J. Wheeler, and W. Zurek (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement (pp. 465–476). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, J. 1963. The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. New York, NY: Benjamin.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Edward. 1982. Scientific Explanation and Atomic Physics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Edward. 1985. Bohr on the Foundations of Quantum Theory. In A. P. French, and P. J. Kennedy (eds.), Niels Bohr: A Centenary Volume (pp. 101–120). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Edward. 1994. Bohr and the Realism Debates. In J. Faye, and H. Folse (eds.), Niels Bohr and Contemporary Physics (pp. 279–302). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Edward. 2008. The Standard Model as a Philosophical Challenge. Philosophy of Science, 75(4), 447–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehra, Jagdish, and Helmut Rechenberg. 1982. The Historical Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Messiah, Albert. 1964. Quantum Mechanics: Vol. I. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauli, Wolfgang. 1947. Die Allgemeinen Prinzipien der Wellenmchanik. Ann Arbor, MI: J. W. Edwards.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, Aage. 1968. Quantum Physics and the Philosophical Tradition. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redhead, Michael. 1987. Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, W. Mark, and Wesley J. Wildman. 1996. Religion and Science: History, Method, Dialogue. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, L. et al. 1972. Niels Bohr: Collected Works. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweber, Silvan S. 1994. QED and the Men Who Made it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinger, Julian. 1970a. Particles, Sources, and Fields. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinger, Julian. 1970b. Quantum Kinematics and Dynamics. New York, NY: W. A. Benjamin, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinger, Julian. 1970c. Selected Papers on Quantum Electrodynamics. New York, NY: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinger, Julian. 1959. The Algebra of Microscopic Measurement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 45, 1542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwinger, Julian. 1964. Field Theory of Matter. Physical Review, 135, B816–B830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwinger, Julian. 1983. Renormalization theory of quantum electrodynamics. In Laurie Brown, and Lillian Hoddeson (eds.), The Birth of Particle Physics (pp. 329–353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Fraassen, Bas. 1991. Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann, John. (1955 [1933]). Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, trans. Robert T. Beyer. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. California State University East Bay, Manzanita Drive 2045, 94611, Oakland, USA

    Edward Mackinnon

Authors
  1. Edward Mackinnon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward Mackinnon .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mackinnon, E. (2012). Orthodox Quantum Mechanics. In: Interpreting Physics. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 289. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2369-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation