Abstract
It has been customary for historians investigating the background to quantum mechanics to concentrate on one or other of the particular branches of quantum physics. In some cases this approach may be vindicated by a similar specialisation on the part of physicists whose work is being discussed. But even though they may have published only within restricted areas, most physicists took their perception of the problem complex from the wider field of their reading, correspondence and conversation. And most of those involved in the actual development of quantum mechanics had already contributed important work in several distinct areas. In general, the major conceptual issues ran through all such areas, and their most obvious and widely discussed manifestations were not necessarily their most significant. The wave-particle duality, which was almost certainly the most characteristic conceptual feature of quantum theory, was most commonly discussed in the contexts of experimental X-ray physics and individual absorption and emission phenomena. This discussion reached its peak, in the years immediately before the development of the new quantum mechanics, in the context of the Compton effect, viewed by at least one historian as a turning point in physics.1 But by the time of Compton’s experiments this whole area had long been one of only secondary importance for the active development of ideas pertaining to the duality problem, and dramatic though his results were to a wider audience they had relatively little impact on the physicists whose work was to be of importance in the creation of quantum mechanics.2
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
A. Einstein, ‘Die Grundlagen der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie’, Ann. der Phys. 49 (1916), 769–822, translated in Lorentz, Principle of Relativity, 111–164. The best account of general relativity theory is probably still W. Pauli, ‘Relativitätstheorie’, Encykl Math. Wiss. 19 (1921), translated as Theory of Relativity (Oxford, 1958). For a recent historical account see Mehra, Einstein and Hilbert.
Mie to Weyl, 26 October 1918, ETHZ 91, 674.
Sommerfeld to Weyl, 3 July 1918, ETHZ 91, 751. Sommerfeld also criticised the theory, however, and his criticisms are to be found in Sommerfeld to Weyl, 7 November 1919, 11 December 1919 and 6 January 1920, ETHZ 91, 752–754.
Eddington to Weyl, 18 August 1920, ETHZ 91, 523. Eddington’s first enthusiastic response was in a letter Eddington to Weyl, 16 December 1918, ETHZ 91, 522.
Einstein to Weyl, 8 March 1918, ETHZ 91, 539, including two pages of extravagant praise.
W. Pauli, ‘Zur Theorie der Gravitation und der Elektrizität von Hermann Weyl’, Phys. Zeit. 20 (1919), 457–467, and ‘Mehrkurperihelbewegung und Strahlenableitung in Weyl’s Gravitationstheorie’, Verh. Deut Phys. Ges. 21 (1919), 742–750.
E. T. Whittaker, A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity 2, (London, 1953 ), 214–217.
Einstein to Weyl, 23 December 1916, ETHZ 91, 536.
Einstein to Weyl, 8 March 1918, in response to Weyl to Einstein, 1 March 1918, ETHZ 91, 539, 538a.
Einstein to Weyl, 8 April 1918, ETHZ 91, 540.
Einstein to Weyl, 15 April 1918, ETHZ 91, 541: “So schön Ihre Gedanke ist, muss ich doch offen sagen, dass er nach meiner Ansicht ausgeschlossen ist, dass die Theorie der Natur entspricht.” Einstein had already communicated this paper, though Weyl had meanwhile become dissatisfied with it, feeling that it did not go far enough: Weyl to Einstein, 15 April 1918, ETHZ 91, 540a.
Einstein to Weyl, 15 April 1918, ETHZ 91, 541, and see also Einstein to Besso, 20 August 1918 and 26 July 1920 in Einstein and Besso, Correspondance, 132–134, 155–158 (Items 46,52.1).
Einstein to Weyl, 19 April 1918, ETHZ 91, 543, with repercussions in Weyl to Einstein, 27 and 28 April 1918, and Einstein to Weyl, 1 May 1918, ETHZ 91, 543a, 543b, 544; Weyl, ‘Grav. u. Elek.’, 478–480, not in translation.
Weyl, ibid.
Weyl, Raum-Zeit-Materie, 1st edition, 226–227, not in 4th edition or translation.
Weyl to Einstein, 19 May 1918, ETHZ 91, 545a: “Weiss ich doch nur zu gut, in einem wie viel Lauteren Verhältnis Sie zur Wirchlichkeit stehen als ich.”
Pauli, Relativity, 196.
A. S. Eddington, ‘Relativity of field and matter’, Phil. Mag. 42 (1921), 800–806, and ‘A generalisation of Weyl’s theory of the electromagnetic and gravitational fields’, Proc. Roy. Soc. A99 (1921), 104–122. See also A. S. Eddington, Space, Time and Gravitation (Cambridge, 1920), Chapter 11, where Weyl’s theory is enthusiastically reviewed, and Mathematical Theory of Relativity (Cambridge, 1923 ).
G. Mie, ‘Grundlagen einer Theorie der Materie’, Ann. der Phys. 37 (1912), 511— 534, 39 (1912), 1–40, 40 (1913), 1–66. See Mehra, Einstein and Hilbert, Pyenson, ‘Gottingen reception’, and L. Pyenson, ‘Mathematics, education, and the Göttingen approach to physical reality, 1890–1914’, Europa 2 (1979), 91–127.
Pauli, ‘Grav. u. Elek.’ and Relativity, 202, 205–206. See also A. Einstein, ‘Spielen Gravitationsfelder in Aufbau der materiellen Elementarteilchen eine wesentliche Rolle?’, S.-B. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. (1919), 348–356, translated in Lorentz, Principle of Relativity, 191–198.
Eddington to Weyl, 10 July 1921, ETHZ 91, 525.
Weyl to Pauli, 10 May 1919, PB, 3–5 (Item 1).
Weyl, Space-Time-Matter, 311.
Weyl, ‘Das Verhältnis’.
See Weyl, Space-Time-Matter, 212–213, and Pauli, Relativity, 192.
Pauli, ‘Grav. u. Elek.’, and Relativity, 205–206.
Hendry, ‘Weimar culture’, but see also Forman, ‘Weimar culture’.
W. Schottky, ‘Das Kausalproblem der Quantentheorie als eine Grundfrage der modernen Naturforschung überhaupt’, Naturwissenschaften 9 (1921), 492–496, 506–511.
K. Försterling, ‘Bohrsches Atommodell und Relativitätstheorie’, Zeit. Phys. 3 (1920), 404–407, reviewed by Pauli in Phys. Ber. 2 (1921), 489.
E. Schrödinger, ‘Dopplerorinzip und Bohrsche Frequenzbedingung’, Phys. Zeit. 23 (1922), 301–303.
Schrödinger to Pauli, 8 November 1922, PB, 69–73 (Item 29).
E. Schrödinger, ‘Was ist ein Naturgesetz?’, Naturwissenschaften 17 (1929), 9–11, inaugural lecture at Zürich, December 1922.
Schrödinger to Pauli, 8 November 1922, PB, 69–73 (Item 29).
Schrödinger, ‘Naturgesetz’.
E. Schrödinger, ‘Quantisierung als Eigenwertproblem’, Ann. der Phys. 79 (1926), 489–527, esp. 489. The words were however omitted from the English translation of the paper, perhaps as unsuitable for an English audience.
E. Schrodinger, ‘Über eine bemerkenswerte Eigenschaft der Quantenbahnen eines einzelnen Elektrons’, Zeit. Phys. 12 (1922), 13–23. See also Raman and Forman, ‘Why Schrödinger’, 305.
Schrödinger, ibid., and see Raman and Forman, ‘Why Schrödinger’, 303–310.
Pauli, Relativity, 206.
Pauli to Eddington, 20 September 1923, PB, 115–119 (Item 45). This letter was sent in response to a copy of Eddington’s Mathematical Theory.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1984 D. Reidel Publishing Company
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hendry, J. (1984). Wolfgang Pauli and the Search for a Unified Theory. In: The Creation of Quantum Mechanics and the Bohr-Pauli Dialogue. Studies in the History of Modern Science, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6277-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6277-4_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-6279-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-6277-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive