Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Physics Today

A trend in contemporary physics

Alexander W. Stern

Published May 1, 1949• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

The introduction by Bohr of Planck's quantum of action h in atomic theory to explain the stability of atoms and their fixed properties culminated in the discovery of the Uncertainty Principle, or the Principle of Indeterminancy, as it is sometimes called. This principle necessitates a redefinition and generalization of the concept of causality, and in the early days of its discovery caused much confusion and misunderstanding among physicists.

DOI
10.1063/1.3066496

Related papers

Quantum mechanics

Guido Bacciagaluppi, Antony Valentini

Introduction Quantum mechanics is based on the intuition that the essential difference between atomic physics and classical physics is the occurrence of discontinuities (see in particular [1,4,58–63]). Quantum mechanics should thus be considered a direct continuation of the quantum theory founded by Planck, Einstein and Bohr. Bohr in particular stressed repeatedly, already before the birth of quantum mechanics, that the discontinuities must lead to the introduction of new kinematical and mechanical concepts, so that indeed classical mechanics and its corresponding conceptual scheme should be abandoned [1,4]. Quantum mechanics tries to introduce the new concepts through a precise analysis of what is ‘observable in principle’. In fact, this does not mean setting up the principle that a sharp division between ‘observable’ and ‘unobservable’ quantities is possible and necessary. As soon as a conceptual scheme is given, one can infer from the observations to other facts that are actually not observable directly, and the boundary between ‘observable’ and ‘unobservable’ quantities becomes altogether indeterminate. But if the conceptual scheme itself is still unknown, it will be expedient to enquire only about the observations themselves, without drawing conclusions from them, because otherwise wrong concepts and prejudices taken over from before will block the way to recognising the physical relationships [Zusammenhänge].

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 22, 2009•0 citations

The quantum, its discovery and the continuing quest

J. Pasupathy

It was exactly one hundred years ago on 14 December 1900 that the great physicist Max Planck (1858–1947) presented to the German Physical Society his revolutionary concept of the quantum of action, using which he successfully explained the spectrum of radiation emitted by a black body. Planck was aided in this momentous discovery by, first, his insistence on empirical veracity and second, the laws of thermodynamics. This history is narrated in several places1, I shall just briefly recall the main features.

•Dec 1, 2000•0 citations

The Rise of Quantum Theory

Tian Yu Cao

The origin of the relativity theories was closely bound up with the development of electromagnetic concepts, a development that approached a coherent field-theoretical formulation, according to which all actions may vary in a continuous manner. In contrast, quantum theory arose out of the development of atomic concepts, a development that was characterized by the acknowledgment of a fundamental limitation to classical physical ideas when applied to atomic phenomena. This restriction was expressed in the so-called quantum postulate, which attributed to any atomic process an essential discontinuity that was symbolized by Planck’s quantum of action and soon incarnated in quantization condition (commutation or anticommutation relations) and uncertainty relations.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 1, 2019•0 citations

Heisenberg's Indeterminacy Principle and Life

Albert Bachem

Heisenberg's (3) principle of indeterminacy or uncertainty has led most theoretical physicists and philosophers to two important steps: 1) the denunciation of the law of physical causality; 2) the decision of biological and psychological problems in favor of indeterminism.

Philosophy of Science•Oct 1, 1952•6 citations

Quantum Physics and God’s Agency

Hamidreza Shakerin

The common understanding of Copenhagen interpretation of the uncertainty principle and indeterminism in quantum physics is that it is a negation of causal relationships. Having the relationship between the existence of God and causality in mind, some advocates of ontological naturalism assert that by negating causality in modern physics, there remains no room for belief in God as the necessary cause of the world and His actions in it. To examine this claim, I will explain briefly the quantum theory, Copenhagen interpretation of uncertainty principle, and its epistemological position. Next, I will investigate its relationship with causality and divine actions. The article concludes that not only is there no conflict between Copenhagen interpretation and causality, but the former is based on the latter and has complete coherence with the belief in God and His actions in the world. Compared to classical physics, its consistency with direct and special divine actions in the world is more.

•Feb 1, 2022•0 citations

Uncertainty

Jonathan Allday

In classical physics, the width, or uncertainty, in a set of experimental results is generally attributable to experimental variations, due to small differences in the objects being tested, or variations in the apparatus used, instrumental factors, environmental factors etc. Experiments in quantum physics also suffer from all these sorts of variations. Consequently, even if we have a collection of systems, all carefully prepared in the same eigenstate of the physical variable in question, we will not always get exactly the same measured value. The spread of this distribution is down to experimental uncertainty. People have not been afraid of drawing philosophical conclusions from the uncertainty principle, almost from the moment the result was first published. Heisenberg himself launched one of the earliest sallies, his target being the principle of causality. Causality, the notion that everything that happens has been caused by something happening previously, has been central to physics for hundreds of years.

CRC Press eBooks•Sep 21, 2022•0 citations
The introduction by Bohr of Planck's quantum of action h in atomic theory to explain the stability of atoms and their fixed properties culminated in the discovery of the Uncertainty Principle, or the Principle of Indeterminancy, as it is sometimes called. This principle necessitates a redefinition and generalization of the concept of causality, and in the early days of its discovery caused much confusion and misunderstanding among physicists.
Introduction Quantum mechanics is based on the intuition that the essential difference between atomic physics and classical physics is the occurrence of discontinuities (see in particular [1,4,58–63]). Quantum mechanics should thus be considered a direct continuation of the quantum theory founded by Planck, Einstein and Bohr. Bohr in particular stressed repeatedly, already before the birth of quantum mechanics, that the discontinuities must lead to the introduction of new kinematical and mechanical concepts, so that indeed classical mechanics and its corresponding conceptual scheme should be abandoned [1,4]. Quantum mechanics tries to introduce the new concepts through a precise analysis of what is ‘observable in principle’. In fact, this does not mean setting up the principle that a sharp division between ‘observable’ and ‘unobservable’ quantities is possible and necessary. As soon as a conceptual scheme is given, one can infer from the observations to other facts that are actually not observable directly, and the boundary between ‘observable’ and ‘unobservable’ quantities becomes altogether indeterminate. But if the conceptual scheme itself is still unknown, it will be expedient to enquire only about the observations themselves, without drawing conclusions from them, because otherwise wrong concepts and prejudices taken over from before will block the way to recognising the physical relationships [Zusammenhänge].
It was exactly one hundred years ago on 14 December 1900 that the great physicist Max Planck (1858–1947) presented to the German Physical Society his revolutionary concept of the quantum of action, using which he successfully explained the spectrum of radiation emitted by a black body. Planck was aided in this momentous discovery by, first, his insistence on empirical veracity and second, the laws of thermodynamics. This history is narrated in several places1, I shall just briefly recall the main features.
The origin of the relativity theories was closely bound up with the development of electromagnetic concepts, a development that approached a coherent field-theoretical formulation, according to which all actions may vary in a continuous manner. In contrast, quantum theory arose out of the development of atomic concepts, a development that was characterized by the acknowledgment of a fundamental limitation to classical physical ideas when applied to atomic phenomena. This restriction was expressed in the so-called quantum postulate, which attributed to any atomic process an essential discontinuity that was symbolized by Planck’s quantum of action and soon incarnated in quantization condition (commutation or anticommutation relations) and uncertainty relations.
The common understanding of Copenhagen interpretation of the uncertainty principle and indeterminism in quantum physics is that it is a negation of causal relationships. Having the relationship between the existence of God and causality in mind, some advocates of ontological naturalism assert that by negating causality in modern physics, there remains no room for belief in God as the necessary cause of the world and His actions in it. To examine this claim, I will explain briefly the quantum theory, Copenhagen interpretation of uncertainty principle, and its epistemological position. Next, I will investigate its relationship with causality and divine actions. The article concludes that not only is there no conflict between Copenhagen interpretation and causality, but the former is based on the latter and has complete coherence with the belief in God and His actions in the world. Compared to classical physics, its consistency with direct and special divine actions in the world is more.
In classical physics, the width, or uncertainty, in a set of experimental results is generally attributable to experimental variations, due to small differences in the objects being tested, or variations in the apparatus used, instrumental factors, environmental factors etc. Experiments in quantum physics also suffer from all these sorts of variations. Consequently, even if we have a collection of systems, all carefully prepared in the same eigenstate of the physical variable in question, we will not always get exactly the same measured value. The spread of this distribution is down to experimental uncertainty. People have not been afraid of drawing philosophical conclusions from the uncertainty principle, almost from the moment the result was first published. Heisenberg himself launched one of the earliest sallies, his target being the principle of causality. Causality, the notion that everything that happens has been caused by something happening previously, has been central to physics for hundreds of years.