The Bohr-Einstein Dispute

Dugald R. Murdoch

Now that my account of Bohr's philosophy of physics has been completed, it remains for me to give a general assessment of it. What value should we assign to Bohr's main ideas – the notions of correspondence and complementarity? How does his interpretation of quantum physics fare in comparison with some of its rivals? What should our assessment of the Bohr–Einstein debate be? I shall take up these questions in the reverse order. Einstein or Bohr? The final verdict The Bohr–Einstein debate is primarily a dispute about the philosophical foundations in terms of which the interpretation of quantum mechanics should be based: specifically it is a dispute about the intrinsic-properties theory, i.e. about the scope of a realist interpretation of quantum mechanics. Einstein wished to maintain the two realist theses, the intrinsic-properties theory and the objective-values theory, whereas Bohr wished to hold only the latter. My own philosophical leanings are in the direction of realism. To my mind the notion of a physical reality the existence and constitution of which are independent of human thought and perception is coherent and plausible: what physical objects there are, and what properties they have, is not determined by human thought or perception, or by human practical interests. I have sympathy, therefore, with Einstein's position concerning the indefinability thesis and the question of the completeness of quantum mechanics.

Dugald R. Murdoch

Between 1927 and 1936 no one had a greater influence on Bohr's thinking than Einstein. It was Einstein's unremitting criticism which provided the severest test of Bohr's interpretation of quantum physics, and which forced him to clarify and refine his arguments. The debate between Bohr and Einstein concerning the interpretation of quantum physics is generally recognised as one of the great intellectual disputes in the history of science. What was the nature of the disagreement between them, and what were the arguments with which each defended his position? The fifth Solvay Conference, 1927 Einstein was not present at the Volta Centennial Conference at Como in September 1927, where Bohr first presented his theory of complementarity; Einstein first learned of Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics at the fifth Solvay Conference of Physics at Brussels in October 1927. In the discussion following Bohr's paper Einstein examined an imaginary experiment in which an electron passes through a slit in a diaphragm and impinges at a point on a hemispherical screen. This experiment, Einstein suggested, could be interpreted in either of two ways: the de Broglie–Schrödinger waves represent either ( a ) an ensemble of electrons spread out in space (but not an individual electron), or ( b ) a wave-packet corresponding to an individual electron. There is, he noted, a difficulty with the latter interpretation.

Li jun Tian

Controversies between Einstein and Niels Bohr about the interpretation of quantum theory have been a classical case in the twentieth-century physics.Through the case study of controversies that been derived from uncertainty princple and EPR paper between Einstein and Niels Bohr,we can find that behind the great controversies concerning great scientific revolutions,it must be the controversies of the fundamental problem of philosophy.In these scientific controversies,the logical inference become highly effective way to argumentation,thus they become the powerful weapons for scientists to win in scientific controversies.Though scientists utilize various rhetoric arguments in dispute,the rhetoric argument must be built on the base of logical inference.For this reason,there is a necessary tension between logical inference and rhetoric argument.