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

Heidelberg science library

Physical Aspects of Quantum Mechanics

Max Born

Published Jan 1, 1969• 22 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-1-4615-7587-0_2

Related papers

Physical Aspects of Quantum Mechanics

Max Born

Heidelberg science library•Jan 1, 1969•5 citations

Quantum Mechanics

G. Spinolo, Paolo Ghigna

When compared to classical mechanics (CM), quantum mechanics (QM) clearly appears as a difficult topic to the beginner. However, some knowledge of the basics of QM is a real need also for learners with predominant interest in experimental chemistry. Indeed, QM is the physical theory explaining most fundamental aspects of Chemistry, such as the periodic table of the elements and the chemical bond now called covalent, found by 19th century chemists and for a long time recognized as incompatible with the physical theories of the time (CM and classical electromagnetism). Going beyond the historical point of view, many peculiar aspects of QM and its very language permeate all modern chemistry so that a trustworthy understanding is required to deal with the matter in a sensible way.

CRC Press eBooks•Jun 26, 2026•0 citations

Aspects of Quantum Mechanics

Carlo Heissenberg, Augusto Sagnotti

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jan 6, 2022•0 citations

Heisenberg’s Pythagorean Revolution

Arkady Plotnitsky

This article considers a revolutionary transformation – physical, mathematical, and philosophical – of modern physics brought about by Heisenberg’s invention of quantum mechanics (QM). While physical and mathematical aspects of Heisenberg’s invention have been extensively commented on, and while they are essential for this article, considering the transformative philosophical aspects of Heisenberg’s thinking is rare. This article fills this lacuna through the concept of reality without realism (RWR) and the corresponding interpretations of QM, and philosophical implications of this concept.

Epistemology & Philosophy of Science•Jan 1, 2025•1 citation

The Physical Basis of Quantum Mechanics

Alberto Galindo, P. Pascual

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1990•4 citations

Toward thinking quantumly: Student reasoning about the enigma of QM

Marc L. Whiting, Lauren A. Barth-Cohen, Adrian L. Adams +2 more

The physics education research (PER) literature on quantum mechanics (QM) often acknowledges and minimizes what we refer to as the enigma of QM, viewing these aspects of QM as a challenge to overcome, rather than an inherent feature to be leveraged for learning. Using the overlapping theories of knowledge-in-pieces and resource theory as connected to an epistemological framing perspective, we focus on students’ descriptions of the enigma of QM and the epistemological frames that students view as relevant when approaching QM. Data comes from interviews with 10 undergraduate physics students who had learned quantum physics topics across different courses in the curriculum, ranging from sophomore-level modern physics to an advanced undergraduate-level QM course. To elicit students’ ideas on QM, the interview protocol emphasized their perspectives and empowerment when possible. Iterative rounds of qualitative analysis coded the data for how students described enigmatic aspects of QM, along with three epistemological frames students identified as their reasoning strategies: reasoning about scale, reasoning about the connections between QM and mathematics, and reasoning about the connections between QM and classical mechanics. The results document that students are aware that something about QM is unexplainable, an enigma to acknowledge. We argue that acknowledgment of the enigma of QM is a key part of what we refer to as thinking quantumly. Additionally, the epistemological frame of reasoning about scale has not been widely discussed in the QM-PER literature, which students use to distinguish QM from classical mechanics and to explain why mathematical models are needed. These results are important for amplifying students’ voices in how they approach enigmatic aspects of QM. Thus, our results begin to move the QM-PER literature beyond viewing enigmatic aspects of QM as obstacles to be corrected through refined instruction, toward an asset-based orientation as a source of meaningful insights for the learning process.

Physical Review Physics Education Research•Jul 30, 2026•0 citations
When compared to classical mechanics (CM), quantum mechanics (QM) clearly appears as a difficult topic to the beginner. However, some knowledge of the basics of QM is a real need also for learners with predominant interest in experimental chemistry. Indeed, QM is the physical theory explaining most fundamental aspects of Chemistry, such as the periodic table of the elements and the chemical bond now called covalent, found by 19th century chemists and for a long time recognized as incompatible with the physical theories of the time (CM and classical electromagnetism). Going beyond the historical point of view, many peculiar aspects of QM and its very language permeate all modern chemistry so that a trustworthy understanding is required to deal with the matter in a sensible way.
This article considers a revolutionary transformation – physical, mathematical, and philosophical – of modern physics brought about by Heisenberg’s invention of quantum mechanics (QM). While physical and mathematical aspects of Heisenberg’s invention have been extensively commented on, and while they are essential for this article, considering the transformative philosophical aspects of Heisenberg’s thinking is rare. This article fills this lacuna through the concept of reality without realism (RWR) and the corresponding interpretations of QM, and philosophical implications of this concept.
The physics education research (PER) literature on quantum mechanics (QM) often acknowledges and minimizes what we refer to as the enigma of QM, viewing these aspects of QM as a challenge to overcome, rather than an inherent feature to be leveraged for learning. Using the overlapping theories of knowledge-in-pieces and resource theory as connected to an epistemological framing perspective, we focus on students’ descriptions of the enigma of QM and the epistemological frames that students view as relevant when approaching QM. Data comes from interviews with 10 undergraduate physics students who had learned quantum physics topics across different courses in the curriculum, ranging from sophomore-level modern physics to an advanced undergraduate-level QM course. To elicit students’ ideas on QM, the interview protocol emphasized their perspectives and empowerment when possible. Iterative rounds of qualitative analysis coded the data for how students described enigmatic aspects of QM, along with three epistemological frames students identified as their reasoning strategies: reasoning about scale, reasoning about the connections between QM and mathematics, and reasoning about the connections between QM and classical mechanics. The results document that students are aware that something about QM is unexplainable, an enigma to acknowledge. We argue that acknowledgment of the enigma of QM is a key part of what we refer to as thinking quantumly. Additionally, the epistemological frame of reasoning about scale has not been widely discussed in the QM-PER literature, which students use to distinguish QM from classical mechanics and to explain why mathematical models are needed. These results are important for amplifying students’ voices in how they approach enigmatic aspects of QM. Thus, our results begin to move the QM-PER literature beyond viewing enigmatic aspects of QM as obstacles to be corrected through refined instruction, toward an asset-based orientation as a source of meaningful insights for the learning process.