An Honourable Funeral

Jim Baggott, John L. Heilbron

Published Apr 25, 2024• 0 citations

Abstract

Abstract The Bohr atom proved to be unworkable for atoms with more than one electron, even when extended with the inclusion of additional quantum numbers. The correspondence principle offered little help. Progress demanded a spinning electron, and Wolfgang Pauli’s ‘exclusion principle’, which Werner Heisenberg welcomed as a record-breaking swindle. Seeking escape from the thicket of atomic contradictions, Bohr sought to slay the ultimate sacred cow. He had resisted the embrace of Einstein’s light quantum, and in a theory devised with Hendrik Kramers and John Slater, he abandoned the conservation of energy in individual atomic events, leaving it to statistics. The question could be settled experimentally, and Bohr was soon obliged to accept the results. He offered to give Bohr–Kramers–Slater (BKS) theory an honourable funeral, and acknowledged the light quantum. Einstein was more convinced than ever that physics must respect causality and allow descriptions of events taking place in space and time.

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192846105.003.0003

Related papers

Introduction

Michela Massimi

The history of the exclusion principle is already an old one, but its conclusion has not yet been written. It is now eighty years since Wolfgang Pauli introduced an ‘extremely natural’ prescriptive rule, while dealing with some spectroscopic anomalies that beset physicists in the heyday of the old quantum theory. The rule excluded the possibility that any two bound electrons in an atom were in the same dynamic state, identified by a set of four quantum numbers. Hence the name of Ausschlieβungsregel (exclusion rule), or Pauli's Verbot (Pauli's veto) as Werner Heisenberg nicknamed it. The far-reaching physical significance of this rule became clear only later. From spectroscopy to atomic physics, from quantum field theory to high-energy physics, there is hardly another scientific principle that has more far-reaching implications than Pauli's exclusion principle. It is thanks to Pauli's principle that one obtains the electronic configurations underlying the classification of chemical elements in Mendeleev's periodic table as well as atomic spectra. To this same principle we credit the statistical behaviour of any half-integral spin particles (protons, neutrons, among many others) and the stability of matter. Shifting to high-energy physics, it is the exclusion principle that fixes the crucial constraint for binding quarks in hadrons, which together with leptons compose our physical world. This book advances a philosophical analysis of the enduring and far-reaching validity of Pauli's principle. It does not aim to address what a scientific principle is.

Cambridge University Press eBooksAug 4, 20052 citations

Incompatible Conceptions

Jim Baggott, John L. Heilbron

Abstract Einstein was not in the audience at Bohr’s Como lecture, and their debate was joined in earnest at the fifth Solvay conference in Brussels in October 1927. All of quantum theory’s founders were present. Einstein excused himself for not having mastered the theory, and introduced a simple electron diffraction thought experiment for which he offered two conceptions. In the first, the wavefunction does not describe individual events and is purely statistical. In the second, the wavefunction does describe individual events, its modulus-square giving the probability of detecting the next diffracted electron at a specific position. In his view, the second conception could not stand, as it implies a ‘very peculiar mechanism of action at a distance’. Outside the conference room Einstein peppered Bohr with thought experiments devised to reveal the theory’s confusions or contradictions. The exchanges between them went on like a game of chess, with Bohr emerging the victor.

Apr 25, 20240 citations

Interlude: The BKS Proposal

A. Pais

Abstract In January 1924, Niels Bohr, Hendrik Anton Kramers, and John Clarke Slater submitted to the Philosophical Magazine an article [Bl] that contained drastic theoretical proposals concerning the interaction of light and matter. It was written after Compton’s discovery, yet it rejected the photon. It was also written after Einstein and Bohr had met. This chapter on the BKS proposal serves a twofold purpose. It is a postscript to the story of the photon and a prelude to the Bohr Einstein dialogue which will occupy us more fully later on. I have already mentioned that Einstein was immediately and strongly impressed by Bohr’s work of 1913. The two men did not yet know each other at that time. A number of years were to pass before their first encounter; meanwhile, they followed each other’s published work.

Aug 25, 20050 citations

Pauli’s Exclusion Principle (1925)

S. Brandt

Abstract The exclusion principle is one of the most far-reaching theorems in physics. In a telegram to the Nobel committee, quoted in [1], Einstein wrote: ‘Nominate Wolfgang Pauli for physics prize stop his contributions to modern quantum theory consisting of so-called Pauli or exclusion principle became fundamental part of modern physics being independent from other basic axioms of that theory stop Albert Einstein.’ It is interesting to note that quantum mechanics, the theory Einstein alluded to, was formulated a little after the Pauli principle.

Apr 22, 19920 citations

Rejection of the Light Quantum: The Dark Side of Niels Bohr ∗

Luis J. Boya

Evidence is recalled of the strong opposition of Niels Bohr, at the time of the Old Quantum Theory 1.913 − 25, to the Lichtquanten hypothesis of Einstein. Some episodes with H.A. Kramers, J.C. Slater and W. Heisenberg are recollected; Bohr’s changing point of view is traced back to some philosophical antecedents and to his endeavour to deduce quantum results from the Correspondence Principle. Some consequences for the future interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, specially to the Complementarity Principle, are considered.

Jan 1, 20081 citation

Mutual Admiration

Jim Baggott, John L. Heilbron

Abstract The nature of the Bohr–Einstein debate was framed long before our protagonists became engaged in it. Both were reformers, ready to embrace controversy and even absurdity in their theories. But where Einstein held fast to classical principles he considered sacrosanct, Bohr would cheerfully embrace their violent reworking or replacement. Einstein’s 1921 Nobel prize was awarded in 1922. He had entertained the absurd notion that light consists of ‘quanta’, endowing particle-like properties governed by a characteristic wave frequency. Bohr’s 1922 Nobel prize involved entertaining the absurd notion of quantum ‘jumps’ between atomic orbits driven entirely by chance. He defended the inconsistencies with vague wordplay, declaring the quantities defining the orbits as ‘symbolic’, and introduced a fuzzy demand called the ‘correspondence principle’. At appropriate limits, the value of a quantity should be the same whether calculated using classical or quantum rules. Few quantum physicists could make it work.

Apr 25, 20240 citations