[概要]本研究ノートは後続する量子論の歴史に対する序論である. 現代と19世紀の間にある種の深い断絶があるように量子論と古典物理学の間にも断絶が存在する. ここに量子の歴史をあらためて記してみる意義がある. 本論では, 19世紀の物理学（古典物理学）の世界観と量子を生み出す社会の直接的な要因と目されるその社会状況を概観しておく. また, 現代がいかに視角や展望を必要としているかについても若干の私論を展開しておくものである. [Abstract] This paper is an introduction for the history of quantum theory that I will write on the subsequent articles. To write the history of quantum is important because we are living in the modern scientific civilization. However, we have deep chasms between classical 19th century world and the modern world. There are also chasms between classical physics and the quantum modern physics. We will argue a world-picture of the classical physics and social circumstances which provided for the birth of the quantum in this paper. And this paper states and expounds the necessity of the perspective into our era as my personal views too.
[概要]本研究ノートは後続する量子論の歴史に対する序論である. 現代と19世紀の間にある種の深い断絶があるように量子論と古典物理学の間にも断絶が存在する. ここに量子の歴史をあらためて記してみる意義がある. 本論では, 19世紀の物理学（古典物理学）の世界観と量子を生み出す社会の直接的な要因と目されるその社会状況を概観しておく. また, 現代がいかに視角や展望を必要としているかについても若干の私論を展開しておくものである. [Abstract] This paper is an introduction for the history of quantum theory that I will write on the subsequent articles. To write the history of quantum is important because we are living in the modern scientific civilization. However, we have deep chasms between classical 19th century world and the modern world. There are also chasms between classical physics and the quantum modern physics. We will argue a world-picture of the classical physics and social circumstances which provided for the birth of the quantum in this paper. And this paper states and expounds the necessity of the perspective into our era as my personal views too.
[概要]量子力学は, 現代の科学技術文明にとってもっとも重要な理論である. 量子なる概念は, 二十世紀初頭に出現した. これを量子革命と称する. われわれは, 本論で量子論の発展過程を見てゆく. とりわけ本論が主題とするのは, 黒体放射の問題がいかに解き明かされてプランクの放射公式に結実したか, ということである. かかる議論の過程で, われわれは, 量子の二重性がどのようにして出現したのかが明確にされるのを見るであろう. 言い替えれば, 量子の二面性の根源が, 完成された理論のどこに潜んでいるかを見いだすであろう. また, 本論は, 量子の認識論に関して, その哲学的含意についても若干の議論をすることになる. [Abstract] Quantum mechanics is the most important theory for the modern scientific and technological civilization. The notion of quantum had been emerged at the beginning of the 20th century that is called quantum revolution. We will see the process of the development of the quantum theory in this paper. Especially, we will see and discuss how the black-body problem had been solved by the Planck's formula for radiation. This discussion will make a clear understanding to the emergence of the so-called wave-particle duality. That is to say, we will see the origins of the quantum duality that are hid behind of the accomplished theory. And we discuss a few philosophical implications that are about the epistemology of quantum.
[概要] 量子なる概念は, プランクの放射公式によって議論に俎上した. しかし, それは未だ単なる関数的関係にすぎず, リアルで現実的な物理的実体ではなかった. プランクの量子は現実存在ではないのである. これに対してアインシュタインは, 光量子仮説を導入することで, 量子をリアルでビビッドな存在とし, 量子は実体となった. これは, 量子を粒子として実体化することでもあった. われわれは, 本論において, このアインシュタインのアイデアと実体化の過程を詳細に追跡し, 幾ばくかの哲学的側面についての考察も行う. また, 考察の過程で波動一粒子の二重性の根源についての議論も行うこととなる. [Abstract] The concept of quantum came up in the discussions by the Planck's formula for radiation. However, it was a merely a functional relation, but not physical substance that is the reality. Planck's quantum does not have a real existence at all. In contrast with this, Einstein proposed the hypothesis of the light quanta as a real and with a vivid existence. Thus the quantum becomes a physical substance. This is also a substantiation of quantum as particles. We will see the process of this substantiation and the developments of the Einstein's idea in this article in details and have a few philosophical discussions about this process. We will see and also argue about the roots of the wave-particle duality.
More than a century after the beginning of the quantum revolution, historians continue to explore new facets in the history of quantum physics, and to re-examine some of its better-known aspects. The thirteen papers collected in this volume, by authors from five continents, present central trends in the current study of quantum physics within its theoretical, experimental, philosophical, technological and social contexts. They discuss developments from the late nineteenth to the early twenty-first century and go beyond the traditional focus on Europe and North America to include China and Japan, and beyond the Heisenbergs and Diracs to reveal the role of actors who hitherto have played only a marginal role in historical account, but left their mark on the development of quantum physics. Also a wider array of subdisciplines comes into view, from optics to quantum gravity through quantum electrodynamics, from atomic and nuclear to condense matter physics and foundations of physics. Moreover, the volume shows that fields such as dispersion, physical chemistry and solid state physics should not be seen merely as areas of applications of ideas that evolved in other contexts, but should be regarded as birthplaces of important theoretical insights. The perspective of the papers ranges from local histories to global discussions, from conceptual changes via the role of experimentation to interactions with social and technological forces and to the interpretation of the theory.
We still lack any consensus about what one is actually talking about as one uses quantum mechanics. There is a gap between the abstract terms in which the theory is couched and the phenomena the theory enables each of us to account for so well. Because it has no practical consequences for how we each use quantum mechanics to deal with physical problems, this cognitive dissonance has managed to coexist with the quantum theory from the very beginning. The absence of conceptual clarity for almost a century suggests that the problem might lie in some implicit misconceptions about the nature of scientific explanation that are deeply held by virtually all physicists, but are rarely explicitly acknowledged. I describe here such unvoiced but widely shared assumptions. Rejecting them clarifies and unifies a range of obscure remarks about quantum mechanics made almost from the beginning by some of the giants of physics, many of whom are held to be in deep disagreement. This new view of physics requires physicists to think about science in an unfamiliar way. My primary purpose is to explain the new perspective and urge that it be taken seriously. My secondary aims are to explain why this perspective differs significantly from what Bohr, Heisenberg, and Pauli had been saying from the very beginning, and why it is not solipsism, as some have maintained. To emphasize that this is a general view of science, and not just of quantum mechanics, I apply it to a long-standing puzzle in classical physics: the apparent inability of physics to give any meaning to 'Now'-the present moment.
Introduction Chapter 1 dealt with one of the deepest mysteries in modern science: how to explain consciousness. This Part deals with another mystery: how to make sense of quantum mechanics. Both involve a problem of reconciliation with the classical worldview, which is one hint that the two mysteries might be related. A second is that, unlike classical physics, which makes no reference to or allowance for consciousness, quantum theory raises the issue of consciousness and its relationship to the physical world in a very direct way. These hints do not necessarily mean there is a connection between the two mysteries, but by the end of this Part I hope to have shown why it would be natural to look for one. My more immediate aim here is to give the social scientific reader an introductory understanding of the experimental findings of quantum theory, its key concepts, and the debates about its interpretation. The discussion assumes no prior knowledge of quantum physics and makes no use of mathematics. Quantum theory without equations might seem like an oxymoron, and certainly reading this Part will not enable anyone to use quantum theory. But to a perhaps surprising degree it is possible to understand quantum theory without being able to use it. Its findings can be communicated in ordinary language, and the same goes for its main concepts and interpretive debates. One consequence of this has been the emergence of a virtual cottage industry of books on quantum theory for a lay audience. Most are written by physicists, and many are quite good. However, it is not just popular treatments that do without equations: much of the professional philosophical literature does as well. (I draw on both kinds of literature below.) Philosophers of physics are trained to understand the math, of course, which is necessary for a full appreciation of the issues.
At the beginning of the XX-th century, after a glorious history of about two centuries, the Newton’s classical physics enters into a great conceptual crisis, marked by the famous findings, which have subsequently represented the fundamentals of the quantum theory. They have thrown out the visions of the classical physics on the main laws of Universe development, the role of the human being and of knowledge in its functioning. Therefore, the quantum theory, confusing the traditional picture of its origin and evolution, gave birth to multiple conceptual issues related not only to physics, but disposing of obvious philosophical, ontological, cognitive and, more recently, economic aspects...