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

A man of Germany : acceptable uncertainties in a time of war

John Bernard Gallagher

Published Jan 1, 2004• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

During the week of September 15, 1941, Niels Bohr and Wemer Heisenberg met secretly in Copenhagen, Denmark. These Nobel physicists worked together in the 1920s to construct a new quantum physics. The Copenhagen Interpretation consisted of statistical quantum mechanics, the Uncertainty Principle, and Complimentarity, which revolutionized perceptions of atomic phenomena and challenged the scientific community with their conceptions of classical Newtonian causality. At the time of the meeting, Germany occupied Denmark and Heisenberg led the German effort to develop practical applications of nuclear fission. Bohr’s and Heisenberg’s meeting ended with anger and frustration leading to the separation, personally and professionally, of these two men. Owing to a lack of documentation and the varying opinions over the events of 1941, I propose to use the scientific principle of uncertainty, developed by Heisenberg in 1927, as a metaphor to broaden our understanding of the meeting between these men. Instead of using the two pairs of conjugate variables, as defined by the Uncertainty Principle, I will use four-square variables that allows for an alternate interpretation of the 1941 Bohr-Heisenberg meeting. The four-square variables involve aspects of Werner Heisenberg’s life. These are the development of his scientific work, the formation of the scientific community through collaboration, the social, cultural, and political context of Germany, and the personal and professional relationship between other physicists and between Bohr and Heisenberg themselves. My thesis seeks to determine what was said between these men that led to the disruption to their relationship. My conclusions limit the indeterminacy of the event and brings a level of acceptable uncertainties that illustrate above all that Heisenberg was a man of Germany.

Related papers

Wonderful Copenhagen?

Alastair I. M. Rae

The 1935 paper by Einstein, Podolski and Rosen represented the culmination of a long debate that had begun soon after quantum theory was developed in the 1920s. One of the main protagonists in this discussion was Niels Bohr, a Danish physicist who worked in Copenhagen until, like so many other European scientists of his time, he became a refugee in the face of the German invasion during the Second World War. As we shall see, Bohr's views differed strongly from those of Einstein and his co-workers on a number of fundamental issues, but it was his approach to the fundamental problems of quantum physics that eventually gained general, though not universal, acceptance. Because much of Bohr's work was done in that city, his ideas and those developed from them have become known as the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’. In this chapter we shall discuss the main ideas of this approach. We shall try to appreciate its strengths as well as attempting to understand why some believe that there are important questions left unanswered. When Einstein said that ‘God does not play dice’, Bohr is said to have replied ‘Don't tell God what to do!’ The historical accuracy of this exchange may be in doubt, but it encapsulates the differences in approach of the two men. Whereas Einstein approached quantum physics with doubts, and sought to reveal its incompleteness by demonstrating its lack of consistency with our everyday ways of thinking about the physical universe, Bohr's approach was to accept the quantum ideas and to explore their consequences for our everyday ways of thinking.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Mar 26, 2012•0 citations

Wonderful Copenhagen?

Alastair I. M. Rae

The 1935 paper by Einstein, Podolski and Rosen represented the culmination of a long debate that had begun soon after quantum theory was developed in the 1920s. One of the main protagonists in this discussion was Niels Bohr, a Danish physicist who worked in Copenhagen until, like so many other European scientists of his time, he became a refugee in the face of the German invasion during the Second World War. As we shall see, Bohr's views differed strongly from those of Einstein and his co-workers on a number of fundamental issues, but it was his approach to the fundamental problems of quantum physics that eventually gained general, though not universal, acceptance. Because much of Bohr's work was done in that city, his ideas and those developed from them have become known as the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’. In this chapter we shall discuss the main ideas of this approach. We shall try to appreciate its strengths as well as attempting to understand why some believe that there are important questions left unanswered. When Einstein said that ‘God does not play dice’, Bohr is said to have replied ‘Don't tell God what to do!’ The historical accuracy of this exchange may be in doubt, but it encapsulates the differences in approach of the two men. Whereas Einstein approached quantum physics with doubts, and sought to reveal its incompleteness by demonstrating its lack of consistency with our everyday ways of thinking about the physical universe, Bohr's approach was to accept the quantum ideas and to explore their consequences for our everyday ways of thinking.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 7, 2004•0 citations

What Can Wheeler Tell Us About the Bohr–Høffding Relationship?

Jan Faye, Stefano Furlan, Rasmus Jaksland

John Wheeler tells us that Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg met with the Danish philosopher Harald Høffding in the summer of 1927 to discuss the philosophy of quantum mechanics—following the disagreement between Bohr and Heisenberg about the uncertainty relations and right before Bohr’s introduction of his complementarity interpretation of quantum mechanics in Como, Italy, in September 1927. Is this evidence that Høffding had an even greater influence on the early development and interpretation of quantum mechanics than hitherto believed? We trace the historical sources of the story, which Wheeler first heard from Casimir, who apparently was present when the episode took place. We argue that the episode cannot have taken place earlier than 1929 and propose an event in November 1929 as its likely origin. What remains true is that Bohr, Casimir, and Høffding did meet, but the meeting is less remarkable than in Wheeler’s retelling. Nonetheless, Casimir’s role in the story adds new evidence for Høffding’s influence on Bohr. Heisenberg presence, though, is entirely of Wheeler’s invention. We use this rendering to illustrate how Wheeler operated as a storyteller of quantum mechanics from the 1980s to his death.

HOPOS The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science•Aug 25, 2025•1 citation

WITHDRAWN

Wim Vegt

The pivotal shift in Physics initiated by Erwin Heisenberg's seminal work in 1925 marked a significant departure from classical paradigms towards what is now known as modern quantum physics. Heisenberg's groundbreaking paper, "On the quantum-theoretical reinterpretation of kinematical and mechanical relationships," commonly referred to as "Die Umdeutung," heralded a radical transformation in the foundation of physics. By replacing the traditional religious notion of "Causality" with an atheistic concept of "Probability," Heisenberg's work revolutionized the field. The removal of "Causality" challenged the religious underpinning of physics, leading to a reevaluation of fundamental principles. This shift, epitomized by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, transformed the deterministic worldview into a probabilistic one, sparking debates on the nature of existence and human agency. The ramifications of this paradigm shift extended beyond theoretical discourse. The ethical implications of scientific advancements, exemplified by the development of the atomic bomb during World War II, underscored the complex interplay between physics, morality, and political ideologies. The juxtaposition of Heisenberg's involvement in Nazi Germany's atomic research and Oppenheimer's leadership in the Manhattan Project highlighted the ethical dilemmas faced by scientists in wartime. Moreover, the integration of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle with Newton's Causality Principle rekindles discussions on the interconnectedness of Physics, Philosophy, and Theology. The quest for a unified framework underscores the importance of reconciling divergent perspectives to forge a coherent understanding of the universe. This synthesis seeks to bridge the gap between classical paradigms and modern quantum theory, offering new insights into the intertwined fabric of physical laws and metaphysical beliefs. During the 5th Solvay in 1927 has been the famous discussion between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr when Einstein declared: “God does not play Dice”. Formally this discussion was between Einstein and Bohr. But the real discussion was between Einstein and Heisenberg. Heisenberg the creator of the principle of “Fundamental Uncertainty”.

•Jul 11, 2024•0 citations

Bohr and Heisenberg

Bernard d’Espagnat

One of the various interpretations of quantum mechanics occupies a privileged position in the opinion of the majority of physicists. This is the Copenhagen view, which owes its fame and popularity not only to historical reasons but also to its simplicity and practical efficiency. As is well known, the Copenhagen outlook was elaborated collectively. Nevertheless, Niels Bohr's and W. Heisenberg's contributions should be singled out as particularly outstanding. This chapter describes two principles, which are in fact the two pillars on which Bohr's doctrine is built. These are: The working of measuring instruments must be accounted for in purely classical terms . Another one is quantum systems that should not even be thought of as possessing individual properties independently of the experimental arrangement. In the particular case of the pair of observables "position" and "momentum," the Heisenberg uncertainty relations can be considered as a generalization of the complementarity principle.

CRC Press eBooks•Mar 5, 2018•0 citations

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle

Matthew Santos

In 1926 Werner Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle set the field of quantum mechanics on a trajectory riddled with indeterminacy, a trajectory which stood in stark contrast with the classical Newtonian world causality and origin. In doing so, Heisenberg effectively created a new standard by which physicists conducted their science, broadened the scope of that science, and altered the very worldview of those physicists. Such paradigmatic upheaval fits the philosophical model of scientific progress posited by Thomas Kuhn. However, in the ever-changing and still-evolving world of quantum mechanics, Heisenberg’s revolutionary work uniquely strays from Kuhn’s model in its further implications.

•Jan 1, 2013•9 citations
During the week of September 15, 1941, Niels Bohr and Wemer Heisenberg met secretly in Copenhagen, Denmark. These Nobel physicists worked together in the 1920s to construct a new quantum physics. The Copenhagen Interpretation consisted of statistical quantum mechanics, the Uncertainty Principle, and Complimentarity, which revolutionized perceptions of atomic phenomena and challenged the scientific community with their conceptions of classical Newtonian causality. At the time of the meeting, Germany occupied Denmark and Heisenberg led the German effort to develop practical applications of nuclear fission. Bohr’s and Heisenberg’s meeting ended with anger and frustration leading to the separation, personally and professionally, of these two men. Owing to a lack of documentation and the varying opinions over the events of 1941, I propose to use the scientific principle of uncertainty, developed by Heisenberg in 1927, as a metaphor to broaden our understanding of the meeting between these men. Instead of using the two pairs of conjugate variables, as defined by the Uncertainty Principle, I will use four-square variables that allows for an alternate interpretation of the 1941 Bohr-Heisenberg meeting. The four-square variables involve aspects of Werner Heisenberg’s life. These are the development of his scientific work, the formation of the scientific community through collaboration, the social, cultural, and political context of Germany, and the personal and professional relationship between other physicists and between Bohr and Heisenberg themselves. My thesis seeks to determine what was said between these men that led to the disruption to their relationship. My conclusions limit the indeterminacy of the event and brings a level of acceptable uncertainties that illustrate above all that Heisenberg was a man of Germany.
The 1935 paper by Einstein, Podolski and Rosen represented the culmination of a long debate that had begun soon after quantum theory was developed in the 1920s. One of the main protagonists in this discussion was Niels Bohr, a Danish physicist who worked in Copenhagen until, like so many other European scientists of his time, he became a refugee in the face of the German invasion during the Second World War. As we shall see, Bohr's views differed strongly from those of Einstein and his co-workers on a number of fundamental issues, but it was his approach to the fundamental problems of quantum physics that eventually gained general, though not universal, acceptance. Because much of Bohr's work was done in that city, his ideas and those developed from them have become known as the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’. In this chapter we shall discuss the main ideas of this approach. We shall try to appreciate its strengths as well as attempting to understand why some believe that there are important questions left unanswered. When Einstein said that ‘God does not play dice’, Bohr is said to have replied ‘Don't tell God what to do!’ The historical accuracy of this exchange may be in doubt, but it encapsulates the differences in approach of the two men. Whereas Einstein approached quantum physics with doubts, and sought to reveal its incompleteness by demonstrating its lack of consistency with our everyday ways of thinking about the physical universe, Bohr's approach was to accept the quantum ideas and to explore their consequences for our everyday ways of thinking.
The 1935 paper by Einstein, Podolski and Rosen represented the culmination of a long debate that had begun soon after quantum theory was developed in the 1920s. One of the main protagonists in this discussion was Niels Bohr, a Danish physicist who worked in Copenhagen until, like so many other European scientists of his time, he became a refugee in the face of the German invasion during the Second World War. As we shall see, Bohr's views differed strongly from those of Einstein and his co-workers on a number of fundamental issues, but it was his approach to the fundamental problems of quantum physics that eventually gained general, though not universal, acceptance. Because much of Bohr's work was done in that city, his ideas and those developed from them have become known as the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’. In this chapter we shall discuss the main ideas of this approach. We shall try to appreciate its strengths as well as attempting to understand why some believe that there are important questions left unanswered. When Einstein said that ‘God does not play dice’, Bohr is said to have replied ‘Don't tell God what to do!’ The historical accuracy of this exchange may be in doubt, but it encapsulates the differences in approach of the two men. Whereas Einstein approached quantum physics with doubts, and sought to reveal its incompleteness by demonstrating its lack of consistency with our everyday ways of thinking about the physical universe, Bohr's approach was to accept the quantum ideas and to explore their consequences for our everyday ways of thinking.
John Wheeler tells us that Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg met with the Danish philosopher Harald Høffding in the summer of 1927 to discuss the philosophy of quantum mechanics—following the disagreement between Bohr and Heisenberg about the uncertainty relations and right before Bohr’s introduction of his complementarity interpretation of quantum mechanics in Como, Italy, in September 1927. Is this evidence that Høffding had an even greater influence on the early development and interpretation of quantum mechanics than hitherto believed? We trace the historical sources of the story, which Wheeler first heard from Casimir, who apparently was present when the episode took place. We argue that the episode cannot have taken place earlier than 1929 and propose an event in November 1929 as its likely origin. What remains true is that Bohr, Casimir, and Høffding did meet, but the meeting is less remarkable than in Wheeler’s retelling. Nonetheless, Casimir’s role in the story adds new evidence for Høffding’s influence on Bohr. Heisenberg presence, though, is entirely of Wheeler’s invention. We use this rendering to illustrate how Wheeler operated as a storyteller of quantum mechanics from the 1980s to his death.
The pivotal shift in Physics initiated by Erwin Heisenberg's seminal work in 1925 marked a significant departure from classical paradigms towards what is now known as modern quantum physics. Heisenberg's groundbreaking paper, "On the quantum-theoretical reinterpretation of kinematical and mechanical relationships," commonly referred to as "Die Umdeutung," heralded a radical transformation in the foundation of physics. By replacing the traditional religious notion of "Causality" with an atheistic concept of "Probability," Heisenberg's work revolutionized the field. The removal of "Causality" challenged the religious underpinning of physics, leading to a reevaluation of fundamental principles. This shift, epitomized by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, transformed the deterministic worldview into a probabilistic one, sparking debates on the nature of existence and human agency. The ramifications of this paradigm shift extended beyond theoretical discourse. The ethical implications of scientific advancements, exemplified by the development of the atomic bomb during World War II, underscored the complex interplay between physics, morality, and political ideologies. The juxtaposition of Heisenberg's involvement in Nazi Germany's atomic research and Oppenheimer's leadership in the Manhattan Project highlighted the ethical dilemmas faced by scientists in wartime. Moreover, the integration of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle with Newton's Causality Principle rekindles discussions on the interconnectedness of Physics, Philosophy, and Theology. The quest for a unified framework underscores the importance of reconciling divergent perspectives to forge a coherent understanding of the universe. This synthesis seeks to bridge the gap between classical paradigms and modern quantum theory, offering new insights into the intertwined fabric of physical laws and metaphysical beliefs. During the 5th Solvay in 1927 has been the famous discussion between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr when Einstein declared: “God does not play Dice”. Formally this discussion was between Einstein and Bohr. But the real discussion was between Einstein and Heisenberg. Heisenberg the creator of the principle of “Fundamental Uncertainty”.
One of the various interpretations of quantum mechanics occupies a privileged position in the opinion of the majority of physicists. This is the Copenhagen view, which owes its fame and popularity not only to historical reasons but also to its simplicity and practical efficiency. As is well known, the Copenhagen outlook was elaborated collectively. Nevertheless, Niels Bohr's and W. Heisenberg's contributions should be singled out as particularly outstanding. This chapter describes two principles, which are in fact the two pillars on which Bohr's doctrine is built. These are: The working of measuring instruments must be accounted for in purely classical terms . Another one is quantum systems that should not even be thought of as possessing individual properties independently of the experimental arrangement. In the particular case of the pair of observables "position" and "momentum," the Heisenberg uncertainty relations can be considered as a generalization of the complementarity principle.
In 1926 Werner Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle set the field of quantum mechanics on a trajectory riddled with indeterminacy, a trajectory which stood in stark contrast with the classical Newtonian world causality and origin. In doing so, Heisenberg effectively created a new standard by which physicists conducted their science, broadened the scope of that science, and altered the very worldview of those physicists. Such paradigmatic upheaval fits the philosophical model of scientific progress posited by Thomas Kuhn. However, in the ever-changing and still-evolving world of quantum mechanics, Heisenberg’s revolutionary work uniquely strays from Kuhn’s model in its further implications.