Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”? A Study in Mythology

What is commonly known as the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, regarded as representing a unitary Copenhagen point of view, differs significantly from Bohr’s complementarity interpretation, which does not employ wave packet collapse in its account of measurement and does not accord the subjective observer any privileged role in measurement. It is argued that the Copenhagen interpretation is an invention of the mid‐1950s, for which Heisenberg is chiefly responsible, various other physicists and philosophers, including Bohm, Feyerabend, Hanson, and Popper, having further promoted the invention in the service of their own philosophical agendas.

[1]  Karl R. Popper,et al.  Quantum Mechanics without “The Observer” , 1967 .

[2]  K. Popper,et al.  Logik der Forschung , 1935 .

[3]  Mara Beller,et al.  Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution , 1999 .

[4]  D. Bohm.  A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION OF THE QUANTUM THEORY IN TERMS OF "HIDDEN" VARIABLES. II , 1952 .

[5]  Book-Review - Uncertainty - the Life and Science of Werner Heisenberg , 1991 .

[6]  Niels Bohr,et al.  Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge , 1958 .

[7]  N. R. Hanson.  Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory , 1959 .

[8]  P. Jordan.  Anschauliche Quantentheorie: Eine Einführung in die Moderne Auffassung der Quantenerscheinungen , 1936 .

[9]  K. Popper.  The Propensity Interpretation of Probability , 1959 .

[10]  Hans Halvorson,et al.  Reconsidering Bohr’s Reply to EPR , 2002 .

[11]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[12]  George Weiss,et al.  Observation and Interpretation , 1958 .

[13]  NIELS BOHR.  Natural Philosophy and Human Cultures , 1939, Nature.

[14]  Don Howard,et al.  “Nicht Sein Kann was Nicht Sein Darf,” or the Prehistory of EPR, 1909–1935: Einstein’s Early Worries about the Quantum Mechanics of Composite Systems , 1990 .

[15]  A. Rainone.  Feyerabend Paul K. , 1992 .

[16]  E. Schrödinger.  Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik , 2005, Naturwissenschaften.

[17]  W. Heisenberg.  DER BEGRIFF ABGESCHLOSSENE THEORIE IN DER MODERNEN NATURWISSENSCHAFT , 1948 .

[18]  E. Schrödinger.  Probability relations between separated systems , 1936, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[19]  G. Beck,et al.  Werner Heisenberg und die Physik unserer Zeit , 1961 .

[20]  Jan Faye,et al.  Niels Bohr and contemporary philosophy , 1994 .

[21]  Niels Bohr,et al.  Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge , 1958 .

[22]  J. Bub.  Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution , 2000 .

[23]  A. Flew,et al.  Patterns of Discovery. , 1961 .

[24]  W. Heisenberg.  Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science , 1958 .

[25]  Hans Halvorson,et al.  Maximal Beable Subalgebras of Quantum Mechanical Observables , 1999 .

[26]  J. Faye.  Niels Bohr: His Heritage and Legacy: An Anti-Realist View of Quantum Mechanics , 1991 .

[27]  M. Dickson.  Bohr on Bell: A Proposed Reading of Bohr and Its Implications for , 2001 .

[28]  W. Pauli,et al.  Niels Bohr and the Development of Physics , 1955 .

[29]  K. Popper,et al.  Zur Kritik der Ungenauigkeitsrelationen , 1934, Naturwissenschaften.

[30]  W. Bean.  Physics and Philosophy, the Revolution in Modern Science. , 1959 .

[31]  Niels Bohr,et al.  Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics , 1996 .

[32]  C. Chevalley.  Niels Bohr’s Words and the Atlantis of Kantianism , 1994 .

[33]  D. Howard.  What Makes a Classical Concept Classical ? Toward a Reconstruction of Niels Bohr ' s Philosophy of Physics , 1986 .

[34]  M. Heidelberger,et al.  History of Philosophy of Science New Trends and Perspectives , 2002 .

[35]  W. Heisenberg,et al.  The development of the interpretation of the quantum theory , 1955 .

[36]  Philipp Frank,et al.  Das Kausalgesetz und seine Grenzen , 1932 .

[37]  J. Faye.  Niels Bohr: His Heritage and Legacy , 1991 .

[38]  S. Korner.  Observation and Interpretation a Symposium of Philosophers and Physicists. , 1960 .

[39]  N. Bohr.  The Quantum Postulate and the Recent Development of Atomic Theory , 1928, Nature.

[40]  E. Schrödinger.  Discussion of Probability Relations between Separated Systems , 1935, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[41]  Complementarity of representations in quantum mechanics , 2001, quant-ph/0110102.

[42]  Tomasz Placek,et al.  Non-locality and Modality , 2002 .

[43]  The EPR Experiment: A Prelude to Bohr's Reply to EPR , 2001, quant-ph/0102053.

[44]  Complementarity , 1971, Science.

[45]  James T. Cushing,et al.  Book Reviews: Quantum Mechanics. Historical Contingency and the Copenhagen Hegemony. , 1994 .

[46]  D. Bohm,et al.  Causality and Chance in Modern Physics , 1963 .

[47]  H. Jehle,et al.  Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. , 1951 .

[48]  A. Fagot-Largeault.  Popper, Karl R , 2005 .

[49]  H. S. Allen.  The Quantum Theory , 1928, Nature.

[50]  B. Hiley.  Quantum mechanics: Historical contingency and the Copenhagen hegemony by James T. Cushing , 1997 .

[51]  Interpretations and misinterpretations of modern physics , 1939 .

[52]  Karl Raimund Sir Popper,et al.  Quantum theory and the schism in physics , 1982 .