DOCSLIB.ORG

To View Fulltext

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
To View Fulltext BOOK I REVIEW Books by and about Werner a Heisenberg Philosophical Problems of Quantum Physics. essays and lectures from 1932 N Mukunda to 1948 Ox Bow Press, 1979. The three principal creators of quantum mechanics made their landmark contri- butions to the subject in very quick succession between July 1925 and January 1926 in the Physics and Philosophy - the Revolution in Modern Science. sequence: Werner Heisenberg, Paul Dirac the 1956 Gifford Lectures at the and Erwin Schrodinger. They received their University of St.Andrews Nobel Prizes together in December 1933 - Harper & Row, 1958. Heisenberg for 1932, Dirac and Schrodinger for 1933. The February 1999 and August 2003 issues of Resonance were devoted Y respectively to Schrodinger and Dirac. The present one celebrates Heisenberg. Across the frontiers. essays and lectures from 1948 to 1973 The purpose of this article is to present to a Ox Bow Press, 1990. younger generation of readers (students and teachers alike) a very brief account of some of Heisenberg's general writings of a historical and philosophical nature. These are accessible f both to scientists, even in areas other than -- J I • ~ _ i physics, and to educated and interested L".....:: ......J ..... : .... ,*so. Physics and Beyond - nonscientists. In reading this article, at Encounters and Conversations George Allen & Unwin, 1971. relevant places one may look at Virendra Singh's Article-in-a-Boxonpage 3, andJochen Heisenberg's Personal Reflections on page 90. E ,... • ...... ~ I'. I ., ... , • EIlClHlllleN "ith Un'["lu Both Heisenberg and Schrodinger, from Encounters with Einstein And Other Essays on People, Places, Germany and Austria respectively, wrote and Particles. essays and extensively on general philosophical matters lectures from 1972 to 1976 apart from their technical scientific work. In Princeton University Press, contrast, Dirac has not written much along 1983. these lines. The following books by ________,AAfl~A,~ __-- __ RESONANCE I August 2004 v V VV V v 83 BOOK I REVIEW Schrodinger should be mentioned: Nature As one would expect, Heisenberg has written and the Greeks; Mind and Matter; My View of frequently about the origins, historical the World; Science, Theory and Man (Science develop men t and difficul ties of in terpretation and the Human Temperament); and Science and of quantum mechanics, the major revolution Humanism. Several of these are currently in thought which he himself initiated. These availa ble either in the Canto Series of are extensively dealt with in (p) as well as in Cambridge University Press, or published by the partly autobiographical (8). His discovery Ox Bow Press. Heisenberg's major general of matrix mechanics in May-June 1925 has wri tings, more or less in chronological sequen­ been recounted in Virendra Singh's article. ce' are listed on page 83 and numbered u, ~, Here is Heisenberg's own description of his y, 8 and E. intense and dramatic feelings at that time, taken from (8): Schrodinger's writings have rarely been matched for their clarity, eloquence of "I had the feeling that, through the surface of expression and persuasive power. 'Heisen­ atomic phenomena, 1 was looking at a berg's nontechnical writings on physics have strangely beautiful interior, and felt almost always been notable for a strong sense of the giddy at the thought that 1 now had to probe historyofthesubject,andforaclearperception this wealth of mathematical structures nature of the impact of modern discoveries on time­ had so generously spread out before me". honored philosophical disputes'. Among his Elsewhere in (8) he describes his Youth technical books at least two deserve mention: Movement days, his introduction to physics the classic 1929 Chicago lectures on The and the atomic concept, his first meeting with Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory Niels Bohr in 1922, and the important (Dover 1949); and from much later in his life, conversation with Einstein in 1926 recalled Introduction to the Unified Field Theory of in Virendra Singh's article. (This last appears Elementary Particles (Interscience 1966). also in (E)). The chapters in (8) are extremely The definitive biography of Heisenberg is carefully reconstructed conversations with David C Cassidy's Uncertainty - The Life and many different people on a great variety of Science of Werner Heisenberg, W H Freeman scientific, philosophical and political topics 1992. Also of great interest is Inner Exile - ranging in time from 1919 u pto 1965. They Recollections of a Life with Werner Heisenberg help us see the new physical concepts gradually by his wife Elisabeth,published by Birkhauser unfolding with all the attendant suspense, in 1984. Michael Frayn's play 'Copenhagen', excitement and drama. The evolution of the Anchor Books 2000, has been briefly referred uncertainty and complementarity principles to by Virendra Singh, and is dealt with more and of the standard Copenhagen interpre­ extensively by Jochen Heisenberg. tation of quantum mechanics during 1926-27 --------~-------- 84 RESONANCE I August 2004 BOOK I REVIEW are all recounted in the first person singular­ symmetry .... This is the natural consequence what more authentic source could one ask of the fact that symmetry is rooted in nature for? All these developments are also dealt itself'. with in great depth in (P). And in (E) he suggests that we have reached Heisenberg's accounts of the growth of ideas the end of the usefulness of thinking that one over the centuries, starting from early Greek thing consists of others: speculations about the nature of matter and "Here the question has obviously been asked, natural law , are deeply revealing. In essays in 'What do protons consist of?' But it has been (a) and (y) titled 'Ideas of the Natural forgotten in the process, that the term consists Philosophy of Ancient Times in Modern of only has a half way clear meaning if we are Physics' and 'Natural Law and the Structure able to dissect the particle in question, with a of Matter' there are splendid recapitulations small expenditure ofenergy, into constituents of the ideas of Leucippus, Democritus and whose rest mass is very much greater than Platonic philosophy; and when the this energy-cost; otherwise, the term consist of comparison to modern day thinking has to be has lost its meaning. And that is the situation made he says: with protons". "It was an unbelievable achievement of the At a couple ofplaces, in (y) and in (0), there are ancient philosophers to have asked the right discussions of the relation between science questions. But, lacking all knowledge of the and religion. In the chapter titled 'Science empirical details, we could not have expected and Religion' in (0), Heisenberg reconstructs them to find answers that were correct in superbly from memory what Bohr had said to detail as well". him on this matter: Such a finely balanced and refreshingly honest " ... our attitude to religious questions cannot assessment! be separated from our attitude to society ... At more than one place in these books, in (0) religion helps to make social life more and (E) for example, Heisenberg traces the harmonious; its most important task is to changes that have taken place over time in remind us, in the language of pictures and the concept of elementary particles of matter parables, of the wider framework wi thin which out of which all matter is composed, and of our life is set". course also offers his own feelings about how things will develop in the future. In (0) he His accounts of the significance of the works says: of Albert Einstein, Max Planck and Wolfgang Pauli are contained in three separate essays in "The elementary particle, like the stationary (y). state of an atom, is determined by its -R-ES-O-N-A-N-C-E--I-A-U-9-U-st--2-00-4-------------~-------------------------------8-5 BOOK I REVIEW Virendra Singh refers briefly to Heisenberg's right to reproach any body for having avoided visit to Bohr in Copenhagen in September a deadly risk. Who can stand up and say he 1941, when he failed in his attempt to 'reach' would have taken the risk in the same situation Bohr and to effect a reconciliation; and to the with the same responsibilities? Those who controversies surrounding his involvement have never been in such situations must be in the German atomic bomb project. Jochen grateful to their fate of being spared such Heisenberg's feelings on seeing Michael decisions" . Frayn's play 'Copenhagen' dealing with this And he concludes by saying that this book episode are expressed in his article in this issue. In this context only two quotations will "will help to improve the bond between those be recalled here. The first is from Elisabeth who suffer and those who have been spared". Heisenberg's book: Heisenberg's writings on many profound "But they were not communicating; they did subjects are so beautiful that they appear not understand each other. The two men who deceptively simple. One enjoys reading him had been such close friends parted deeply many times over to truly appreciate his disappointed, and there were no further thinking. Some of the books described above attempts to contact each other. Ultimately, may be rather difficult to get, but the serious the cause of this misunderstanding must be reader must make the effort to find them. She seen in both of them". will be very greatly rewarded. The second is from Victor WeisskopPs Preface to this book: N Mllkunda, Centre for Theoretical Studies, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India. "Whatever has happened, nobody has the Email:[email protected] Heisenberg had a special, intuitive way of getting to the essential point. This, together with an incredible force of persistence and determination, made him the most prolific and successful physicist of the recent past.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Complementary & the Copenhagen Interpretation
    Complementarity and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Click here to go to the UPSCALE home page. Click here to go to the Physics Virtual Bookshelf home page. Introduction Neils Bohr (1885 - 1962) was one of the giants in the development of Quantum Mechanics. He is best known for: 1. The development of the Bohr Model of the Atom in 1913. A small document on this topic is available here. 2. The principle of Complementarity, the "heart" of Bohr's search for the significance of the quantum idea. This principle led him to: 3. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. In this document we discuss Complementarity and then the Copenhagen Interpretation. But first we shall briefly discuss the general issue of interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, and briefly describe two interpretations. The discussion assumes some knowledge of the Feynman Double Slit, such as is discussed here; it also assumes some knowledge of Schrödinger's Cat, such as is discussed here. Finally, further discussion of interpretations of Quantum Mechanics can be meaningfully given with some knowledge of Bell's Theorem; a document on that topic is here. The level of discussion in what follows is based on an upper-year liberal arts course in modern physics without mathematics given at the University of Toronto. In that context, the discussion of Bell's Theorem mentioned in the previous paragraph is deferred until later. A recommended reference on the material discussed below is: F. David Peat, Einstein's Moon (Contemporary Books, 1990), ISBN 0-8092-4512-4 (cloth), 0-8092-3965-5 (paper). Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics Although the basic mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics was developed independently by Heisenberg and Schrödinger in 1926, a full and accepted interpretation of what that mathematics means still eludes us.
    [Show full text]
  • Bohr's Complementarity and Kant's Epistemology
    Bohr, 1913-2013, S´eminairePoincar´eXVII (2013) 145 { 166 S´eminairePoincar´e Bohr's Complementarity and Kant's Epistemology Michel Bitbol Archives Husserl ENS - CNRS 45, rue d'Ulm 75005 Paris, France Stefano Osnaghi ICI - Berlin Christinenstraße 18-19 10119, Berlin, Germany Abstract. We point out and analyze some striking analogies between Kant's transcendental method in philosophy and Bohr's approach of the fundamental issues raised by quantum mechanics. We argue in particular that some of the most controversial aspects of Bohr's views, as well as the philosophical concerns that led him to endorse such views, can naturally be understood along the lines of Kant's celebrated `Copernican' revolution in epistemology. 1 Introduction Contrary to received wisdom, Bohr's views on quantum mechanics did not gain uni- versal acceptance among physicists, even during the heyday of the so-called `Copen- hagen interpretation' (spanning approximately between 1927 and 1952). The `ortho- dox' approach, generally referred to as `the Copenhagen interpretation', was in fact a mixture of elements borrowed from Heisenberg, Dirac, and von Neumann, with a few words quoted from Bohr and due reverence for his pioneering work, but with no unconditional allegiance to his ideas [Howard2004][Camilleri2009]. Bohr's physical insight was, of course, never overtly put into question. Yet many of his colleagues found his reflections about the epistemological status of theoretical schemes, as well as his considerations on the limits of the representations employed by science, ob- scure and of little practical moment { in a word: too philosophical.1 In addition, it proved somehow uneasy to reach definite conclusions as to the true nature of this philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Naïve Physics and Quantum Mechanics
    Naïve Physics and Quantum Mechanics: The Cognitive Bias of Everett’s Many-Worlds Interpretation Andrew SID Lang* and Caleb J Lutz Department of Computing and Mathematics, Oral Roberts University, USA *Address correspondence to this author at the Department of Computing and Mathematics, 7777 S. Lewis Ave., Tulsa, OK, 74171 USA. E-mail: [email protected] Keywords: cognitive bias, Everett’s interpretation, naïve physics, quantum mechanics Abstract: We discuss the role that intuitive theories of physics play in the interpretation of quantum mechanics. We compare and contrast naïve physics with quantum mechanics and argue that quantum mechanics is not just hard to understand but that it is difficult to believe, often appearing magical in nature. Quantum mechanics is often discussed in the context of "quantum weirdness" and quantum entanglement is known as "spooky action at a distance." This spookiness is more than just because quantum mechanics doesn't match everyday experience; it ruffles the feathers of our naïve physics cognitive module. In Everett's many- worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, we preserve a form of deterministic thinking that can alleviate some of the perceived weirdness inherent in other interpretations of quantum mechanics, at the cost of having the universe split into parallel worlds at every quantum measurement. By examining the role cognitive modules play in interpreting quantum mechanics, we conclude that the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics involves a cognitive bias not seen in the Copenhagen interpretation. Introduction Neils Bohr said of quantum mechanics, “Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it.” [1] When one first learns about quantum mechanics, it appears to be a theory that cannot be describing reality.
    [Show full text]
  • Bacciagaluppi CV
    Guido Bacciagaluppi: Curriculum Vitae and List of Publications 1 December 2020 Born Milan (Italy), 24 August 1965. Italian citizen. Freudenthal Instituut Postbus 85.170 3508 AD Utrecht The Netherlands Email: [email protected] Tel.: +31 (0)30 253 5621 Fax: +31 (0)30 253 7494 Web: https://www.uu.nl/staff/GBacciagaluppi/Profile https://www.uu.nl/staff/GBacciagaluppi/Research https://www.uu.nl/staff/GBacciagaluppi/Teaching Research interests My main field of research is the philosophy of physics, in particular the philosophy of quantum theory, where I have worked on a variety of approaches, including modal interpretations (for my PhD), stochastic mechanics, Everett theory, de Broglie-Bohm pilot-wave theory and spontaneous collapse theories, with a special interest in the theory of decoherence. Other special interests include time (a)symmetry, the philosophy of probability, issues in the philosophy of logic, and the topics of emergence, causation, and empiricism. I also work on the history of quantum theory and have co-authored three books on the topic, including a widely admired monograph on the 1927 Solvay conference, and I am a contributor to the recent revival of interest in the figure and work of Grete Hermann. Present positions Academic: • Utrecht University: Associate Professor (UHD1, scale 14), Freudenthal Institute, Departement of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, and Descartes Centre for the History and Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, since September 2015. • SPHERE (CNRS, Paris 7, Paris 1), Paris: Associate Member since April 2015. • Foundational Questions Institute (http://fqxi.org/): Member since February 2015. • Institut d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques (CNRS, Paris 1, ENS), Paris: Associate Member since January 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Art of Scientific Imagination
    On the Art of Scientific Imagination The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Holton, Gerald. 1996. On the Art of Scientific Imagination. Daedalus 125 (2): 183-208. Published Version https://www.jstor.org/stable/20013446? seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:40508269 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA NOTES FROM THE ACADEMY The text of addresses given at the Stated Meetings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences are generally printed in the Academy's Bulletin, distributed principally to Fellows and Foreign Honorary Members of the Academy. Because the Bulletin's format is not one designed to accommodate many detailed illustrations, and because the communication delivered by Professor Gerald Holton at the House of the Academy, like others recently given, raised such interest among those who heard it, a decision was made to make it more widely available through publication in the Academy's journal, Dadalus. This practice, followed very occasionally in the past, has much to recommend it and may be pursued more fre quently in the future. [S.R.G.] Gerald Holton On the Art of Scientific Imagination Wver HEN THE ACADEMY S PRESIDENT asked if I would speak on Saint Valentine's Day, I gladly accepted the honor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Most Dangerous Possible German Algis Valiunas
    Algis Valiunas David M. Buisán (instagram.com/davidmbuisan) 36 ~ The New Atlantis Copyright 2019. All rights reserved. Print copies available at TheNewAtlantis.com/BackIssues. The Most Dangerous Possible German Algis Valiunas What trace of his earthly passage can a man of genius hope will remain after his death? For a great scientist, it is almost certainly a discovery that advances human understanding a step further from ignorance and con- fusion. To uncover some eternal truth that has been carefully concealed from ordinary sight by Nature or whatever gods there be, and to enjoy the lasting esteem accorded the world-altering thinkers — these are the motive forces behind the most serious and accomplished scientific lives. To one who opens new mental continents for further exploration, and exploitation, the supreme accolades rightly belong. Honor of this order is not a paltry thing. Yet John Milton called the craving for fame “that last infirmity of noble mind”; and while such infirmity might easily be forgiven poets, who are notorious for their moral weakness, we have become accustomed to thinking of scientists as free of such all-too-human frailties. Like Aristotle’s theoretical man in the Nicomachean Ethics, scientists are said to live for the unsurpassed pleasure of knowing the highest things in the universe, those that cannot be other than they are. This makes them god- like, so that they need nothing else — certainly not the glint of admiration or envy in other men’s eyes. And yet perfection is not to be expected even from the most high- minded among us.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Period Klaus Scharnhorst
    Photon-photon scattering and related phenomena. Experimental and theoretical approaches: The early period Klaus Scharnhorst To cite this version: Klaus Scharnhorst. Photon-photon scattering and related phenomena. Experimental and theoretical approaches: The early period. 2020. hal-01638181v4 HAL Id: hal-01638181 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01638181v4 Preprint submitted on 30 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. hhal-01638181i Photon-photon scattering and related phenomena. Experimental and theoretical approaches: The early period K. Scharnhorst† Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Physics and Astronomy, De Boelelaan 1081, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands Abstract We review the literature on possible violations of the superposition prin- ciple for electromagnetic fields in vacuum from the earliest studies until the emergence of renormalized QED at the end of the 1940’s. The exposition covers experimental work on photon-photon scattering and the propagation of light in external electromagnetic fields and relevant theoretical work on non- linear electrodynamic theories (Born-Infeld theory and QED) until the year 1949. To enrich the picture, pieces of reminiscences from a number of (the- oretical) physicists on their work in this field are collected and included or appended.
    [Show full text]
  • Wherefore Quantum Mechanics?†
    Wherefore Quantum Mechanics?† Stephen Boughn⋇ Department of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton NJ Departments of Physics and Astronomy, Haverford College, Haverford PA Abstract After the development of a self-consistent quantum formalism nearly a century ago, there ensued a quest to understand the often counterintuitive predictions of the theory. These endeavors invariably begin with the assumption of the truth of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and then proceed to investigate the theory’s implications for the physical world. One of the outcomes has been endless discussions of the quantum measurement problem, wave/particle duality, the non-locality of entangled quantum states, Schrödinger's cat, and other philosophical conundrums. In this essay, I take the point of view that quantum mechanics is a mathematical model, a human invention, and rather than pondering what the theory implies about our world, I consider the transposed question: what is it about our world that leads us to a quantum mechanical model of it? One consequence is the realization that discrete quanta, the quantum of action in particular, leads to the wave nature and statistical behavior of matter rather than the other way around. Preface Richard Feynman famously declared, “I think I can safely say that nobody really understands quantum mechanics.”1 Sean Carroll decried the persistence of this sentiment in a recent opinion piece entitled “Even Physicists Don’t Understand Quantum Mechanics: Worse, they don’t seem to want to understand it.”2 No one doubts the efficacy of quantum theory. The “understanding” to which these physicists refer is an acceptable ontology of the theoretical constructs of quantum mechanics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Fact in German Physics Around 1900: a Comparison Between Mach and Einstein
    Phys. Perspect. © 2020 The Author(s). This article is an open access publication https://doi.org/10.1007/s00016-020-00256-y Physics in Perspective The Concept of Fact in German Physics around 1900: A Comparison between Mach and Einstein Elske de Waal and Sjang L. ten Hagen* The concept of “fact” has a history. Over the past centuries, physicists have appropriated it in various ways. In this article, we compare Ernst Mach and Albert Einstein’s interpreta- tions of the concept. Mach, like most nineteenth-century German physicists, contrasted fact and theory. He understood facts as real and complex combinations of natural events. Theories, in turn, only served to order and communicate facts efficiently. Einstein’s concept of fact was incompatible with Mach’s, since Einstein believed facts could be theoretical too, just as he ascribed mathematical theorizing a leading role in representing reality. For example, he used the concept of fact to refer to a generally valid result of experience. The differences we disclose between Mach and Einstein were symbolic for broader tensions in the German physics discipline. Furthermore, they underline the historically fluid character of the category of the fact, both within physics and beyond. Key words: Facts; Theory; Ernst Mach; Albert Einstein; Epistemology; Physics. Introduction In recent years, supporters of science have been on the barricades defending the authority of science and its facts. Among the slogans of the 2017 March for Science were expressions such as “trust scientific facts, not alternative facts” and “science is not an alternative fact” (figure 1). The message behind these slogans seems straightforward, but is actually complex when we realize that there have been and still are many different ideas about what a “fact” is.
    [Show full text]
  • Kantian and Neo-Kantian First Principles for Physical and Metaphysical Cognition
    Kantian and Neo-Kantian First Principles for Physical and Metaphysical Cognition Michael E. Cuffaroa, b a University of Western Ontario, Rotman Institute of Philosophy b Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy Abstract I argue that Immanuel Kant’s critical philosophy—in particular the doctrine of tran- scendental idealism which grounds it—is best understood as an ‘epistemic’ or ‘metaphilo- sophical’ doctrine. As such it aims to show how one may engage in the natural sciences and in metaphysics under the restriction that certain conditions are imposed on our cognition of objects. Underlying Kant’s doctrine, however, is an ontological posit, of a sort, regarding the fundamental nature of our cognition. This posit, sometimes called the ‘discursivity thesis’, while considered to be completely obvious and uncontroversial by some, has nevertheless been denied by thinkers both before and after Kant. One such thinker is Jakob Friedrich Fries, an early neo-Kantian thinker who, despite his re- jection of discursivity, also advocated for a metaphilosophical understanding of critical philosophy. As I will explain, a consequence for Fries of the denial of discursivity is a radical reconceptualisation of the method of critical philosophy; whereas this method is a priori for Kant, for Fries it is in general empirical. I discuss these issues in the context of quantum theory, and I focus in particular on the views of the physicist Niels Bohr and the Neo-Friesian philosopher Grete Hermann. I argue that Bohr’s understand- ing of quantum mechanics can be seen as a natural extension of an orthodox Kantian viewpoint in the face of the challenges posed by quantum theory, and I compare this with the extension of Friesian philosophy that is represented by Hermann’s view.
    [Show full text]
  • The Entanglement of Gender and Physics: Human Actors, Work Place Cultures, and Knowledge Production Helene Götschel
    Science Studies 1/2011 The Entanglement of Gender and Physics: Human Actors, Work place Cultures, and Knowledge Production Helene Götschel Research in an area that might be called gender and physics lies neither in the focus of science studies nor in the centre of gender studies. However, there is a rich tradition of interdisciplinary research that studies the entanglement of gender and physics from different perspectives. In this review article, I give a survey on this inadequately discussed research area by presenting selected examples of often-cited as well as internationally less known literature. Furthermore, I propose a systematisation of three different dimensions, comprising research on human actors, work place cultures, and knowledge production in physics. In so doing, I uncover some achievements and gaps of this interdisciplinary research. Following E. F. Keller (1995), I finally plea for a trading zone for scholars working on the entanglement of gender and physics. Keywords: Gender Studies, Gender and Physics, Systematisation Introducing Three Dimensions at natural and technological sciences. The of Analysis in Regards to research areas that study natural science Gender and Physics while stressing feminist and gender issues are often summarized as Gender and The body of this paper is a systematisation Science (e.g., Keller, 1995) or as Feminist of the existing literature on gender and Science Studies (e.g., Mayberry et al., 2001; physics, introducing research on human Wyer et al., 2001). Gender and science or actors, work place cultures, and knowledge feminist science studies can be understood production in physics. In providing this as a research field that covers research review I hope to indicate some of the less on women in natural and technological obvious ways in which physics is gendered.
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned Using Book Scancenter 5033
    15 The Wavefunction 15.1 Between release and detection In the previous chapter, we talked about finding the probability that a j ball released at point P would be detected at point Q. We found out _l‘ how to calculate this probability by assigning an appropriate amplitude arrow to each of the possible paths from P to Q, and then adding up ■ all the arrows. But, what happens if the ball is released at point P and then detected at some other point, say R? (See the figure below.) You know the procedure for finding this probability: enumerate paths from P to R, assign to each path an amplitude arrow using the formula on ^ page 104, and add up all the arrows. It is somewhat more difficult to execute this procedure for the P to R case than it was for the P to Q case, because it lacks the symmetry. Nevertheless it is clear that many of the f same features will apply to both processes: for example, in both cases the largest contribution to the sum amplitude arrow comes from a bundle of paths near the path of minimum length. You might find this problem * technically difficult, but it is conceptually straightforward and you could I do it if you had to. P U Q R T S I But we don’t have to stop here. We could consider having one detector 113 i i 114 15 The Wavefunctìon at Q and another detector at R at the same time. Indeed, we could sprinkle detectors all over the page, at points S, T, U, etc.
    [Show full text]