Einstein, Science, and Philosophy
Einstein versus Bohr
Copenhagen is not a last name but the residence of Neils Bohr. Bohr originally raised certain philosophical questions about quantum mechanics, which became the Copenhagen interpretation or position. Bohr wasn’t a philosopher. Some philosophers think his statements are imprecise or defective, but perhaps philosophically correct if restated properly.
The questions revolve around his discussions with Einstein. Einstein was always trying to figure out a thought experiment in which a physicist could potentially measure both the location and the energy or frequency or velocity of an electron with less than the uncertainty of Heisenberg. Bohr always punched holes in Einstein’s ideas. After a while they gave it up. However, Bohr’s victory was only that of a spoiler. Einstein’s followers could always say that no one had yet found a way to defeat the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
Einstein began by making significant contributions to quantum theory, but later drew back because of his preference for determinism. Einstein rejected the probabilistic formulation of quantum mechanics and sought a deterministic theory that would explain the behavior of small particles like electrons.
Meanwhile other physicists developed quantum mechanics separately from general relativity and went on to brilliant success. Theoreticians defined many differences between quantum and classical physics. Experimentalists proved that the behavior of small particles is consistent with quantum mechanics and inconsistent with classical physics.
One physical constant, known as the electron g-factor, is a measure of the slight difference between the real electron magnetic moment and the magnetic moment an electron would have in a classical or deterministic model of the atom. Quantum mechanics produces an agreement within 4 parts per million millions between the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted values of the electron g-factor. That makes quantum mechanics the most successful and precise physical theory known to date.
Yet Einstein continued to reject quantum mechanics. Toward the end of his career Einstein isolated himself increasingly from the scientific community to dedicate all his energy to finding a “unified field theory” that would replace quantum mechanics, extend to gravity, and restore determinacy. He even published a theory but later retracted it. He died without producing a field theory that satisfied him.
Einstein’s theory about gravity, general relativity, has been proved accurate time and time again. Aerospace engineers must take into account general relativity to get space probes precisely to distant planets. Yet half a century after Einstein’s death, there is still no unified theory for quantum mechanics and gravity. Gravity shapes the universe in the large, and quantum mechanics is about the very small. The difficulty is that gravity is extremely weak. In quantum mechanics one measures the interactions between very small particles. But one needs particles too heavy to lift to produce gravity strong enough to measure. Without a unifying theory to resolve the differences between general relativity and quantum mechanics, the philosophical debate rages on. It is still Einstein versus Bohr, determinism versus uncertainty.
The questions revolve around his discussions with Einstein. Einstein was always trying to figure out a thought experiment in which a physicist could potentially measure both the location and the energy or frequency or velocity of an electron with less than the uncertainty of Heisenberg. Bohr always punched holes in Einstein’s ideas. After a while they gave it up. However, Bohr’s victory was only that of a spoiler. Einstein’s followers could always say that no one had yet found a way to defeat the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
Einstein began by making significant contributions to quantum theory, but later drew back because of his preference for determinism. Einstein rejected the probabilistic formulation of quantum mechanics and sought a deterministic theory that would explain the behavior of small particles like electrons.
Meanwhile other physicists developed quantum mechanics separately from general relativity and went on to brilliant success. Theoreticians defined many differences between quantum and classical physics. Experimentalists proved that the behavior of small particles is consistent with quantum mechanics and inconsistent with classical physics.
One physical constant, known as the electron g-factor, is a measure of the slight difference between the real electron magnetic moment and the magnetic moment an electron would have in a classical or deterministic model of the atom. Quantum mechanics produces an agreement within 4 parts per million millions between the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted values of the electron g-factor. That makes quantum mechanics the most successful and precise physical theory known to date.
Yet Einstein continued to reject quantum mechanics. Toward the end of his career Einstein isolated himself increasingly from the scientific community to dedicate all his energy to finding a “unified field theory” that would replace quantum mechanics, extend to gravity, and restore determinacy. He even published a theory but later retracted it. He died without producing a field theory that satisfied him.
Einstein’s theory about gravity, general relativity, has been proved accurate time and time again. Aerospace engineers must take into account general relativity to get space probes precisely to distant planets. Yet half a century after Einstein’s death, there is still no unified theory for quantum mechanics and gravity. Gravity shapes the universe in the large, and quantum mechanics is about the very small. The difficulty is that gravity is extremely weak. In quantum mechanics one measures the interactions between very small particles. But one needs particles too heavy to lift to produce gravity strong enough to measure. Without a unifying theory to resolve the differences between general relativity and quantum mechanics, the philosophical debate rages on. It is still Einstein versus Bohr, determinism versus uncertainty.
Logical Positivists are Still Waiting
Logical positivists claim that theology and metaphysics are earlier imperfect modes of knowledge and that positive knowledge is based on natural phenomena and their properties and relations as verified by the empirical sciences. Verification is done by observation. There is no problem observing the properties of large bodies like stars and galaxies, but the very process of observation may disturb small bodies like electrons.
The impasse between Einstein and Bohr left the logical positivists without resolution of a key step in their program to destroy theology and metaphysics.
It is ironic that Einstein never saw that quantum indeterminacy prevents God from using physical means to control people’s thoughts. If he had accepted quantum mechanics, he would have seen that God can still justly judge the world.
The impasse between Einstein and Bohr left the logical positivists without resolution of a key step in their program to destroy theology and metaphysics.
It is ironic that Einstein never saw that quantum indeterminacy prevents God from using physical means to control people’s thoughts. If he had accepted quantum mechanics, he would have seen that God can still justly judge the world.
Philosophy versus Science
In reality there was no reason for interference between philosophy and science. Let’s consider this philosophical question: If there is a supreme being that can do anything, can he give his creatures so much independence that they, not he, are responsible for their own actions? The answer “no” violates the premise that their creator can do anything. The answer “yes” removes the problem.
