Quantum theory Copenhagen interpretation

The historical and philosophical aspects of the Copenhagen interpretation are more extensively discussed in J. Baggott (1992) The Meaning of Quantum Theory (Oxford University Press, Oxford). 

The answer to this question depends on the chosen, underlying theory. According to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics, the wavefunc-... 

In the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, this standard (see Fig. 21) for the measurement cannot be changed at will since it is composed of sinus waves infinite in length. 

Causal quantum theories have been developed to handle the empirical quantum evidence, and some of these theories, such as de Broglie s theory in its linear approximation, are almost as good as the usual orthodox quantum theory. A relative large number of experiments were even developed to test de Broglie s causal theory and other alternative theories as well, but only a few limited number of these proposed experiments were carried out effectively. And even so they were not carried out thoroughly. As a consequence, the results obtained were not conclusive, and no solid conclusion in favor or against the completeness of the usual orthodox interpretation of the Copenhagen School... 

Niels Bohr, bom Copenhagen, 1885. Ph.D. University of Copenhagen. Professor, University of Copenhagen. Nobel Prize in physics 1922. Founder of the Copenhagen school interpretation of quantum theory. Died Copenhagen, 1962. 

There are several reasons for this unsatisfactory state of affairs. Most important is perhars the different conceptual demands on theories of chemistry and physics respectively. In this instance there has been no effort to re-interpret mathematical quantum theory to satisfy the needs of chemistry. The physical, or Copenhagen, interpretation, which is essentially an ensemble theory, is simply not able to handle the individual elementary units needed to formulate a successful theory of chemical cohesion and interaction. Computational dexterity without some mechanistic basis does not constitute a theory. Equally unfortunate has been the dogmatic insistence of theoretical chemists to drag their outdated phenomenological notions into the formulation of a hybrid theory, neither classical nor quantum even to the point of discarding... 

The orthodox or Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory originated with three seminal papers published in 1925-26 by Heisenberg, Born and Jordan and an independent paper by Dirac (1926) all of these are available in English (translation) in a single volume [13]. A detailed summary was published by Heisenberg [9]. The primary aim of these studies was to formulate a mathematical system for the mechanics of atomic and electronic motion, based entirely on relations between experimentally observable quantities. An immediate consequence of this stipulation was that the motion of electrons could no longer be described in terms of the familiar concepts of space and time, but rather in terms of state functions constructed from matrix elements that relate to the Fourier sums over observed spectroscopic frequencies. The procedure became known as matrix mechanics. 

A worse dilemma was created by the user-friendly nature of wave mechanics, arising from the relative ease of manipulating differential equations, compared to the diagonalization of matrices. Most physicists who had eagerly anticipated the appearance of a generally applicable quantum theory immediately turned to wave mechanics. The Copenhagen school must have perceived this as a dangerous development that could potentially pollute the purity of quantum mechanics and they started to develop an interpretational structure that would eliminate deviant perceptions created by wave mechanics. 

The Copenhagen model is universally acknowledged as the ruling interpretation of quantum theory, although an authorized complete statement of the underlying principle does not appear to exist. In fact, such a statement is probably no longer needed as the Copenhagen interpretation, or orthodoxy, is so widely accepted as synonymous with quantum theory itself that, in ef-... 

The interminable discussions on the interpretation of quantum theory that followed the pioneering events are now considered to be of interest only to philosophers and historians, but not to physicists. In their view, finality had been reached on acceptance of the Copenhagen interpretation and the mathematical demonstration by John von Neumann of the impossibility of any alternative interpretation. The fact that theoretical chemists still have not managed to realize the initial promise of solving all chemical problems by quantum mechanics probably only means some lack of insight on the their part. 

Copenhagen interpretation, quantum mechanics, 266 Coulomb s law, 94 Crystal field theory, transition metal complexes, 149-152 Curvilinear coordinates, overview, 80, 86-88... 

The linear superposition principle plays a central role in the theory presented here. It should be noted, however, that the standard Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is not well adapted to discuss the notion of state amplitudes and measurements in the context required by the GED scheme. A more appropriate theoretical framework for quantum measurement is found in the ideas proposed by Fidder and Tapia [16]. 

The solution, proposed by Einstein, was that the discrete energy units, identified by Planck, correspond to quanta of light, called photons, which interact with electrons in the metal surface during direct collision. This dual wave/particle nature of light inspired de Broglie to postulate a similar behaviour for electrons. Experimental observation of electron diffraction confirmed the wave nature of electrons and firmly estabUshed the dual character of all quantum objects as mysterious reality. As the logical pictme of an entity, which is wave as well as particle, is hard to swallow, it has become fashionable to avoid all physical models of quantum events it is considered poor taste to contaminate the quantmn world with classical concepts. This noble idea of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantmn theory has resulted in a probabilistic computational model that, not only defies, but denies comprehension. 

There came a time when each model expanded too rapidly for scientists to keep track of all points of view and for the practitioners to reach a consensus interpretation. In the case of quantum theory the arguments were settled, to the satisfaction of none, on the authority of a few, and ordained as the Copenhagen interpretation. There is no written record to the details of this interpretation, which to this day, remains open to the formulation that best suits individual tastes. One of the authors who claimed responsibility for the interpretation (Heisenberg, 1955) states the purpose of the paper to... 

However, the problem of A in particle physics remains. It can be traced back to the concept of massive indivisible point particles with infinite self-energy and self-field - the basic premise of field theories based on the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. As recollected by one pioneer... 

The months which followed [... ] were a time of the most intensive work in Copenhagen, from which there finally emerged what is called the "Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory," [... ] BOHR intended to work the new simple pictures, obtained by wave mechanics, into the interpretation of the theory, while I for my part attempted to extend the physical significance. ... 

---