Introduction Knowledge Value FreeWill Mind Chance Quantum Afterword

SiteMap|Glossary|TheIPhiBlog|AboutIPhi|Citethispage Search GoogleTranslate

Hom e>Solutions >Scientis ts >Eins tein>ReplytoCriticis m s

Philosophers

AlbertEinsteinReplytoCriticisms
MortimerAdler (Alb ertEinstein:PhilosopherScientist,Ed.PaulArthurSchilpp,pp.665688)

RogersAlbritton

AlexanderofAphrodisias

REMARKSCONCERNINGTHEESSAYSBROUGHTTOGETHERINTHISCOOPERATIVE
SamuelAlexander
VOLUME
WilliamAlston
G.E.M.Anscombe
Anselm BywayofintroductionImustremarkthatitwasnoteasyformetodojusticetothetaskof

LouiseAntony expressingmyselfconcerningtheessayscontainedinthisvolume.Thereasonliesinthefact
ThomasAquinas thattheessaysrefertoentirelytoomanysubjects,which,atthepresentstateofour
Aristotle knowledge,areonlylooselyconnectedwitheachother.Ifirstattemptedtodiscusstheessays

DavidArmstrong individually.However,Iabandonedthisprocedurebecausenothingevenapproximately

HaraldAtmanspacher

homogeneousresulted,sothatthereadingofitcouldhardlyhavebeeneitherusefulor
RobertAudi
enjoyable.Ifinallydecided,therefore,toordertheseremarks,asfaraspossible,accordingto
Augustine
J.L.Austin
topicalconsiderations.
A.J.Ayer

AlexanderBain Furthermore,aftersomevainefforts,Idiscoveredthatthementalitywhichunderliesafewofthe
MarkBalaguer essaysdifferssoradicallyfrommyown,thatIamincapableofsayinganythingusefulabout
JeffreyBarrett them.ThisisnottobeinterpretedthatIregardthoseessaysinsofarastheircontentisatall

WilliamBelsham meaningfultomelesshighlythanIdothosewhichlieclosertomyownwaysofthinking,to
HenriBergson which[latter]Idedicatethefollowingremarks.
IsaiahBerlin

BernardBerofsky
RobertBishop TobeginwithIrefertotheessaysofWolfgangPauliandMaxBorn.Theydescribethecontent
MaxBlack ofmyworkconcerningquantaandstatisticsingeneralintheirinnerconsistencyandintheir

SusanneBobzien participationintheevolutionofphysicsduringthelasthalfcentury.Itismeritoriousthatthey
EmilduBoisReymond havedonethis:Foronlythosewhohavesuccessfullywrestledwiththeproblematicsituationsof
HilaryBok theirownagecanhaveadeepinsightintothosesituations}unlikethelaterhistorian,whofinds

LaurenceBonJour itdifficulttomakeabstractionsfromthoseconceptsandviewswhichappeartohisgeneration
GeorgeBoole
asestablished,orevenasselfevident.Bothauthors[p.666]deprecatethefactthatIrejectthe
mileBoutroux
F.H.Bradley basicideaofcontemporarystatisticalquantumtheory,insofarasIdonotbelievethatthis
C.D.Broad fundamentalconceptwillprovideausefulbasisforthewholeofphysics.Moreofthislater.

MichaelBurke
C.A.Campbell Inowcometowhatisprobablythemostinterestingsubjectwhichabsolutelymustbediscussed

JosephKeimCampbell inconnectionwiththedetailedargumentsofmyhighlyesteemedcolleaguesBorn,Pauli,Heitler,
RudolfCarnap Bohr,andMargenau.Theyareallfirmlyconvincedthattheriddleofthedoublenatureofall
Carneades corpuscles(corpuscularandundulatorycharacter)hasinessencefounditsfinalsolutioninthe

ErnstCassirer
statisticalquantumtheory.
DavidChalmers
RoderickChisholm
Chrysippus Onthestrengthofthesuccessesofthistheorytheyconsideritproved
thatatheoreticallycompletedescriptionofasystemcan,inessence, Here"complete"means
Cicero
lessthansimultaneous

RandolphClarke involveonlystatisticalassertionsconcerningthemeasurablequantities accuratevaluesof
SamuelClarke ofthissystem.TheyareapparentlyalloftheopinionthatHeisenberg's positionandmomentum.
AnthonyCollins indeterminacyrelation(thecorrectnessofwhichis,frommyownpoint ForEinstein,thisisstill
AntonellaCorradini
ofview,rightfullyregardedasfinallydemonstrated)isessentially "incomplete."
DiodorusCronus
prejudicialinfavorofthecharacterofallthinkablereasonablephysical
JonathanDancy
DonaldDavidson
theoriesinthementionedsense.InwhatfollowsIwishtoadducereasonswhichkeepmefrom
MarioDeCaro fallinginlinewiththeopinionofalmostallcontemporarytheoreticalphysicists.Iam,infact,
Democritus firmlyconvincedthattheessentiallystatisticalcharacterof

DanielDennett contemporaryquantumtheoryissolelytobeascribedtothefactthat Einstein'smajorcriticism
ofquantumtheory.
JacquesDerrida this[theory]operateswithanincompletedescriptionofphysical Ifitisstatistical,
RenDescartes systems.
RichardDouble thenitisincomplete
FredDretske
Aboveall,however,thereadershouldbeconvincedthatIfully
JohnDupr
JohnEarman recognizetheveryimportantprogresswhichthestatisticalquantumtheoryhasbroughtto

LauraWaddellEkstrom theoreticalphysics.

Epictetus Inthefieldofmechanicalproblemsi.e.,whereveritispossibleto
Epicurus considertheinteractionofstructuresandoftheirpartswithsufficient Einsteinendorsesthe

HerbertFeigl statisticalquantumtheory.
accuracybypostulatingapotentialenergybetweenmaterialpoints
JohnMartinFischer
Ow enFlanagan [thistheory]evennowpresentsasystemwhich,initsclosedcharacter, Itexplainsthew ave
LucianoFloridi correctlydescribestheempiricalrelationsbetweenstatable particledualityhecalled
PhilippaFoot phenomenaastheyweretheoreticallytobeexpected.Thistheoryis forin1909.
AlfredFouille untilnowtheonlyonewhichunitesthecorpuscularandundulatory Itisacompletetheory,up
HarryFrankfurt dualcharacterofmatterinalogicallysatisfactoryfashionandthe
totheindeterminacy
RichardL.Franklin (testable)relations,[p.667]whicharecontainedinit,are,withinthe
relation.
MichaelFrede
naturallimitsfixedbytheindeterminacyrelation,complete.Theformal
GottlobFrege Anyfuturetheoryw ill
PeterGeach
relationswhicharegiveninthistheoryi.e.,itsentiremathematical
probablyincorporatethis
EdmundGettier formalismwillprobablyhavetobecontained,intheformoflogical
quantumtheory.
CarlGinet inferences,ineveryusefulfuturetheory. Butinhisautobiography,
AlvinGoldman
hew asdoubtful
Gorgias Whatdoesnotsatisfymeinthattheory,fromthestandpointof

NicholasSt.JohnGreen principle,isitsattitudetowardsthatwhichappearstometobethe
H.PaulGrice
programmaticaimofallphysics:thecompletedescriptionofany(individual)realsituation(asit
IanHacking
supposedlyexistsirrespectiveofanyactofobservationorsubstantiation).Wheneverthe
IshtiyaqueHaji
StuartHampshire positivisticallyinclinedmodernphysicisthearssuchaformulationhisreactionisthatofapitying
W.F.R.Hardie smile.Hesaystohimself:"therewehavethenakedformulationofametaphysicalprejudice,
SamHarris emptyofcontent,aprejudice,moreover,theconquestofwhichconstitutesthemajor
WilliamHasker epistemologicalachievementofphysicistswithinthelastquartercentury.Hasanymanever
R.M.Hare perceiveda'realphysicalsituation'?Howisitpossiblethatareasonablepersoncouldtodaystill

GeorgW.F.Hegel believethathecanrefuteouressentialknowledgeandunderstandingbydrawingupsucha
MartinHeidegger
bloodlessghost?"Patience!Theabovelaconiccharacterizationwasnotmeanttoconvince
R.E.Hobart
ThomasHobbes anyoneitwasmerelytoindicatethepointofviewaroundwhichthefollowingelementary
DavidHodgson considerationsfreelygroupthemselves.IndoingthisIshallproceedasfollows:Ishallfirstofall
Shadsw orthHodgson showinsimplespecialcaseswhatseemsessentialtome,andthenIshallmakeafewremarks
Barond'Holbach aboutsomemoregeneralideaswhichareinvolved.
TedHonderich
PamelaHuby Weconsiderasaphysicalsystem,inthefirstinstance,aradioactiveatomofdefiniteaverage
DavidHume decaytime,whichispracticallyexactlylocalizedatapointofthecoordinatesystem.The
FerencHuoranszki
WilliamJames radioactiveprocessconsistsintheemissionofa(comparativelylight)particle.Forthesakeof
LordKames simplicityweneglectthemotionoftheresidualatomafterthedisintegrationprocess.Thenitis
RobertKane possibleforus,followingGamow,toreplacetherestoftheatombyaspaceofatomicorderof
ImmanuelKant magnitude,surroundedbyaclosedpotentialenergybarrierwhich,atatimet=0,enclosesthe
TomisKapitan particletobeemitted.Theradioactiveprocessthusschematizedisthen,asiswellknown,tobe
Jaegw onKim describedin[p.668]thesenseofelementaryquantummechanicsbyafunctioninthree
WilliamKing dimensions,whichatthetimet=0isdifferentfromzeroonlyinsideofthebarrier,butwhich,for
HilaryKornblith
ChristineKorsgaard positivetimes,expandsintotheouterspace.Thisfunctionyieldstheprobabilitythatthe
SaulKripke particle,atsomechoseninstant,isactuallyinachosenpartofspace(i.e.,isactuallyfound
AndreaLavazza therebyameasurementofposition).Ontheotherhand,thefunctiondoesnotimplyany
KeithLehrer assertionconcerningthetimeinstantofthedisintegrationoftheradioactiveatom.Nowweraise
GottfriedLeibniz thequestion:Canthistheoreticaldescriptionbetakenasthecompletedescriptionofthe

Leucippus disintegrationofasingleindividualatom?Theimmediatelyplausibleansweris:No.
MichaelLevin
GeorgeHenryLew es

Foroneis,firstofall,inclinedtoassumethattheindividualatom
C.I.Lew is CompareEinsteinin1917:
DavidLew is
decaysatadefinitetimehowever,suchadefinitetimevalueisnot
Itis"aw eaknessinthe
PeterLipton impliedinthedescriptionbythefunction.If,therefore,theindividual theory...,thatitleaves
JohnLocke atomhasadefinitedisintegrationtime,thenasregardstheindividual timeanddirectionof
MichaelLockw ood atomitsdescriptionbymeansofthefunctionmustbeinterpretedas elementaryprocessesto
E.JonathanLow e anincompletedescription.Inthiscasethefunctionistobetakenas chance(Zufall,ibid.)."

JohnR.Lucas thedescription,notofasingularsystem,butofanidealensembleof
Lucretius Einsteinisrightthat

systems.Inthiscaseoneisdriventotheconvictionthatacomplete
RuthBarcanMarcus statisticalquantum
JamesMartineau descriptionofasinglesystemshould,afterall,bepossiblebutfor mechanicsdescribesonly
StorrsMcCall suchcompletedescriptionthereisnoroomintheconceptualworldof ensemblesofsystems.
HughMcCann statisticalquantumtheory.
ColinMcGinn
MichaelMcKenna Tothisthequantumtheoristwillreply:Thisconsiderationstandsandfallswiththeassertionthat
BrianMcLaughlin thereactuallyissuchathingasadefinitetimeofdisintegrationoftheindividualatom(an
JohnMcTaggart instantoftimeexistingindependentlyofanyobservation).Butthisassertionis,frommypointof
PaulE.Meehl
view,notmerelyarbitrarybutactuallymeaningless.Theassertionoftheexistenceofadefinite
Uw eMeixner
AlfredMele
timeinstantforthedisintegrationmakessenseonlyifIcaninprincipledeterminethistime
TrentonMerricks instantempirically.Suchanassertion,however,(which,finally,leadstotheattempttoprovethe
JohnStuartMill existenceoftheparticleoutsideoftheforcebarrier),involvesadefinitedisturbanceofthe
DickinsonMiller systeminwhichweareinterestedsothattheresultofthedeterminationdoesnotpermita

G.E.Moore conclusionconcerningthestatusoftheundisturbedsystem.Thesupposition,therefore,thata

C.LloydMorgan radio[p.669]activeatomhasadefinitedisintegrationtimeisnotjustifiedbyanything
ThomasNagel
whatsoever}itis,therefore,notdemonstratedeitherthatthefunctioncannotbeconceived
FriedrichNietzsche
JohnNorton asacompletedescriptionoftheindividualsystem.Theentireallegeddifficultyproceedsfrom
P.H.Now ellSmith thefactthatonepostulatessomethingnotobservableas"real."(Thistheanswerofthe
RobertNozick quantumtheorist.)
WilliamofOckham
TimothyO'Connor WhatIdislikeinthiskindofargumentationisthebasicpositivisticattitude,whichfrommypoint
DavidF.Pears ofviewisuntenable,andwhichseemstometocometothesamethingasBerkeley'sprinciple,
CharlesSandersPeirce

esseestpercipi."Being"isalwayssomethingwhichismentallyconstructedbyus,thatis,
DerkPereboom
somethingwhichwefreelyposit(inthelogicalsense).Thejustificationofsuchconstructsdoes
StevenPinker
Plato notlieintheirderivationfromwhatisgivenbythesenses.Suchatypeofderivation(inthe

KarlPopper senseoflogicaldeducibility)isnowheretobehad,noteveninthedomainofprescientific
Porphyry thinking.Thejustificationoftheconstructs,whichrepresent"reality"forus,liesaloneintheir
Huw Price qualityofmakingintelligiblewhatissensorilygiven(thevaguecharacterofthisexpressionis
H.A.Prichard hereforceduponmebymystrivingforbrevity).Appliedtothespecificallychosenexamplethis
HilaryPutnam considerationtellsusthefollowing:

WillardvanOrmanQuine
FrankRamsey
AynRand Onemaynotmerelyask:"Doesadefinitetimeinstantforthetransformationofasingleatom
MichaelRea exist?"butrather:"Isit,withintheframeworkofourtheoreticaltotalconstruction,reasonableto
ThomasReid posittheexistenceofadefinitepointoftimeforthetransformationofasingleatom?"Onemay
CharlesRenouvier notevenaskwhatthisassertionmeans.Onecanonlyaskwhethersuchaproposition,within
NicholasRescher theframeworkofthechosenconceptualsystemwithaviewtoitsabilitytograsptheoretically

C.W.Rietdijk whatisempiricallygivenisreasonableornot.
RichardRorty
JosiahRoyce Insofar,then,asaquantumtheoreticiantakesthepositionthatthedescriptionbymeansofa
BertrandRussell
PaulRussell functionrefersonlytoanidealsystematictotalitybutinnowisetotheindividualsystem,hemay
GilbertRyle calmlyassumeadefinitepointoftimeforthetransformation.But,ifherepresentsthe
JeanPaulSartre assumptionthathisdescriptionbywayofthefunctionistobetakenasthecomplete
KennethSayre descriptionoftheindividualsystem,thenhemustrejectthepostulationofaspecificdecaytime.
T.M.Scanlon Hecan[p.670]justifiablypointtothefactthatadeterminationoftheinstantofdisintegrationis

MoritzSchlick notpossibleonanisolatedsystem,butwouldrequiredisturbancesofsuchacharacterthat
ArthurSchopenhauer

theymustnotbeneglectedinthecriticalexaminationofthesituation.Itwould,forexample,not
JohnSearle
WilfridSellars bepossibletoconcludefromtheempiricalstatementthatthetransformationhasalreadytaken
AlanSidelle place,thatthiswouldhavebeenthecaseifthedisturbancesofthesystemhadnottakenplace.
TedSider
ick
HenrySidgw AsfarasIknow,itwasE.Schrdingerwhofirstcalledattentiontoamodificationofthis
WalterSinnottArmstrong consideration,whichshowsaninterpretationofthistypetobeimpracticable.Ratherthan
J.J.C.Smart consideringasystemwhichcomprisesonlyaradioactiveatom(anditsprocessof
SaulSmilansky
transformation),oneconsidersasystemwhichincludesalsothemeansforascertainingthe
MichaelSmith
radioactivetransformationforexample,aGeigercounterwithautomaticregistration
BaruchSpinoza
L.SusanStebbing mechanism.Letthislatterincludearegistrationstrip,movedbyaclockwork,uponwhicha
GeorgeF.Stout markismadebytrippingthecounter.True,fromthepointofviewofquantummechanicsthis
GalenStraw son totalsystemisverycomplexanditsconfigurationspaceisofveryhighdimension.Butthereis
PeterStraw son inprinciplenoobjectiontotreatingthisentiresystemfromthestandpointofquantum
EleonoreStump mechanics.Heretoothetheorydeterminestheprobabilityofeachconfigurationofallitsco
FranciscoSurez

ordinatesforeverytimeinstant.Ifoneconsidersallconfigurationsofthecoordinates,foratime
RichardTaylor
largecomparedwiththeaveragedecaytimeoftheradioactiveatom,therewillbe(atmost)one
KevinTimpe
MarkTw ain
suchregistrationmarkonthepaperstrip.Toeachcoordinateconfigurationcorrespondsa
PeterUnger definitepositionofthemarkonthepaperstrip.But,inasmuchasthetheoryyieldsonlythe
PetervanInw agen relativeprobabilityofthethinkablecoordinateconfigurations,italsooffersonlyrelative
ManuelVargas probabilitiesforthepositionsofthemarkonthepaperstrip,butnodefinitelocationforthis
JohnVenn mark.Inthisconsiderationthelocationofthemarkonthestripplaystheroleplayedinthe
KadriVihvelin

originalconsiderationbythetimeofthedisintegration.Thereasonfortheintroductionofthe
Voltaire
systemsupplementedbytheregistrationmechanismliesinthefollowing.Thelocationofthe
G.H.vonWright
DavidFosterWallace markontheregistrationstripconcepts,incontradistinctiontotheinstantofdisintegrationofa
R.JayWallace singleatom.Ifweattempt[toworkwith]theinterpretationthatthequantumtheoretical
W.G.Ward descriptionistobeunderstoodasacompletedescriptionoftheindividualsystem,weare
TedWarfield forcedtotheinterpretationthatthelocationofthemarkonthestripisnothingwhichbelongsto
RoyWeatherford thesystemperse,butthattheexistenceofthatlocationisessentiallydependentuponthe
WilliamWhew ell carryingoutofanobservationmadeontheregistrationstrip.Suchaninterpretationiscertainly
AlfredNorthWhitehead
bynomeansabsurdfromapurelylogicalstandpointyetthereishardlylikelytobeanyonewho
DavidWiderker
DavidWiggins
wouldbeinclinedtoconsideritseriously.For,inthemacroscopicsphereitsimplyisconsidered
BernardWilliams certainthatonemustadheretotheprogramofarealisticdescriptioninspaceandtime
TimothyWilliamson whereasinthesphereofmicroscopicsituationsoneismorereadilyinclinedtogiveup,orat
Ludw igWittgenstein leasttomodify,thisprogram.

SusanWolf Thisdiscussionwasonlytobringoutthefollowing.Onearrivesatvery
Einsteinisrightthat
implausibletheoreticalconceptions,ifoneattemptstomaintainthe
Scientists statisticalquantumtheory
thesisthatthestatisticalquantumtheoryisinprinciplecapableof doesnotproducea

MichaelArbib
producingacompletedescriptionofanindividualphysicalsystem.On "complete"description.
BernardBaars theotherhand,thosedifficultiesoftheoreticalinterpretationdisappear, Butmissinginformationis
GregoryBateson ifoneviewsthequantummechanicaldescriptionasthedescriptionof nottheresultofhuman
JohnS.Bell ensemblesofsystems. ignoranceasinclassical

CharlesBennett statisticalmechanics

Ludw igvonBertalanffy Ireachedthisconclusionastheresultofquitedifferenttypesof
SusanBlackmore
considerations.Iamconvincedthateveryonewhowilltakethetroubletocarrythroughsuch
MargaretBoden
reflectionsconscientiouslywillfindhimselffinallydriventothisinterpretationofquantum
DavidBohm
NielsBohr
theoreticaldescription(thefunctionistobeunderstoodasthedescriptionnotofasingle

Ludw igBoltzmann systembutofanensembleofsystems).
EmileBorel
MaxBorn Roughlystatedtheconclusionisthis:Withintheframeworkofstatisticalquantumtheorythereis

SatyendraNathBose nosuchthingasacompletedescriptionoftheindividualsystem.Morecautiouslyitmightbeput

WaltherBothe asfollows:Theattempttoconceivethequantumtheoreticaldescriptionasthecomplete
HansBriegel descriptionoftheindividualsystemsleadstounnaturaltheoreticalinterpretations,which
LeonBrillouin
StephenBrush becomeimmediatelyunnecessaryifoneacceptsthe[p.672]interpretationthatthedescription
HenryThomasBuckle referstoensemblesofsystemsandnottoindividualsystems.Inthatcasethewhole"egg
S.H.Burbury walking"performedinordertoavoidthe"physicallyreal"becomessuperfluous.Thereexists,
DonaldCampbell however,asimplepsychologicalreasonforthefactthatthismostnearlyobviousinterpretation
AnthonyCashmore isbeingshunned.Forifthestatisticalquantumtheorydoesnotpretendtodescribethe

EricChaisson individualsystem(anditsdevelopmentintime)completely,itappearsunavoidabletolook
JeanPierreChangeux
elsewhereforacompletedescriptionoftheindividualsystem^indoingsoitwouldbeclearfrom
ArthurHollyCompton
JohnConw ay theverybeginningthattheelementsofsuchadescriptionarenotcontainedwithinthe
JohnCramer conceptualschemeofthestatisticalquantumtheory.Withthisonewouldadmitthat,inprinciple,
E.P.Culverwell thisschemecouldnotserveasthebasisoftheoreticalphysics.Assumingthesuccessofefforts
CharlesDarw in toaccomplishacompletephysicaldescription,thestatisticalquantumtheorywould,withinthe
TerrenceDeacon frameworkoffuturephysics,takeanapproximatelyanalogouspositiontothestatistical
LouisdeBroglie mechanicswithintheframeworkofclassicalmechanics.Iamratherfirmlyconvincedthatthe
MaxDelbrck developmentoftheoreticalphysicswillbeofthistypebutthepathwillbelengthyanddifficult.
AbrahamdeMoivre
PaulDirac
HansDriesch Inowimagineaquantumtheoreticianwhomayevenadmitthatthequantumtheoretical
JohnEccles descriptionreferstoensemblesofsystemsandnottoindividualsystems,butwho,

ArthurStanleyEddington nevertheless,clingstotheideathatthetypeofdescriptionofthestatisticalquantumtheorywill,
PaulEhrenfest initsessentialfeatures,beretainedinthefuture.Hemayargueasfollows:True,Iadmitthat
AlbertEinstein thequantumtheoreticaldescriptionisanincompletedescriptionoftheindividualsystem.Ieven

HughEverett,III admitthatacompletetheoreticaldescriptionis,inprinciple,thinkable.ButIconsideritproven
FranzExner thatthesearchforsuchacompletedescriptionwouldbeaimless.Forthelawfulnessofnature
RichardFeynman
R.A.Fisher isthusconstitutedthatthelawscanbecompletelyandsuitablyformulatedwithintheframework
JosephFourier ofourincompletedescription.
LilaGatlin

MichaelGazzaniga TothisIcanonlyreplyasfollows:Yourpointofviewtakenastheoreticalpossibilityis
GianCarloGhirardi incontestable.Forme,however,theexpectationthattheadequateformulationoftheuniversal
J.WillardGibbs lawsinvolvestheuseofallconceptualelements[p.673]whicharenecessaryforacomplete
NicolasGisin description,ismorenatural.Itisfurthermorenotatallsurprisingthat,byusinganincomplete
PaulGlimcher
description,(inthemain)onlystatisticalstatementscanbeobtainedoutofsuchdescription.Ifit
ThomasGold
A.O.Gomes
shouldbepossibletomoveforwardtoacompletedescription,itislikelythatthelawswould
BrianGoodw in representrelationsamongalltheconceptualelementsofthisdescriptionwhich,perse,have
JoshuaGreene nothingtodowithstatistics.
JacquesHadamard
PatrickHaggard Afewmoreremarksofageneralnatureconcerningconceptsand[also]concerningthe
StuartHameroff insinuationthataconceptforexamplethatoftherealissomethingmetaphysical(and
AugustinHamon thereforetoberejected).Abasicconceptualdistinction,whichisanecessaryprerequisiteof
SamHarris
scientificandprescientificthinking,isthedistinctionbetween"senseimpressions"(andthe
HymanHartman
JohnDylanHaynes recollectionofsuch)ontheonehandandmereideasontheother.Thereisnosuchthingasa
MartinHeisenberg conceptualdefinitionofthisdistinction(asidefromcirculardefinitions,i.e.,ofsuchasmakea
JohnHerschel hiddenuseoftheobjecttobedefined).Norcanitbemaintainedthatatthebaseofthis
WernerHeisenberg distinctionthereisatypeofevidence,suchasunderlies,forexample,thedistinctionbetween
JesperHoffmeyer redandblue.Yet,oneneedsthisdistinctioninordertobeabletoovercomesolipsism.Solution:
E.T.Jaynes

weshallmakeuseofthisdistinctionunconcernedwiththereproachthat,indoingso,weare
WilliamStanleyJevons
guiltyofthemetaphysical"originalsin."Weregardthedistinctionasacategorywhichweusein
RomanJakobson
PascualJordan
orderthatwemightthebetterfindourwayintheworldofimmediatesensations.The"sense"
RuthE.Kastner andthejustificationofthisdistinctionliessimplyinthisachievement.Butthisisonlyafirststep.
StuartKauffman Werepresentthesenseimpressionsasconditionedbyan"objective"andbya"subjective"

 SimonKochen factor.Forthisconceptualdistinctionthe/ealsoisnologicalphilosophicaljustification.Butifwe
StephenKosslyn
rejectit,wecannotescapesolipsism.Itisalsothepresuppositionofeverykindofphysical
LadislavKov
thinking.Heretoo,theonlyjustificationliesinitsusefulness.Wearehereconcernedwith
RolfLandauer
AlfredLand
"categories"orschemesofthought,theselectionofwhichis,inprinciple,entirelyopentous

PierreSimonLaplace andwhosequalificationcanonlybejudgedbythedegreetowhichitsusecontributestomaking
DavidLayzer thetotalityofthecontentsofconsciousness"intelligible."Theabove[p.674]mentioned
BenjaminLibet "objectivefactor"isthetotalityofsuchconceptsandconceptualrelationsasarethoughtofas
SethLloyd independentofexperience,viz.,ofperceptions.Solongaswemovewithinthethus

HendrikLorentz programmaticallyfixedsphereofthoughtwearethinkingphysically.Insofarasphysicalthinking
JosefLoschmidt
justifiesitself,inthemorethanonceindicatedsense,byitsabilitytograspexperiences
ErnstMach
DonaldMacKay intellectually,weregarditas"knowledgeofthereal."
HenryMargenau
JamesClerkMaxw ell Afterwhathasbeensaid,the"real"inphysicsistobetakenasatypeofprogram,towhichwe
ErnstMayr are,however,notforcedtoclingapriori.Nooneislikelytobeinclinedtoattempttogiveupthis

UlrichMohrhoff programwithintherealmofthe"macroscopic"(locationofthemarkonthepaperstrip"real").
JacquesMonod Butthe"macroscopic"andthe"microscopic"aresointerrelatedthatitappearsimpracticableto
EmmyNoether giveupthisprograminthe"microscopic"alone.NorcanIseeanyoccasionanywherewithinthe
How ardPattee
observablefactsofthequantumfieldfordoingso,unless,indeed,oneclingsaprioritothe
WolfgangPauli
MassimoPauri
thesisthatthedescriptionofnaturebythestatisticalschemeofquantummechanicsisfinal.
RogerPenrose
StevenPinker ThetheoreticalattitudehereadvocatedisdistinctfromthatofKantonlybythefactthatwedo
ColinPittendrigh notconceiveofthe"categories"asunalterable(conditionedbythenatureofthe
MaxPlanck understanding)butas(inthelogicalsense)freeconventions.Theyappeartobeapriorionly

SusanPockett insofarasthinkingwithoutthepositingofcategoriesandofconceptsingeneralwouldbeas
HenriPoincar impossibleasisbreathinginavacuum.Fromthesemeagerremarksonewillseethattomeit
DanielPollen
IlyaPrigogine
mustseemamistaketopermittheoreticaldescriptiontobedirectlydependentuponactsof
HansPrimas empiricalassertions,asitseemstometobeintended[forexample]inBohr'sprincipleof

AdolpheQutelet complementarity,thesharpformulationofwhich,moreover,Ihavebeenunabletoachieve
JuanRoederer despitemucheffortwhichIhaveexpendedonit.Frommypointofview[such]statementsor
JeromeRothstein measurementscanoccuronlyasspecialinstances,viz.,parts,ofphysicaldescription,towhichI

DavidRuelle cannotascribeanyexceptionalpositionabovetherest.TheabovementionedessaysbyBohr

Erw inSchrdinger andPaulicontaina[p.675]historicalappreciationofmyeffortsintheareaofphysicalstatistics
AaronSchurger
ClaudeShannon
andquantaand,inaddition,anaccusationwhichisbroughtforwardinthefriendliestoffashion.
DavidShiang Inbriefestformulationthislatterrunsasfollows:"Rigidadherencetoclassicaltheory."This
HerbertSimon accusationdemandseitheradefenseortheconfessionofguilt.Theoneortheotheris,
DeanKeithSimonton however,beingrenderedmuchmoredifficultbecauseitisbynomeansimmediatelyclearwhat
B.F.Skinner ismeantby"classicaltheory."Newton'stheorydeservesthenameofaclassicaltheory.Ithas
RogerSperry neverthelessbeenabandonedsinceMaxwellandHertzhaveshownthattheideaofforcesata
HenryStapp distancehastoberelinquishedandthatonecannotmanagewithouttheideaofcontinuous
TomStonier
AntoineSuarez "fields."
LeoSzilard

WilliamThomson(Kelvin) Theopinionthatcontinuousfieldsaretobeviewedastheonly
PeterTse acceptablebasicconcepts,whichmustalso[beassumedto]underlie

HeinzvonFoerster thetheoryofthematerialparticles,soonwonout.Nowthisconception Eintein'sgoalistoexplain
JohnvonNeumann became,sotospeak,"classical"butaproper,andinprinciple everythingintermsofa
JohnB.Watson complete,theoryhasnotgrownoutofit.Maxwell'stheoryofthe fieldtheory.
DanielWegner electricfieldremainedatorso,becauseitwasunabletosetuplawsforthebehaviorofelectric
StevenWeinberg
PaulA.Weiss
density,withoutwhichtherecan,ofcourse,benosuchthingasanelectromagneticfield.
JohnWheeler Analogouslythegeneraltheoryofrelativityfurnishedthenafieldtheoryofgravitation,butno
WilhelmWien theoryofthefieldcreatingmasses.(Theseremarkspresupposeitasselfevidentthatafield
NorbertWiener theorymaynotcontainanysingularities,i.e.,anypositionsorpartsinspaceinwhichthefield
EugeneWigner lawsarenotvalid.)Consequentlythereis,strictlyspeaking,todayno
E.O.Wilson suchthingasaclassicalfieldtheoryonecan,therefore,alsonot Einstien'sprogramisfield
H.DieterZeh rigidlyadheretoit.Nevertheless,fieldtheorydoesexistasaprogram theory.
ErnstZermelo
WojciechZurek "Continuousfunctionsinthefourdimensional[continuum]asbasic
conceptsofthetheory.Rigidadherencetothisprogramcanrightfullybeassertedofme.The
Presentations deepergroundforthisliesinthefollowing:Thetheoryofgravitationshowedmethatthenon
linearityoftheseequationsresultsinthefactthatthistheoryyieldsinteractionsamong
Biosemiotics structures(localizedthings)atall.Butthetheoreticalsearchfornonlinearequationsis

FreeWill hopeless(becauseoftoogreatvarietyofpossibilities),ifonedoesnotusethegeneralprinciple

MentalCausation

ofrelativity(invariance[p.676]undergeneralcontinuouscoordinatetransformations).Inthe
JamesSymposium
meantime,however,itdoesnotseempossibletoformulatethisprinciple,ifoneseekstodeviate
fromtheaboveprogram.HereinliesacoercionwhichIcannotevade.Thisformyjustification.
NeverthelessIamforcedtoweakenthisjustificationbyaconfession.Ifonedisregardsquantum
structure,onecanjustifytheintroductionofthegik "operationally"bypointingtothefactthat
onecanhardlydoubtthephysicalrealityoftheelementarylightconewhichbelongstoapoint.
Indoingsooneimplicitlymakesuseoftheexistenceofanarbitrarilysharpopticalsignal.Such
asignal,however,asregardsthequantumfacts,involvesinfinitelyhighfrequenciesand
energies,andthereforeacompletedestructionofthefieldtobedetermined.Thatkindofa
physicaljustificationfortheintroductionofthegik fallsbythewayside,unlessonelimitshimself
tothe"macroscopic."Theapplicationoftheformalbasisofthegeneraltheoryofrelativitytothe
"microscopic"can,therefore,bebasedonlyuponthefactthatthattensoristheformally
simplestcovariantstructurewhichcancomeunderconsideration.Suchargumentation,
however,carriesnoweightwithanyonewhodoubtsthatwehavetoadheretothecontinuumat
all.Allhonortohisdoubtbutwhereelseisthereapassableroad?

NowIcometothethemeoftherelationofthetheoryofrelativitytophilosophy.Hereitis
Reichenbach'spieceofworkwhich,bytheprecisionofdeductionsandbythesharpnessofhis
assertions,irresistiblyinvitesabriefcommentary.Robertson'sluciddiscussionalsois
interestingmainlyfromthestandpointofgeneralepistemology,althoughitlimitsitselftothe
narrowerthemeof"thetheoryofrelativityandgeometry."Tothequestion:Doyouconsidertrue
whatReichenbachhashereasserted,IcanansweronlywithPilate'sfamousquestion:"Whatis
truth?"Letusfirsttakeagoodlookatthequestion:Isageometrylookedatfromthephysical
pointofviewverifiable(viz.,falsifiable)ornot?Reichenbach,togetherwithHelmholtz,says:
Yss,providedthattheempiricallygivensolidbodyrealizesthe[p.677]conceptof"distance."
PoincaresaysnoandconsequentlyiscondemnedbyReichenbach.Nowthefollowingshort
conversationtakesplace:

Poincar:Theempiricallygivenbodiesarenotrigid,andconsequentlycannotbeusedforthe
embodimentofgeometricintervals.Therefore,thetheoremsofgeometryarenotverifiable.

Reichenbach:Iadmitthattherearenobodieswhichcanbeimmediatelyadducedforthe"real
definition"oftheinterval.Nevertheless,thisrealdefinitioncanbeachievedbytakingthe
thermalvolumedependence,elasticity,electroandmagnetostriction,etc.,intoconsideration.
Thatthisisreally[and]withoutcontradiction:possible,classicalphysicshassurely
demonstrated.

Poincar:Ingainingtherealdefinitionimprovedbyyourselfyouhavemadeuseofphysical
laws,theformulationofwhichpresupposes(inthiscase)Euclideangeometry.Theverification,
ofwhichyouhavespoken,refers,therefore,notmerelytogeometrybuttotheentiresystemof
physicallawswhichconstituteitsfoundation.Anexaminationofgeometrybyitselfis
consequentlynotthinkable.Whyshoulditconsequentlynotbeentirelyuptometochoose
geometryaccordingtomyownconvenience(i.e.,Euclidean)andtofittheremaining(inthe
usualsense"physical")lawstothischoiceinsuchmannerthattherecanarisenocontradiction
ofthewholewithexperience?

(Theconversationcannotbecontinuedinthisfashionbecausetherespectofthe[present]
writerforPoincar'ssuperiorityasthinkerandauthordoesnotpermititinwhatfollows
therefore,ananonymousnonpositivistissubstitutedforPoincar.)

Reichenbach:Thereissomethingquiteattractiveinthisconception.But,ontheotherhand,itis
noteworthythattheadherencetotheobjectivemeaningoflengthandtotheinterpretationof
thedifferencesofcoordinatesasdistances(inprerelativisticphysics)hasnotledto
complications.Shouldwenot,onthebasisofthisastoundingfact,bejustifiedinoperating
furtheratleasttentativelywiththeconceptofthemeasurable[p.678]length,asiftherewere
suchthingsasrigidmeasuringrods?InanycaseitwouldhavebeenimpossibleforEinsteinde
facto(evenifnottheoretically)tosetupthetheoryofgeneralrelativity,ifhehadnotadheredto
theobjectivemeaningoflength.

AgainstPoincar'ssuggestionitistobepointedoutthatwhatreallymattersisnotmerelythe
greatestpossiblesimplicityofthegeometryalone,butratherthegreatestpossiblesimplicityof
allofphysics(inclusiveofgeometry).Thisiswhatis,inthefirstinstance,involvedinthefact
thattodaywemustdeclineasunsuitablethesuggestiontoadheretoEuclideangeometry.

NonPositivist:If,underthestatedcircumstances,youholddistancetobealegitimateconcept,
howthenisitwithyourbasicprinciple(meaning=verifiability)?Doyounothavetoreachthe
pointwhereyoumustdenythemeaningofgeometricalconceptsandtheoremsandto
acknowledgemeaningonlywithinthecompletelydevelopedtheoryofrelativity(which,however,
doesnotyetexistatallasafinishedproduct)?Doyounothavetoadmitthat,inyoursenseof
theword,no"meaning"canbeattributedtotheindividualconceptsandassertionsofaphysical
theoryatall,andtotheentiresystemonlyinsofarasitmakeswhatisgiveninexperience
"intelligible?"Whydotheindividualconceptswhichoccurinatheoryrequireanyspecific
justificationanyway,iftheyareonlyindispensablewithintheframeworkofthelogicalstructure
ofthetheory,andthetheoryonlyinitsentiretyvalidatesitself?

Itseemstome,moreover,thatyouhavenotatalldonejusticetothereallysignificant
philosophicalachievementofKant.FromHumeKanthadlearnedthatthereareconcepts(as,
forexample,thatofcausalconnection),whichplayadominatingroleinourthinking,andwhich,
nevertheless,cannotbededucedbymeansofalogicalprocessfromtheempiricallygiven(a
factwhichseveralempiricistsrecognize,itistrue,butseemalwaysagaintoforget).What
justifiestheuseofsuchconcepts?Supposehehadrepliedinthissense:Thinkingis
necessaryinordertounderstandtheempiricallygiven,andconceptsand"categories"are
necessaryasindispensableelementsofthinking.Ifhehadremainedsatisfiedwiththistype
[p.679]ofananswer,hewouldhaveavoidedscepticismandyouwouldnothavebeenableto
findfaultwithhim.He,however,wasmisledbytheerroneousopiniondifficulttoavoidinhis
timethatEuclideangeometryisnecessarytothinkingandoffersassured(i.e.,not
dependentuponsensoryexperience)knowledgeconcerningtheobjectsof"external"
perception.Fromthiseasilyunderstandableerrorheconcludedtheexistenceofsynthetic
judgmentsapriori,whichareproducedbythereasonalone,andwhich,consequently,canlay
claimtoabsolutevalidity.IthinkyourcensureisdirectedlessagainstKanthimselfthanagainst
thosewhotodaystilladheretotheerrorsof"syntheticjudgmentsapriori."Icanhardlythink
ofanythingmorestimulatingasthebasisfordiscussioninanepistemologicalseminarthanthis
briefessaybyReichenbach(besttakentogetherwithRobertson'sessay).

WhathasbeendiscussedthusfariscloselyrelatedtoBridgman'sessay,sothatitwillbe
possibleformetoexpressmyselfquitebrieflywithouthavingtoharbortoomuchfearthatIshall
bemisunderstood.Inordertobeabletoconsideralogicalsystemasphysicaltheoryitisnot
necessarytodemandthatallofitsassertionscanbeindependentlyinterpretedand"tested"
"operationally}"defactothishasneveryetbeenachievedbyanytheoryandcannotatallbe
achieved.Inordertobeabletoconsideratheoryasaphysicaltheoryitisonlynecessarythat
itimpliesempiricallytestableassertionsingeneral.

Thisformulationisinsofarentirelyunpreciseas"testability"isaqualitywhichrefersnotmerely
totheassertionitselfbutalsotothecoordinationofconcepts,containedinit,withexperience.
Butitisprobablyhardlynecessaryformetoenteruponadiscussionofthisticklishproblem,
inasmuchasitisnotlikelythatthereexistanyessentialdifferencesofopinionatthispoint.
Margenau.Thisessaycontainsseveraloriginalspecificremarks,whichImustconsider
separately:

TohisSec.1:"Einstein'sposition...containsfeaturesofrationalismandextremeempiricism..
.."ThisremarkIs[p.680]entirelycorrect.Fromwhencecomesthisfluctuation?Alogical
conceptualsystemisphysicsinsofarasitsconceptsandassertionsarenecessarilybrought
intorelationshipwiththeworldofexperiences.Whoeverdesirestosetupsuchasystemwillfind
adangerousobstacleinarbitrarychoice(embarrasderichesse).Thisiswhyheseeksto
connecthisconceptsasdirectlyandnecessarilyaspossiblewiththeworldofexperience.Inthis
casehisattitudeisempirical.Thispathisoftenfruitful,butitisalwaysopentodoubt,because
thespecificconceptandtheindividualassertioncan,afterall,assertsomethingconfrontedby
theempiricallygivenonlyinconnectionwiththeentiresystem.Hethenrecognizesthatthere
existsnologicalpathfromtheempiricallygiventothatconceptualworld.Hisattitudebecomes
thenmorenearlyrationalistic,becauseherecognizesthelogicalindependenceofthesystem.
Thedangerinthisattitudeliesinthefactthatinthesearchforthesystemonecanloseevery
contactwiththeworldofexperience.Awaveringbetweentheseextremesappearstome
unavoidable.

TohisSec.2:IdidnotgrowupintheKantiantradition,butcametounderstandthetruly
valuablewhichistobefoundinhisdoctrine,alongsideoferrorswhichtodayarequiteobvious,
onlyquitelate.Itiscontainedinthesentence:"Therealisnotgiventous,butputtous
(aufgegeben)(bywayofariddle)."Thisobviouslymeans:Thereissuchathingasa
conceptualconstructionforthegraspingoftheinterpersonal,theauthorityofwhichliespurely
initsvalidation.Thisconceptualconstructionreferspreciselytothe"real"(bydefinition),and
everyfurtherquestionconcerningthe"natureofthereal"appearsempty.

TohisSec.4:Thisdiscussionhasnotconvincedmeatall.Foritisclearpersethatevery
magnitudeandeveryassertionofatheorylaysclaimto"objectivemeaning"(withinthe
frameworkofthetheory).Aproblemarisesonlywhenweascribegroupcharacteristicstoa
theory,i.e.,ifweassumeorpostulatethatthesamephysicalsituationadmitsofseveralwaysof
description,eachofwhichistobeviewedasequallyjustified.Forinthiscaseweobviously
cannotascribecompleteobjectivemeaning(forexamplethexcomponentofthe[p.681]velocity
ofaparticleoritsxcoordinates)totheindividual(noteliminable)magnitudes.Inthiscase,
whichhasalwaysexistedinphysics,wehavetolimtourselvestoascribingobjectivemeaningto
thegenerallawsofthetheory,i.e.,wehavetodemandthattheselawsarevalidforevery
descriptionofthesystemwhichisrecognizedasjustifiedbythegroup.Itis,therefore,nottrue
that"objectivity"presupposesagroupcharacteristic,butthatthegroupcharacteristicforcesa
refinementoftheconceptofobjectivity.Thepositingofgroupcharacteristicsisheuristicallyso
importantfortheory,becausethischaracteristicalwaysconsiderablylimitsthevarietyofthe
mathematicallymeaningfullaws.

Nowtherefollowsaclaimthatthegroupcharacteristicsdeterminethatthelawsmusthavethe
formofdifferentialequations}Icannotatallseethis.ThenMargenauinsiststhatthelaws
expressedbywayofthedifferentialequations(especiallythepartialones)are"leastspecific."
Uponwhatdoeshebasethiscontention?Iftheycouldbeprovedtobecorrect,itistruethatthe
attempttogroundphysicsupondifferentialequationswouldthenturnouttobehopeless.We
are,however,farfrombeingabletojudgewhetherdifferentiallawsofthetypetobeconsidered
haveanysolutionsatallwhichareeverywheresingularityfreeand,ifso,whethertherearetoo
manysuchsolutions.

AndnowjustaremarkconcerningthediscussionsabouttheEinsteinPodolskiRosenParadox.
IdonotthinkthatMargenau'sdefenseofthe"orthodox"("orthodox"referstothethesisthatthe
functioncharacterizestheindividualsystemexhaustively)quantumpositionhitstheessential
[aspects].Ofthe"orthodox"quantumtheoreticianswhosepositionIknow,NielsBohr'sseemsto
metocomenearesttodoingjusticetotheproblem.Translatedintomyownwayofputtingit,he
arguesasfollows:

IfthepartialsystemsAandBformatotalsystemwhichisdescribedby
itsfunction/(AB),thereisnoreasonwhyanymutuallyindependent Atw oparticlecannot
existence(stateofreality)shouldbeascribedtothepartialsystemsA beseparatedintothe
andBviewedseparately,notevenifthepartialsystemsarespatially productofsingleparticle
separatedfromeach[p.682]otherattheparticulartimeunder 's
consideration.Theassertionthat,inthislatter
case,therealsituationofBcouldnotbe Einsteinistroubledbythe
appearanceofnonlocal
(directly)influencedbyanymeasurement behavior
takenonAis,therefore,withintheframework
ofquantumtheory,unfoundedand(asthe
paradoxshows)unacceptable.

Bythiswayoflookingatthematteritbecomesevidentthattheparadoxforcesustorelinquish
oneofthefollowingtwoassertions:

(i)thedescriptionbymeansofthefunctioniscomplete

(2)therealstatesofspatiallyseparatedobjectsareindependentofeachother.

Ontheotherhand,itispossibletoadhereto(2),ifoneregardsthe
functionasthedescriptionofa(statistical)ensembleofsystems(and Iftheseparatedsystems
areentangled,they
thereforerelinquishes(1)).However,thisviewblaststheframeworkof cannotbeindependent
the"orthodoxquantumtheory."

OnemoreremarktoMargenau'sSec.7.Inthecharacterizationofquantummechanicsthebrief
littlesentencewillbefound:"ontheclassicallevelitcorrespondstoordinarydynamics."Thisis
entirelycorrectcumgranosalisanditispreciselythisgranumsaliswhichissignificantfor
thequestionofinterpretation.

Ifourconcerniswithmacroscopicmasses(billiardballsorstars),weareoperatingwithvery
shortdeBrogliewaves,whicharedeterminativeforthebehaviorofthecenterofgravityofsuch
masses.Thisisthereasonwhyitispossibletoarrangethequantumtheoreticaldescriptionfor
areasonabletimeinsuchamannerthatforthemacroscopicwayofviewingthings,itbecomes
sufficientlypreciseinpositionaswellasinmomentum.Itistruealsothatthissharpnessremains
foralongtimeandthatthequasipointsthusrepresentedbehavejustlikethemasspointsof
classicalmechanics.However,thetheoryshowsalsothat,afterasufficientlylongtime,the
pointlikecharacterofthefunctioniscompletelylosttothecenterofgravitycoordinates,so
thatonecannolongerspeakofanyquasilocalisationofthecentersofgravity.Thepicture
thenbecomes,forexampleinthecaseofasinglemacromasspoint,quitesimilartothat
involvedinasinglefreeelectron.[p.683]

Ifnow,inaccordancewiththeorthodoxposition,Iviewthefunctionasthecomplete
descriptionofarealmatteroffactfortheindividualcase,Icannotbutconsidertheessentially
unlimitedlackofsharpnessofthepositionofthe(macroscopic)bodyasreal.

Ontheotherhand,however,weknowthat,byilluminatingthebodyby
meansofalanternatrestagainstthesystemofcoordinates,wegeta Theideathatlightfalling
onanobjectmakesit
(macroscopicallyjudged)sharpdeterminationofposition.Inorderto moreclassicalis
comprehendthisImustassumethatthatsharplydefinedpositionis assumedbythetheoryof
determinednotmerelybytherealsituationoftheobservedbody,but decoherence
alsobytheactofillumination.Thisisagainaparadox(similartothe
markonthepaperstripintheabovementionedexample).Thespook
disappearsonlyifonerelinquishestheorthodoxstandpoint,accordingtowhichthefunctionis
acceptedasacompletedescriptionofthesinglesystem.

Itmayappearasifallsuchconsiderationswerejustsuperfluouslearnedhairsplitting,which
havenothingtodowithphysicsproper.However,itdependspreciselyuponsuch
considerationsinwhichdirectiononebelievesonemustlookforthefutureconceptualbasisof
physics.Iclosetheseexpositions,whichhavegrownratherlengthy,concerningthe
interpretationofquantumtheorywiththereproductionofabriefconversationwhichIhadwith
animportanttheoreticalphysicist.He:"Iaminclinedtobelieveintelepathy."I:"Thishas
probablymoretodowithphysicsthanwithpsychology."He:"Yes."

TheessaysbyLenzenandNorthropbothaimtotreatmyoccasionalutterancesof
epistemologicalcontentsystematically.FromthoseutterancesLenzenconstructsasynoptic
totalpicture,inwhichwhatismissingintheutterancesiscarefullyandwithdelicacyoffeeling
supplied.Everythingsaidthereinappearstomeconvincingandcorrect.Northropusesthese
utterancesaspointofdepartureforacomparativecritiqueofthemajorepistemological
systems.Iseeinthiscritiqueamasterpieceofunbiasedthinkingandconcisediscussion,which
nowherepermitsitselftobedivertedfromtheessential.Thereciprocalrelationshipof
epistemologyandscienceisofnoteworthykind.Theyaredependentuponeachother.
Epistemology[p.684]withoutcontactwithsciencebecomesanemptyscheme.Sciencewithout
epistemologyisinsofarasitisthinkableatallprimitiveandmuddled.However,no
soonerhastheepistemologist,whoisseekingaclearsystem,foughthiswaythroughtosucha
system,thanheisinclinedtointerpretthethoughtcontentofscienceinthesenseofhissystem
andtorejectwhateverdoesnotfitintohissystem.Thescientist,however,cannotaffordtocarry
hisstrivingforepistemologicalsystematicthatfar.Heacceptsgratefullytheepistemological
conceptualanalysisbuttheexternalconditions,whicharesetforhimbythefactsof
experience,donotpermithimtolethimselfbetoomuchrestrictedintheconstructionofhiscon
ceptualworldbytheadherencetoanepistemologicalsystem.Hethereforemustappeartothe
systematicepistemologistasatypeofunscrupulousopportunist:heappearsasrealistinsofar
asheseekstodescribeaworldindependentoftheactsofperceptionasidealistinsofarashe
looksupontheconceptsandtheoriesasthefreeinventionsofthehumanspirit(notlogically
derivablefromwhatisempiricallygiven)aspositivistinsofarasheconsidershisconceptsand
theoriesjustifiedonlytotheextenttowhichtheyfurnishalogicalrepresentationofrelations
amongsensoryexperiences.HemayevenappearasPlatonistorPythagoreaninsofarashe
considerstheviewpointoflogicalsimplicityasanindispensableandeffectivetoolofhis
research.

AllofthisissplendidlyelucidatedinLenzen'sandNorthrop'sessays.

AndnowafewremarksconcerningtheessaysbyE.A.Milne,G.Lemaitre,andL.Infeldas
concernsthecosmologicalproblem:

ConcerningMilne'singeniousreflectionsIcanonlysaythatIfindtheirtheoreticalbasistoo
narrow.Frommypointofviewonecannotarrive,bywayoftheory,atanyatleastsomewhat
reliableresultsinthefieldofcosmology,ifonemakesnouseoftheprincipleofgeneral
relativity.

AsconcernsLemaitre'sargumentsinfavorofthesocalled"cosmologicalconstant"inthe
equationsofgravitation,Imustadmitthattheseargumentsdonotappeartomeassufficiently
convincinginviewofthepresentstateofourknowledge.Theintroductionofsuchaconstant
impliesaconsiderable[p.685]renunciationofthelogicalsimplicityoftheory,arenunciation
whichappearedtomeunavoidableonlysolongasonehadnoreasontodoubttheessentially
staticnatureofspace.AfterHubble'sdiscoveryofthe"expansion"ofthestellarsystem,and
sinceFriedmann'sdiscoverythattheunsupplementedequationsinvolvethepossibilityofthe
existenceofanaverage(positive)densityofmatterinanexpandinguniverse,theintroduction
ofsuchaconstantappearstome,fromthetheoreticalstandpoint,atpresentunjustified.

Thesituationbecomescomplicatedbythefactthattheentiredurationoftheexpansionof
spacetothepresent,basedontheequationsintheirsimplestform,turnsoutsmallerthan
appearscredibleinviewofthereliablyknownageofterrestrialminerals.Buttheintroductionof
the"cosmologicalconstant'"offersabsolutelynonaturalescapefromthedifficulty.Thislatter
difficultyisgivenbywayofthenumericalvalueofHubble'sexpansionconstantandtheage
measurementofminerals,completelyindependentofanycosmologicaltheory,providedthat
oneinterpretstheHubbleeffectasDopplereffect.

Everythingfinallydependsuponthequestion:Canaspectrallinebeconsideredasameasure
ofa"propertime"(EigenZeit)ds(ds2=gik dxidxk ),(ifonetakesintoconsiderationregionsof
cosmicdimensions)?Istheresuchathingasanaturalobjectwhichincorporatesthe"natural
measuringstick"independentlyofitspositioninfourdimensionalspace?Theaffirmationofthis
questionmadetheinventionofthegeneraltheoryofrelativitypsychologicallypossible)however
thissuppositionislogicallynotnecessary.Fortheconstructionofthepresenttheoryofrelativity
thefollowingisessential:

(1)Physicalthingsaredescribedbycontinuousfunctions,fieldvariablesoffourco
ordinates.Aslongasthetopologicalconnectionispreserved,theselattercanbefreely
chosen.
(2)Thefieldvariablesaretensorcomponentsamongthetensorsisasymmetricaltensor
gikforthedescriptionofthegravitationalfield.
(3)Therearephysicalobjects,which(inthemacroscopicfield)measuretheinvariantds.

[p.686]If(1)and(2)areaccepted,(3)isplausible,butnotnecessary.Theconstructionof
mathematicaltheoryrestsexclusivelyupon(1)and(2).Acompletetheoryofphysicsasa
totality,inaccordancewith(1)and(2)doesnotyetexist.Ifitdidexist,therewouldbenoroom
forthesupposition(3).Fortheobjectsusedastoolsformeasurementdonotleadan
independentexistencealongsideoftheobjectsimplicatedbythefieldequations.Itisnot
necessarythatoneshouldpermitone'scosmologicalconsiderationstoberestrainedbysucha
scepticalattitudebutneithershouldonecloseone'smindtowardsthemfromthevery
beginning.

ThesereflectionsbringmetoKarlMenger'sessay.Forthequantumfactssuggestthe
suspicionthatdoubtmayalsoberaisedconcerningtheultimateusefulnessoftheprogram
characterizedin(1)and(2).Thereexiststhepossibilityofdoubtingonly(2)and,indoingso,to
questionthepossibilityofbeingableadequatelytoformulatethelawsbymeansofdifferential
equations,withoutdropping(1).Themoreradicaleffortofsurrendering(1)with(2)appearsto
meandIbelievetoDr.Mengeralsotoliemorecloselyathand.Solongasnoonehas
newconcepts,whichappeartohavesufficientconstructivepower,meredoubtremainsthisis,
unfortunately,myownsituation.Adheringtothecontinuumoriginateswithmenotinaprejudice,
butarisesoutofthefactthatIhavebeenunabletothinkupanythingorganictotakeitsplace.
Howisonetoconservefourdimensionalityinessence(orinnearapproximation)and[atthe
sametime]surrenderthecontinuum?

L.Infeld'sessayisanindependentlyunderstandable,excellentintroductionintothesocalled
"cosmologicalproblem"ofthetheoryofrelativity,whichcriticallyexaminesallessentialpoints.

MaxvonLaue:Anhistoricalinvestigationofthedevelopmentoftheconservationpostulates,
which,inmyopinion,isoflastingvalue.Ithinkitwouldbeworthwhiletomakethisessayeasily
accessibletostudentsbywayofindependentpublication.[p.687]InspiteofseriouseffortsI
havenotsucceededinquiteunderstandingH.Dingle'sessay,notevenasconcernsitsaim.Is
theideaofthespecialtheoryofrelativitytobeexpandedinthesensethatnewgroup
characteristics,whicharenotimpliedbytheLorentzinvariance,aretobepostulated?Arethese
postulatesempiricallyfoundedoronlybywayofatrial"posited"?Uponwhatdoesthe
confidenceintheexistenceofsuchgroupcharacteristicsrest?

KurtGdel'sessayconstitutes,inmyopinion,animportantcontributiontothegeneraltheoryof
relativity,especiallytotheanalysisoftheconceptoftime.Theproblemhereinvolveddisturbed
mealreadyatthetimeofthebuildingupofthegeneraltheoryofrelativity,withoutmyhaving
succeededinclarifyingit.Entirelyasidefromtherelationofthetheoryofrelativitytoidealistic
 philosophyortoanyphilosophicalformulationofquestions,theproblempresentsitselfas
follows:

IfPisaworldpoint,a"lightcone"(ds2=0)belongstoit.We
drawa"timelike"worldlinethroughPandonthisline
observethecloseworldpointsBandA,separatedbyP.
Doesitmakeanysensetoprovidetheworldlinewithan
arrow,andtoassertthatBisbeforeP,AafterP?Iswhat
remainsoftemporalconnectionbetweenworldpointsinthe
theoryofrelativityanasymmetricalrelation,orwouldonebe
justasmuchjustified,fromthephysicalpointofview,to
indicatethearrowintheoppositedirectionandtoassertthat
AisbeforeP,BafterP?

Inthefirstinstancethealternativeisdecidedinthenegative,ifwearejustifiedinsaying:Ifitis
possibletosend(totelegraph)asignal(alsopassingbyinthecloseproximityofP)fromBto
A,butnotfromAtoB)thentheonesided(asymmetrical)characteroftimeissecured,i.e.,
thereexistsnofreechoiceforthedirectionofthearrow.Whatisessentialinthisisthefactthat
thesendingofasignalis,inthesenseofthermodynamics,anirreversibleprocess,aprocess
whichisconnected[p.688]withthegrowthofentropy(whereas,accordingtoourpresent
knowledge,allelementaryprocessesarereversible).If,therefore,BandAaretwo,sufficiently
neighboring,worldpoints,whichcanbeconnectedbyatimelikeline,thentheassertion:"Bis
beforeA"makesphysicalsense.Butdoesthisassertionstillmakesense,ifthepoints,which
areconnectablebythetimelikeline,arearbitrarilyfarseparatedfromeachother?Certainly
not,ifthereexistpointseriesconnectablebytimelikelinesinsuchawaythateachpoint
precedestemporallytheprecedingone,andiftheseriesisclosedinitself.Inthatcasethe
distinction"earlierlater"isabandonedforworldpointswhichliefarapartinacosmological
sense,andthoseparadoxes,regardingthedirectionofthecausalconnection,arise,ofwhich
Mr.Gdelhasspoken.

Suchcosmologicalsolutionsofthegravitationequations(withnotvanishingconstant)have
beenfoundbyMr.Gdel.Itwillbeinterestingtoweighwhetherthesearenottobeexcludedon
physicalgrounds.

******
IhavethedistressingfeelingthatIhaveexpressedmyself,inthisreply,notmerelysomewhat
longwindedlybutalsorathersharply.Thisobservationmayserveasmyexcuse:onecanreally
quarrelonlywithhisbrothersorclosefriends}othersaretooalien[forthat].

P.S.TheprecedingremarksrefertoessayswhichwereinmyhandsattheendofJanuary
1949.InasmuchasthevolumewastohaveappearedinMarch,itwashightimetowritedown
thesereflections.

AftertheyhadbeenconcludedIlearnedthatthepublicationofthevolumewouldexperiencea
furtherdelayandthatsomeadditionalimportantessayshadcomein.Idecided,nevertheless,
nottoexpandmyremarksfurther,whichhadalreadybecometoolong,andtodesistfromtaking
anypositionwithreferencetothoseessayswhichcameintomyhandsaftertheconclusionof
myremarks.

InstituteofAdvancedStudy
Princeton,NewJersey
February1,1949

Chapter1.5ThePhilosophers Chapter2.1TheProblemofKnowledge
Home PartTwoKnowledge

Normal|Teacher|Scholar
ContactUs SiteMap PoweredbyskyBuilders CreativeCommonsAttributionLicense