Eur J Phys 1 1 (l9go) 65-74

Prtnled In the UK

65

Atoms and consciousness as complementary elements of reality
K V Laurikainen
Research Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Helsinki, Siltavuorenpenger 20 C, SF-00170 Helsinki, Finland Received 17 July 1989, in final form 26 October 1989
Abstract. Describing Wolfgang Pauli’s philosophical views is a delicate matter. In addition to his extensive study of Kepler, Pauli published only short epistemological articles (not available in English translation). His extraordinarily wide correspondence is the best source for understanding Pauli’s philosophical thought. Forming a coherent picture of Pauli’s philosophy on the basis of his correspondence is, however, like doing a puzzle where half of the pieces are missing. I have been doing this puzzle for more than ten years, inspired by the exceptionally profound ideas presented in the available documents, and wish to draw more general attention to Pauli’s philosophy. This article aims at describing the conception of reality which Pauli shaped on the basis of quantum theory. It points out in particular that philosophical and psychological viewpoints which Pauli has emphasised, are inconsistent with important trends in basic research today. Characteristic quotations from Pauli’s writings, related to the questions discussed here, are given in the appendix.

Zusammenfassung. Es isteine delikate Aufgabe, die philosophischen Auffassungen von Wolfgang Pauli zu beschreiben. Nach seiner ausfiihrlichen Kepler-Studie publizierte Pauli nur sehr kurze epistemologische Abhandlungen (die nicht als englische ubersetzungen erhaltlich sind). Seine ausserordentlich umfangreiche Korrespondenz ist die beste Quelle, wenn man Paulis philosophisches Denken kennen lernen will. Will man auf dieser Basis ein Gesamtbild von Paulis Philosophie gestalten, ist es jedoch wie ein Legespiel, bei dem die Stiickchen zur Halfte fehlen. Ich habe dieses Legespiel mehr als zehn Jahre lang gespielt, begeistert von den ausserordentlich tiefsinnigen Ideen, die man in den vorhandenen Dokumenten findet, und nun mochte ich grossere Aufmerksamkeit auf d i e s Philosophie ziehen. Der Artikel versucht, die Wirklichkeitsidee zu beschreiben, die Pauli auf Grund der Quantentheorie gestaltet hat. Es wird insbesondere darauf aufmerksam gemacht, dass die philosophischen und psychologischen Gesichtspunkte, die Pauli betont hat, mit wichtigen Tendenzen in der heutigen Grundlagenforschung unvereinbar sind. Im Anhang sind charakteristische Zitate aus Paulis Schriften gegeben, die Beriihrungspunkte mit den hier diskutierten Fragen haben.

which is completely opposite to this direction of the endeavour.AccordingtoPauli, it isimpossible t o As the interest in the philosophical problems of quanmake any strict distinction between the ‘inner world’ tum theory is clearly increasing again, I must state and the ‘outer world’; in the description of the ‘outer with astonishment that the profound epistemological world’, it is, on the contrary, necessary to take into views of Wolfgang Pauli [ l ] seem to have remained account psychic factors which set essential limitations totally unnoticed so far. The aim now, in general, is toon the empirical knowledge in general and which have present and to interpret quantum theory in a such way appearedespeciallyclearlyinatomicphysics (see that the requirements of philosophical ‘realism’ are appendix, AI). satisfied. ‘realism’ Here is always understood as requiring the that material ‘outer world’ be can described objectively, i.e. without referring in any way 2. Veiled reality to the psychic properties of the observer [2]. When analysing observations and the theory forThe fact that requires a change in the conception of mationinatomicphysics,Pauliwasledto a view reality is the renunciation of determinism in atomic
0143-0%07/90/010065 10 903 50 @ 1990 IOP Publlshlng Lld 8 The European Physlcal Soclety +

1. Introduction

An example is the investigation of the beginning phases of our universe. meansthatevolutionhasan irrational aspect which. ‘Laws of nature’ have reference only to statistical mean values [3] (see A2). in general. of course. without any ‘subjective’ elements of psychic origin. The same criticism applies to cosmic evolution. however. In several places Pauli criticises the way biologists use the concept of ‘chance’ in neo-Darwinistic theories. be separated from the role nature.inprinciple. It sets limitationsthe to rational descriptionof phenomena: sucha description cannot refer to individual events but only to their average progress. Pauli calls this belief the repression of the irrational. However. namely for describing the nature reality in of a world where causality is not deterministic but statis. however. introduced by tiontheterm ‘will’. which Pauli strongly emphasises. Inthis research. It is the scattering of individual events around the average behaviour that Pauli emphasises as a fact in which the irrationality of reality appears. 3. We are going to use this term here in This. is a product of the unconscious processes with a ‘scientistic’ belief held by many natural scienin our psyche which guide our ‘gestalt’ formation in tists: science is consideredastheonlyacceptable perception as well as our thought (see A4).theirrationality of reality. New perspectives for physics The conception of reality which the researcher has. This must be recognised as a n empirical result of fundamental character. makes each rational description of reality incomplete. therefore. many physicists consider modern cosmoCharacteristic of Pauli’s thought is emphasis on the logical theories to be a scientific counterpart of ‘crearole of theunconscious in the forming ofempirical tion’ or a description of the ‘technique of creation’if knowledge. was totally different the from however. In fact. be directly ascribed to Pauli. They are. The irrationality of realmisconception. His cannot. .66 K V Laurikainen physics. ‘realism’. Creation is irrational by its very [6]. which today enjoy a great interest among physicists. in Pauli’s thought. It is a characteristic feature of Western thought that this rationality is consideredto be animperativeproperty of reality: it is presupposed that everything that real is is rational. one can theme in Pauli’s extensive article concerning Kepler say:unscientific. This choice cannot be described by any rational theory. belongs to the realm of religion. and any attempt todescribe it with the aid of rational scientific theories implies a fundamental played by the unconscious. influences his work more thanhe usually knows himself. people assume without hesitation that rational laws are capable of explaining theevolution of the universe afterthe ‘Big Bang’. the latter acentral was ing makes such ideas quite unfounded-a. Pauli wasa realist because he especially stressed the importance of striving for a new conception ofreality t Remarks made in this section and in the next one which would be compatible with atomic physics. psychology of C G Jung and in the Neo-Platonian The conception of reality which we are now studyphilosophy of the Renaissance. which is importantboth in the principle. Statistical causality. borrowedfromSchopenhauer. and this concept. I also refer to the Appendix ‘The Possibilityof Science and Its Limits’ in my book Beyond the Atom Pauli understood ‘realism’ in adeeper sense: he found the ‘objective’ description of the ‘outer world’ to be impossible because of the psychic processes belonging to thefield of the unconscious. unmotivatedt. The regularities we can find in nature are an expression of the rational features ofreality. rather straightforward consequences of the picture of Pauli’s philosophy I have been able to form for ‘realism’ which aims at describing the ‘outer world’ myself. himself. taking place in perception and in the formation of theories (see AS). He was especially interested in the concreation itself is considered to be an act which. implies that the phenomenal world is open to ‘irrational influences’. individual In events. if this is considered as a stepwise stochastic process. something always comes up which cannot be described in any rational way. We are forced to generalise the traditional ideaofcausality:it is possible to find laws for the statistical mean values of physical quantities but not for their values in individual events. i. cannot be excluded from the scientific picture of the tical: the irrationality ofreality forms a veil which world. appears as a choice between different possibilities.understood in this way. d’Espagnat [S].in cept of archetype. makes purely rational description of perhaps a slightly more general way than d’Espagnat Creation can be evolution impossible. The essential presupposition in natural science is. A pertinent term for describing the ‘reality itself in Pauli seems to have interpreted the ‘irrationality of reality’ as a teleological aspect. the ‘veil’ which hidesreality fromhuman the evolution of the universe seems to be connected knowledge. The emphasis put on the irrationality of reality cannot. Dl. and they make the rational description of nature possible.e. Ihavein anotherconnection described in more detail Pauli’s conception of realityand simultaneously criticised some attempts to eliminate the irrationality [4]. The Copenhagen interpretation implies explicitly therenunciation of deterministic causality. using in this connecquantum theory is veiled reality. The irrationality of reality makes many of the research programmes. The breaking down of determinism makes this belief unfounded (see A3). that all the eventsin the phenomenal ‘outer world’ have causes in this same phenomenal world. The great interest in these theories of ity. of course. in each quantum step.

Some scientists actively use these ‘new scientific myths’ a infight againstthe traditional religious beliefs. It is important to make a distinction. I have presented some criticism of such attempts wish here. say particle 1. at first. ‘Paradoxes’ arise from where the spin states are not disturbed in any way. is of principle. . the spins the two particles are opposite of to each other. as we supposed. The ‘paradox’ in this situation is that we can ‘influence’ the spin state of particle 2 by turning the magnetic field in A. Thischaracteristic of abilities for the spin state of particle 2 . The direction of this magnetic field can be freely chosen. It is important to note that the result is independent of the direction of the magnetic fields in A and B. Thus. the very nature of the basic problems created by quantum theory-as Pauli and many other philosophically oriented physicistshave understood the situation-is neglected. behaviour ofthissystemwithrespect to spins.Atoms and complementary consciousness as elements o reality f 67 spin states are not disturbed between the interaction in the beginning and the subsequent observation of the spin states. formed as 1 of particle 2 in region B far away.we call them particles 1 and 2 . if only the field in B is then chosen parallel to it. if the spin of is the spin-singlet state which was produced by the inter. The EPR problem emphasised by d’Espagnat. particle 2 in region B also has a definitespin state. do not accept any irrationality reality are in a littlelater observedin aspace region A while particle forced to confuse these two concepts of reality.particle 1 is given. could ‘turn’ the spin direction of the other particle far away. When the spin probability of 100% if the situation is such that the 1 state of particle is observed. Thus. and in certain cases these predicaction of bothparticles. and as soon as the spin state of particle 1 is observed (it is either ‘up’ or ‘down’with respect to the field direction). is described with the aid of a spin function which spin states of both particles are observed. we know with certainty thespin state of particle 2 which is far away in region B. wavefunction we can make certain predictions of the If the spin states are not disturbed. confusing these twoconcepts. and then they fly far apart in a situation pletely in anyrational way. thespin state is changed ‘religion’ for a scientist.4] and do not to go into details An enormous amount of unnecessary work has been doneand will continuetobe so because this of unfounded aim.by freely turning the magnetic field in A. in the form David Bohm has proposed for it. With the aid of this using parallel magnetic fields in the regions A and B. In this case both the idea of the spin direction of particle 2 before observation and the ‘turning’ direction of this are macrophysicalimages which lack a counterpart in the microworld. as if a materialistic conception of reality is accepted. in The spin state of one the particles. between the empirical reality which we investigate in physics. as especially 4. At first the particles empirical research [8]. This independent reality coninteract in such away that aspin-singlet state is tains irrationality and it can never be described comproduced. which fromour point of view are made in the wrong direction. but the direction of the spins is indefinite. In the results of these correlated spin observations are particular. but one should be more awareofthe limitsof science than physicists and astronomers seem often to be.and especially The question one of how the observation the spin is of the ‘state’ is described with the aid of the state funcstate of particle in region Acan ‘affect’ the spin state tion (wavefunction). elsewhere [ 1. we can freely choose the direction of the magnetic field in the region A. This is a typical quantum mechanical situation and it is worth adetaileddiscussion. it is not necessary to observe thespin state of particle 2 at all: as soon as thespin state of particle l is observed in A. Thus. Of course such extrapolations approaching the very ‘beginningof the universe’ have certain interest.It is as ifwe. as some kind of rational game. In general it aims today at findinga way of rescuing the objectivity of the ‘outer world’. supposing that these fields are parallel. let us think of a positive example of how the consideration of consciousness eliminates the ‘paradoxes’ of quantum theory in a natural way. a result of an interaction between the particles 1 and We consider thesimplest case and suppose that the 2 . In the spinsinglet state. The‘paradox’ arises from mixing macrophysical ideas with microphysical ones. An analogouscriticism is needed with respect to the general trend of basic research in atomic theory. 2 is simultaneously in a regionB far fromregion A (as The propertiesof empirical reality are described by can be inferred from the conservation momentum). Instead of criticising attempts. by refers to this system as a whole.andpeoplewho. The spin-singlet state. in spite of the problems which the complementarity of the atomic world created. Microphysical systems are not describable any rational way any more than in allowed by the quantum theoretical description. and the indeConsider a system of two identical particles withspin pendent reality which always remains ‘behind a veil’ in +. of using quantumtheoreticalconcepts. this wavefunction gives definite probalways opposite to each other. Spin is atypical quantum theoretical variable with discrete values (‘up’ or ‘down’) in each definite case. We think of the typical EPR situation [7]. while Pauli often emphasised that for him “the ‘motivating forces’of both scientific understanding and religious belief are the same”. means one has This that tries to describerealityneglecting the roleofspirit(of the observer).This is the result with a tions are certain (probability 100%).

we obtain additional wish to take an essential step further in physics. which is intimately conmore in our description). We imagine that we can describe situations in an independent reality than from a continuum. He seems to have expected macrophysical visions and ideas which do not have that one should start from a discrete physics rather any counterpart in the microworld. space and time need special attention if we state) with the aidof the spin-singlet function. It is generally thought that. This is a question of intuition and imaginamechanicsitresults in anew statefunction which tion. The theory of relativity is a macrophysical theory and presupposes. we can onlyreach empirical ishinglyweak so far. namely the belief in an independent ideas have also been presented by Ari Lehto [lo]. at some remarks Pauli made in letters. been used in the observation andit does not exist any The concept of causality. before it will be possible to find a way for a natural transition from discrete microphysics to conregion B is a purely psychic phenomenon. Probably further clarification of a that we are describing an ‘independentreality’. This is the Pierre Noyes et a/ seem interesting. and thereforethey must be we can describe the state function aas ‘gestalt’(shape) of the system as a whole. The crucial concepts of physlcs however. change that irrationality is connected with the functioning we of our description of the state because we have ‘become our unconscious. and I am not able say much more than to hint to corresponds to this new knowledge of the situation. It is just a result of a new ‘shaping’ (‘gestalting’) of the situation tinuous macrophysics. of course. Themost essential change inphysics tion which again makes certain predictions possible. the ideas of Ted Bastin. In this respect. of our ability to change our view of a situation far away from us on the basis of some additional inforthe spacetime continuum. It is as if some mathematical reality and it has limitations caused by our limited senses and the imperfection of our rational theories.perhapsideasconcerningtopology. tion of the physical world. No signal can be transmitted in this way. In fact. This ‘gestalt’ is formed on considered as belonging to the irrational ‘veil’ which we should try to penetrate. The upperlimit of signal velocities ining of the ideas of thetheoriesof relativity and in the theory of relativity does not concern the ‘speed’ quantum physics. is also critical in this respect. the main features of the processes that take place in A ‘paradox’originatesfromanattemptto neglect the unconscious in physical theory formationin order consciousness as the complementary element of realto find any natural widening of the rational descripity (see A6). This kind of description of microsystems only con. and can describe the spin we state of particle 2 with the aid of a certain spin func. our two-particlesystem we describeits‘gestalt’(its Therefore. before the observation concerning particle 1 is made and that this direction is ‘turned’ in the observation Pauli often repeats the remark that the spacetime continuum is rather tooeasily introduced into contemmade in region A. have know something of particle 2 alone (particle 1 has concerned these concepts.during this century explicitly concerns this concept: the decline of determinism and the introduction of cerns empiricalreality. in empirical reality: our vision of realityis changed on It is obvious that this problem is intimately connected to the great problem of a harmonious combthe basis of the information.characteristic of human (including the preparation process which determines the situation in which systems are investigated). In reality inwhich everythingcan be describedina general. interest in discrete physics has been astonrational way. In psyche. and this results in a new ‘gestalt’: we the theory of relativity and in quantum theory. ‘Paradoxes’ arise we imagine if statistical causality. An observation means ideas become possible on the basis of this conception ‘becoming conscious of something’. both in information. the concepts of space and time are expressions of our psyche. and in the Eastern philosophiesthey are considered as belonging to the illusions of our senses.are still The ‘influence’ on the spin direction particle 2 in of missing. It does not contain any ‘paradox’. if we include the complementary element of reality in the description of the situation: the It remains to try to show what kind of constructive consciousness of the observer. then we apply to microsystems porary physics (see A7). with theaidoftherationalpicturesandconcepts which are applicable in the macroworld.nected with the conceptionof reality. the most important changes in physics. When the spin of particle 1 is measured. but the limiting case of macrophysicsis not satisfactorilydescribed in main origin of the ‘paradoxes’ which people find in these attempts so far [9]. Kantcalls space and time the basisof theobservation we have made of it theforms of perception. a concept belonging to the macroworld. The question of a . which we form on the basis of certain observations. we should try to form some idea of conscious of something’ thatwe did not know earlier.5. If we this concept is still needed before physics can essentiimagine that particle 2 has a certain spin direction ally proceed.60 K V Laurikainen and we have to forma new state function on the basis ‘independent reality’ butjustourimageof reality of this observation. Such a discontinuous change of the wavefunction because of an observation is the notorious ‘reduction of the wavepacket’. In the language the psychological ‘gestalt theory’ of in the first place. in its present form. In quantum of reality. If we think his Because of an observation must. In fact. Someinterestingdiscrete quantum theory. ideas. while quantum theory intromation! The change does not concern systems in the duces discontinuity into physics.

of 6.The English translations of letters havebeen made by Eugene Holman. or ‘spin down’ for particle This is the very nature of the ‘irrationality of reality’: nature always ‘makes a choice’betweendifferent states which are possible according to the statistical law.often said. The quotations presented this appendix aim to in give characteristic examples of Pauli’s writings related to thequestions discussed inthisarticle. . where the original German text has also been published. After these two choices have been made-ne is made by theobserver.complementary consciousness and as elements Atoms of reality 69 only because paying attention toit presupposes other harmonious fusion of these great theories is decisive. really no longer the same: only the statistical averages remain. closely connected with the and articles role of the spirit in the conception reality (see A8). cal analogies between the concept of field in physics and the concept of the unconscious inpsychology [ 1l]. consciousness. however. only because it is not possible to describe them in the Quantum field theories explicitly concern these same convincing way as rational aspects. The individual case is occasio and not causa. both in the form inwhich it appears inclassical field theories and andtruth(Wahrheit)arecomplementary. The creative elementin the world is clearly connected with the future. It is important. and are taken from the author’s book Beyond the Atom [l]. and the irrationalityimplies afreedorn which makes the creativity possible (see A9). Al. Department of English. Quotations from Pauli’s letters had a very decisive role. The physically unique individual is no longer separable from the observerand for this reason it goes through the meshes of the net of physics. the conservative element. 1951 (PLC? Now there comes the major crisis of the quantum of action: one has to sacrifice the unique individual and the ‘sense’ ofitin orderto save an objective and rational description of the phenomena. see [l]. I am inclined to see in this occasio which includes within itself the observer and the selection of theexperimentalprocedure whichhe has hit upon -a revenue of the anima mundi which was pushed aside in theseventeenthcentury(naturally ‘in an altered form’). for Pauli the concept field seems to have of Appendlx.theotherone by nature-a certain state (situation) has created in the empiribeen cal reality.asBohr in its quantum theoretical form. questions. These unconscious processes also produce our basic concepts. In general. Heresomethinghasremainedopen which previously appeared to be closed. He found metaphysi. These remarks perhaps show that the irrationality of reality opens new vistas. It is important to note that Pauli was not Logic without intuition creates a distorted picture at all satisfied with the present field theories. The unity of the ‘outer world’ and the ‘inner world’ Letter Markus to 0092. He found of the world-even in pure physics! Clarity (Klarheit) the concept of field to be unsatisfactory. there are differentpossibilities. which are uniformly simultaneously physical and psychological. The normal attitude among physicists today is to presupposethateverything inphysics can be described without anyreference to psychic or metaphysical concepts. University of Helsinki. can force themselves through this gap in place of ‘parallelism’. In the spin experiment. ‘This moment’. Empirical reality is created in those choices made by the observer and by nature. Irrationality and Creativity It is important to notice that in the process in which we form a picture of theempirical reality (form a ‘gestalt’ for it) there is always a certainfreedom. Itis quite arbitrary to cut the other off partoftheprocess of observation. t Pauli letter collection. which finds its expression in the laws of nature. Such views will be discussedin another journal [ 121.we can freely choose the direction of the magneticfield to be used when measuring the spin of particle 1. ‘now’. Irrational aspects of reality cannot be omitted be necessary as a starting point. thesame. contains both of these aspects. and it is my hope that new concepts. to think that empirical knowledgeis based on unconscious processes in which the observer ‘becomes conscious of something’. not only for physics itself but also for its relations to more general questions of existence. May ‘more successful offspring’ attain this. Thus. and the constructive creativity presupposes a balance between these basic elements of existence. ingeneral. La donna e mobile-so are the anima mundi and the occasio. nature also has a choice in reacting to the problem we have posed to it: nature ‘chooses’ either the state ‘spin up’ 1. Pauli’s articles quoted here are not available in English translation. kinds of ideas than we are familiar with in physical and the development of purely discretephysics may a research.078) Fierz. indeed. If two observers d o the same thing even physically it is. When we have made our choice. October 13. and nature ‘chooses’between them in each individual case. is connected with the past. The irrationality of reality always contains apossibility for creating something new.

I was trying to give a name to the positive principle which lies at the basis of quantum mechanics. originally published in the journal Theorie und Experiment (1952 Tire de Dialectica 6/2) ‘Experientia’ and now available as anoffprint. in a way which would Platos vorschlagen. Es ist interessant.dass auchdie neueste Richtung in der Psychologiedes Unbewussten. N Bohrs Komplementaritat). sobald die Endlichkeit des Wirkungsquantums insSpiel kommt. Dieser Begriff der Psychologie Jungs. 1949 (PLC 0092. being causally determined. einen Seite und den Begriffen auf der andern Seite. das heisst als ein zur Deckung kommen von praexistenten continuum (wave image) and discontinuum (particle image). Zur Festlegung der Eigenschaften der atomaren Objekte hat der Beobachter gemass dieser Theorie die freie Wahl zwischen Versuchsanordnungen. die von der reinen Logik nicht konstruiert werden kann. die ich hier als ein echtes ‘Symbol’ auffassen mochte. 21 245-250. November 26. .70 K V Laurikainen Naturwissenschaftliche erkenntnistheoretische und Aspekte derIdeen vom Unbewussten(1954 Dialectica 8/41 Diese Problematik ist ein Teil der in der Quantenmechanik wesentlichen Tatsache. die der Mensch beim Verstehen. ferner durch eine Veranderung seines alteren Begriffes ‘Archetypen’. . dass jedes Verstehen ein langwieriger Prozess ist. den taumzeitlichen Ablauf der Prozesse andererseits (Heisenbergs Unsicherheitsrelation. die nichtgedacht. anordnende Faktoren. Dem Nichtpsychischen versucht Jung durch einen besonderen Begriff ‘psychoid’ Rechnung zu tragen. erste Schritt hierzu war ihre Begegnung mit der Alchemie. then. das heisst bewusstwerden einer neuen mechanical description of nature. (After putting forwardwave mechanics he continues to speak ofa ‘correspondence argument’ ”see Naturw. den Vorgang des Verstehens der specifically characterise the positive side of quantum a Natur sowie auch dieBegliickung. Die cal theory’ in Bohr’s writings. nunmehr von C G Jung auch fur unanschauliche. namlich die von C G Jung vertretene.der lange vor der rationalen Formulierbarkeitdes Bewusstseinsinhaltes durch Prozesse im Unbewussten eingeleitet wird: auf der vorbewussten Stufe der Erkenntnissind an Stelle vonklaren Begriffen Bilder mitstarkem emotionalemGehaltvorhanden. Die moderne Psychologie hat betreffend die Erkenntnissituation Nachweis den erbracht. sondern gleichsam malend geschaut werden.063) Bohr’s expression ‘correspondence’ served as an aid to me when. dessen Wirkungenaufdasvonihm mit geeigneten Instrumentenbeobachtete System nicht mehr kompensiert werden konnen. Ibidem Es erscheint mirnuniiberausbemerkenswert. Die gesuchte Briicke zwischen Sinnesempfindungen und Ideen oder Begriffen scheint anordnende durch Operatoren oder Faktoren(die ich aber im Gegensatz zu Bernays nichtals ‘rational’ bezeichnen mochte) bedingt zu sein.of course. top of the second column.die von der Welt der Erscheinungen verschieden ist und sowohl Psyche als Physis. It is certainly this statistical correspondence which mediates between Erkenntnis empfindet. als eine Entsprechung. In my lecture oncomplementarity. A2.) There I did not explicitly Brucke zwischen den Sinneswahrnehmungen auf der . beruht nach dieser Auffassung auf einer unserer Willkurentzogenen kosmischen Ordnung. on the other hand. das zum Beispiel Kepler fur die (platonischen)praexistenten Bilder verwendet. in quantum mechanics been interpreted as the last law-governed fact which cannot be further reduced (approximately as was the case for Galileo with respect to uniformly acceleratedfallingbodies).) That statistical behaviour of many similar individual systems which have no contact whatsoever with another (‘windowless monads’). (This in a somewhat more general way than inneren Bildern der menschlichen Psyche mitausseren the mediation between ‘quantum theory’ and ‘classiObjekten und ihrem Verhalten zu interpretieren. der ursprunglich synonym mit ‘urtiimliches Bild’ gebraucht wurde. dass das Wort ‘Archetypus’.auch hinsichtlichseiner allmahlichen Veranderung und Entwicklung kurz erlautert werden. moge durch die folgenden chronologisch geordnetenZitate. die einander im allgemeinen ausschliessen.Er istnicht zu trennenvon Jungs bereits erwahnterIdee einer kollektiv-archaischen Schicht desUnbewussten. 1933. von denen auch die vorbegrimiche Schicht der symbolischen Bilder beherrscht wird. Die Stellung des Beobachters andert sich dementsprechend in der Quantenphysik von der zu der eines Haneines verborgenen Zuschauers delnden.dieimstandeist. den ich hier nichtals bekannt voraussetze. dass dieWechselwirkungen der Messinstrumente mit dem beobachteten System teilweise unbestimmbar bleiben.mythologische Motive spontan zu reproduzieren. has. without. sowohl Subjekt als Objekt umfasst. particularly the passage on page 246. Insbesondere betrifft dies Bewegungsgrosse und Energie einerseits. Statistical causalltylstatistical correspondence Letter to Fierz. I thus Ich mochte deshalb in Anlehnung an die Philosophie tried to use the expression ‘correspondence’ in a more general sense than Bohr had. die sich sowohl psychisch als auch physisch manifestieren sollen. gebraucht wird. eine Entwicklung in Richtung der Anerkennung des Nichtpsychischen in Verbindung mit dern Problem der psychophysischen Einheit genommen Der hat.

I mean by the ‘objective significance of the counter Diesem irrationalen Aspektderkonkreten Erscheinungen. whichis something completely different from ‘crystalclear’. Thesymbol which expresses A3. He senses here at once a certain danger that the concept the ‘unconscious’ of hasthe tendency towithdrawPlatonicallyinto a ‘metaphysical space’.central point here is always observation. differently from what is the case in classical physics and in such Wahrscheinlichkeit und Physik (1954 Dialectica 8/2) things as its field concept. remaining in a ‘metaphysical space’. every feeling is personal. Perhaps ‘personality’ is specifically this unique irrational intervention in the regularly and more frequently. among other things also within physics. indeed The only thingI wanted to say in the Kepler article toinclude this wholeness and indivisibility in the was the following: in its struggle for wholeness definition of the ‘phenomenon’.) The single systems of quantum mechanics are ‘windowless monads’and. The und der Konflikt ‘Naturwissenschaft-gefuhlsmassigposition which stands in opposition to the natural intuitive Gegenposition’ ” 1953 (PLC 0092.he attempted to apply to this ethics (good-evil. as a wholeness and indivisibility of an experimental propossibility. a general model f o r the resolution of conflicts.private. rather. Personal is not the opposite of objective! What von Ganzheitlichkeit im physikalischen Geschehen. Actually. die sich sonach nicht wie zum aversion to the concept of the ‘unconscious’? Seen Beispiel die thermodynamischen Wahrscheinlichkeiten completelyapartfromthepersonal views he conder klassischen Physik durch Hilfsannahmen auf tinuously points out that the utilisation of this condeterministischeNaturgesetzezuruckfiihren lassen. die derAktualitiit nach festgestellt sind. ohne das Phanomen wesentlich zu andern. but not private. cedure used in quantum mechanics. W Heisenberg und N Bohr. also give expression to the Hierdurch bekommt die Beobachtung den Charakter irrationalintervention of observationand its consequences as potentiality. from the expected statistical fluctuations).since the observation modern physics gives a model for the unification of interrupts the connection of phenomena in an ‘irraopposites (conjunctio). He says that in this psychology it should also allen voran M Born. Because of it the ‘reality’ of the $-function becomes ‘symbolic’. as it was manifested in physics.oder Quantenmechanik konnte die Existenz primarer Wahrscheinlichkeiten in den Natur. always in conjunction phenomena. which can only be expressed in ‘objecwith ‘complementarity’. thecorrect fraction can always be found which reacts as calculated (apart. Bohr is typically antiplatonic (cf to his complementarity of ‘clarity’ and ‘truth’) and he now would like to see in ‘complementarity’. einmal{Gen Aktualitat mit nicht vorIt is only in this sense that the ‘struggle for wholehersagbarem Resultat.complementary consciousness and as elements Atoms of reality 71 statethatformethe intellectualderivative ofthe ‘correspondentia’ of the Middle Ages (‘correlations’) clearly seem to glimmer through in the term ‘correspondence’. In both cases. naturally. which prevents the $-function remaining from ‘P1atonic’“that is to from say. That which is Wahrscheinlichkeitsbegriffes personal can also be of interest for everyone.107) sciences is thus not private. even if feeling is as Recently the word ‘wholeness’ is used by Bohr more widespread as thinking. This happens when he speaks of the tive’ description of natural science symbolically. for unifying pairs of opposites-I myself like to say conjunctio. It is thisirrationality of observation Fludd has re-emerged to the surface today as a conJict .a lichkeit. der irrationalen. nevertheless. Why does Bohr havea so extraordinarily strong gesetzen behaupten. for the des mathematischen universality. we are concerned with a form of describing nature in terms of laws which transcends normal causality and which is based on some kind of analogy. under discussion appear to me to emphasising and be Draft entitled “Das ‘Ganzheitsstreben in der Physik’ this is what I have designatedas ‘objective’. for the public. cept in the psychology of the unconscious has resulted Diese umwalzende Folgerung halt die iiberwiegende in toolittle attention being paid to the of observarole Mehrheit modernen der theoretischen Physikertion. For him the Erst die Wellen. The irrationality of reality reality validly and adequately must. Uberdies bedingt die Unmogness in physics’ can be a model (if you desire. it may well be personal. however. justice-love).einen neuen Zug ‘prefiguration’) for the larger conflict Kepler versus Fludd. very much to the distress of the Spinozists (Einstein). but he was particularly Wahrscheinlichkeit und Physik (1954 Dialectica 8/2) physisinterested in applying it totheopposition psyche (the psycho-physical problem). denen be emphasisedthataftereachobservation a new auch ich mich angeschlossen habe-fur unwiderruflich. phenomenon comes into being. For example. the Cartesians (de Broglie) and the intellectual aestheticians (Schrodinger). die Versuchsanordnung zu unterteilen. (This is also the case with Leibniz’s pre-estabilised harmony. For example. This is what the dreams und der $-Funktion. steht position to the natural sciences’ is an opposition to of gegenuber der rationale Aspekt einer abstrakten Ord. The problem of Kepler versus tional’ way. He wants. a call to an institution higher nung der Moglichkeiten von Feststellungen mit Hilfe education is personal.

das gleichsam von hinterder Szene das Bewusstsein lenkt. die in bezug auf die Unterscheidung psychisch-physisch neutral.InderTatsind ‘nicht-seiend’ oder ‘real’ und ‘irreal’ keine eindeutigen Charakterisierungen komplementaren von Eigenschaften. zum Beispiel neuerdings in der Fassung:‘Es gibt so etwas wie den realen Zustand eines physikalischen Systems. Natunvissenschaftliche erkenntnistheoretische und Aspekte derIdeen vom Unbewussten(1954 Dialectica 8/41 Dieses unterschwellige Etwas. A4. August 12. die einander unter Umstanden ausschliessen. Insbesondere fuhrte Jung den Nachweis. zu einem wesentlichen Teil jedoch aus archaischen. wie es. zur alteren TerminologiederPhilosophenzuriickkehrend.’ Auch diese Formulierungen Einsteins umschreiben jedoch nur das Ideal einer besonderen Form der Physik.oder Quantenmechanik hat gezeigt. A new conception of reailty is necessary See PLC 0092. allgemeinere Denkformen gegenubergestellt werden konnen. kollektiven Inhalten besteht.107 cited above in A3. was unabhangig von jederBeobachtungoderMessungobjektiv existiert und mit den Ausdrucksmitteln der Physik im Prinzip beschriebenwerden kann. dass es nur zum kleinen Teil aus Verdrangtem. Wahrscheinlichkeit und Physik (1954 Dialectica 8/2) See the quotation at the beginning of A3. dass die zweite Alternative die zutreffende ist. Auch die Physiker. sein erster Entdecker und Erforscher. aber im Gegensatzzurkonkretischen psychophysischen Einheitssprachederalten Alchemie ideal-abstrakt. die unter dem Namen ‘Ontologie’ oder ‘Realismus’ zusammengefasst werden. That which I have in mind with respect to the new idea of reality I would . . die nur kontrolliert werden konnen statisin tischen Versuchsreihen mit verschiedenen frei wahlbaren Anordnungen. so dass dieses Unterbewusste durch aufheben der Verdrangung wieder beseitigt werden kann.der Vorstellungen anordnet. This is alsowhat I mean when I always emphasise that science and religion must have something to d o with one another . namlich der ‘klassischen’ Form. 1948 When the layman says ‘reality’ he usually thinks that he is speaking about something which is self-evidently known.72 K V Laurikainen and it demands a conjunctio. bothin the world of ideas and in the life of concrete personalities. . Am klarsten sind die Postulate der in Rede stehenden Denkformen in ihrer Anwendung auf die Physik von Einstein formuliert worden. ob diese Denkformen eine notwendige Bedingung die fur Moglichkeit der Physik uberhaupt sind oder o b ihnen andere. wollte es ursprunglich zuruckfuhren auf aus dem Bewusstsein Verdrangtes. A6. Ibidem DieangefurtenZitatemogendem Leser ein Bild geben von der Funktion des Begriffes ‘Archetypus’ in der Jungschen Psychologie und seiner Wandlung von der ursprunglichen Bedeutung des ‘urtiimlichenBildes’ zum unanschaulichen Strukturelement des Unbewussten. die sich nicht einseitig zu den ‘Sensualisten’ oder ‘Empiristen’ zahlen. AS. die vorher niemals im Bewusstsein waren und eben die Autonomie und Eigengesetzlichkeit des ‘Unbewussten’ bedingen. Die neue Theorie verallgemeinert vielmehrjene klassischen IdealeundPostulate. Diese logische Verallgemeinerung hat sich unter dem Druck der unter dem Stichwort ‘Endlichkeit des Wirkungsquantums’zusammengefassten physikalischen Tatsachen als schliesslich befriedigende Losung friiherer Widerspruche in einer hoheren Synthese herausgebildet: Die mathematische Erfassung der Moglichkeiten des Naturgeschehens in der Quantenmechanik envies sich als ein genugend weiter Rahmen. um die Letter to Fierz. das heisst an und fur sich unanschaulich sind. Archetypes as the bridge between spirit and matter like to preliminarily name: the idea of the reality of the symbol.miissen aber die infolge des Postulatcharakters dieser traditionellen Denkformen mogliche und infolge des Vorhandenseins der Quantenmechanik unerlassliche Frage stellen. Die Analyse der theoretischen Grundlage der Wellen. Personlich erblicke ich hierin erste Anzeichendes Erkennens von Ordnungsprinzipien. einem Regulator.so liegt diesmeines ErachtensanderMachttraditioneller Denkformen. Wenntrotzder logischen Geschlossenheitundder mathematischenEleganzderQuantenmechanik bei einigen Physikern eine gewisse regressive Hoffnung besteht. der geschilderte erkenntnistheoretische Sachverhalt mogesich als nicht endgultig enveisen. Freud.wurdedas ‘Unterbewusste’ genannt. Dieses von Einstein so treffend charakterisierte Ideal mochte ich das des losgelosten ‘seiend’ und Beobachters nennen. The irrational reductlon of the state function See the quotations in A l .nun wieder genannt wurde. Das ‘Unterbewusste’ envies sich bald als von verwickelterer Struktur alsurspriinglich angenommen wurde. while to me it appears to be specifically the most important and extremely difficult task of our time to work on the elaboration of a new idea of reality.

(NB Of what is it to me thatno empty use space is possible?) A9. Thetruerelation of complementarity between the possibilityofperceiving the same physicalobjects. however. m = electron mass). if we take e = 0 and describe electrons. as Bohr and Stern have finally convinced me.039) I’m more and more expecting a further revolutionising of the basic concepts in physics. 1I might name that ‘the classical idea of objective reality in the cosmos’. 1951 (PLC 0092. positrons and photons (Schwinger). Between the observations nothing at all happens. that I quoted Einstein correctly. Something only really happens when an observation is being made. the same must also hold for the atomic objects. there must be something contained in the complete description of physical reality whichcorresponds tothepossibility of observing a position. der welche die klassisch-deterministische Naturerklarung verallgemeinern und furdie ichden Namen‘statistische Korrespondenz’ vorgeschlagen habe.whether we prove it or not. I am of somewhat different opinion than you that in I do not ascribe the same significance to the impossibility of empty space in quantised field theory as you. Dass der mathematische Wahrscheinlichkeitsbegriff sich auch indieser neuen. only time has. March 30. exactly in the way. it is always difficult to quotesomebody out of memory with whom one does not agree. on the contrary.’ I hope. eine tragfahige logische Grundlage geliefert hat. Time and Field Concepts in Wolfgang Pauli’s Work Symp. In my opinion the snagin quantised field theory nevertheless remains quite the same as in non-quantised classical field theory: it should be the case that a field would not be mathematically or logically conceivable without the experimental bodies required for its measurement. You presented the ‘regulation’ for the reality of the field very nicely on page 14: ’But Faraday thought that the field must be present. this is mathematically possible without the heavy masses which are part of the measuring devices which are needed in order to obtain a measurement of the fields or density of charge in small spaces (of the order h/mc. The concept of field Letter to Fierz. ‘in the interval’. an observation hic et nunc changes in general the ‘state’ of the t Man kann mit F Gonseth das Zusammenspiel der beiden Aspekte als ‘dialektisch’ bezeichnen. da er fur den zwischen Kontinuum (Welle) und Diskontinuum (Teilchen) vermittelnden Typus Naturgesetze. .’ The further addition can be made: ‘exactly as we assume that the movement of the moon is the same. If. are mathematically possible without charges.) See also Enz C P 1987 The Space.consciousness and Atoms as complementary elements of reality 73 irrationale Aktualitut des Einmaligen aufzunehmen.077) This matter now brings me to another one which was also treatedin your essay: the difficulties with the field concept which result from matters of principle. however. Space time continuum in modern physlcs Letter to Fierz. It is precisely this kind of postulate which I call the ideal of the detached observer. already before the observation has been actually made.with respect to both physics (quantisedfield theory) and the psychological analogy. (Naturally it is brilliant not to use time any more for sequencing causal series-as once in May-but rather as a playground of probabilities. as we believe. Letter to Bohr. either as fields or as experimental bodies (measuring devices) (the first case after other objects function as measuring devices) is not expressed in the formalism used today.mit‘Komplementaritat’ bezeichneten Situation bewahrt scheint hat. The creation of a new state (new attributes) in an observation See quotations in A3. instead of ‘brilliant’ we say ‘foolhardy’ it would be at least as true. February 15.51) ‘Like the moon has definiteposition’ Einstein said to a me last winter. In actual fact. 1955 (PLC 0014. October 3. Es scheint diesem eine Wirklichkeit in der Natur zutiefst zu entsprechen. A7. then these. 1947 (PLC 0092. thus describing light fields. mir hdchst bedeutungsvoll. whether we look on him or not. is like this it in the present theory:if we take e # 0. and in conjunction with which. as there is no sharp distinction possible between these and macroscopic objects. whether classical fields or photons. In quantum mechanics. AIS Zusammenfassung des rationalen und des irrationalen Aspektes einer wesentlich paradoxen Wirklichkeit kann sie auch als eineTheoriedesWerdens bezeichnet werdent. In connection with this particularly the manner in which the spacetime continuumis currently introduced into appears it to me to be increasingly unsatisfactory. irreversibly progressed on the mathematical papers. Observation cannot create an element of reality like a position. that man exists. entropy necessarily increases. on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1987: The Copenhagen Interpretation 60 Years after the Como Lecture Singapore: World Scientific) A8. That is naturallytheentiresnag. whether we observe it ornot’ (which goesconsiderablybeyond itsmere existence)$. ‘whether or not we look at the moon.

Das Gewissen der Physik (Braunschweig: Vieweg) [2] Herbert N 1985 Quantum Reality. 91 and 130 [l21 Laurikainen K V. See also Pauli’s ‘Editorial’ in 1948 Dialecfica 2 No 3/4 [4] Laurikainen K V 1987 Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1987 ed P Lahti and P Mittelstaedt (Singapore: World Scientific) p 209 [S] d’Espagnat B 1983 In Search of Reality (Heidelberg: Springer) ch 9 [6] Jung C G and Pauli W 1952 Naturerklarung und Psyche (Zurich: Rascher) p 109 [7] d’Espagnat B 1979 Sci. in his letter to Fierz of October 13. References [l] Laurikainen K V 1988 Beyond the Alom. To put it in non-technical common language one cancomparethe roleof the observerin quantum theory with thatof a person.74 K V Laurikainen observed systema in way not contained in the mathematically formulated laws. University of Helsinki. e. As it is allowed to consider the instruments of observation as a kind of prolongation of the sense organs of the observer. Am. Religion Sci. The Philosophical Thought of Wolfgang Pauli (Heidelberg: Springer). Beyond the New Physics (New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday) [3] Pauli analyses the fundamental significance of statistical causality. submitted . This book is essentially based on the correspondence stored in the Pauli Letter Collection (PLC) at CERN von Meyenn K (ed) 1984 Wolfgang Pauli: Physik und Erkenntnistheorie (Facetten der Physik. see also Beyond the Atom [l] pp 84. November 128 Lahti P and Mittelstaedt P (ed) 1985 Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics: 50 Years of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Gedankenexperiment (Singapore: World Scientific) [S]See[S] and d’Espagnat B 1987 Found.I consider the unpredictable change of the state by a single observation-in spite of the objective character of the results of every observation and notwithstanding the statistical laws forthe frequenciesof repeatedobservationunder f f equal conditions-to be an abandonment o the idea o theisolation(detachment) o theobserverfromthe f f course o physical events outside himself. without being outcome and able to influence its unpredictable results which afterwards can be objectively checked by everyone. I think here on the passage to a new phenomenon by observation which is technically taken into account by the so-called ’reduction of the wavepackets’.078). who by its freely chosen experimental arrangements recordings and brings forth a considerable ‘trouble’ in nature. 17 507 [9] Bastin T 1971 Quantum Theory and Beyond ed T Bastin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) p 213. Band 15) (Braunschweig: Vieweg) Enz C P and von Meyenn K 1988 Wolfgang Pauli. [IO] Lehto A 1984 On (3 + 3)-Dimensional Discrete SpaceTime (Report Series in Physics. Zygon.g. HU-P-236) [l l] Enz C P 1987 Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics [4]. The idea has been developed further by Noyes P et 01. J . 1951 (PLC 0092. which only apply to the automatical time dependence of the state of a closed system. especially at the meetings of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association. Phys.