Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

Eur J Phys 1 1 (l9go) 65-74

Prtnled In the UK


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 Paulis 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 Paulis philosophical thought. Forming a coherent picture of Paulis 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 Paulis 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 Paulis 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


K V Laurikainen

physics. 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. The Copenhagen interpretation implies explicitly therenunciation of deterministic causality. Laws of nature have reference only to statistical mean values [3] (see A2). This must be recognised as a n empirical result of fundamental character. It sets limitationsthe to rational descriptionof phenomena: sucha description cannot refer to individual events but only to their average progress. individual In events, something always comes up which cannot be described in any rational way. It is the scattering of individual events around the average behaviour that Pauli emphasises as a fact in which the irrationality of reality appears. The regularities we can find in nature are an expression of the rational features ofreality, and they make the rational description of nature possible. 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. Pauli calls this belief the repression of the irrational. The breaking down of determinism makes this belief unfounded (see A3). Ihavein anotherconnection described in more detail Paulis conception of realityand simultaneously criticised some attempts to eliminate the irrationality [4]. 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, taking place in perception and in the formation of theories (see AS).

3. New perspectives for physics

The conception of reality which the researcher has, influences his work more thanhe usually knows himself. The essential presupposition in natural science is, in general, that all the eventsin the phenomenal outer world have causes in this same phenomenal world. Statistical causality, however, implies that the phenomenal world is open to irrational influences. The irrationality of reality makes many of the research programmes, which today enjoy a great interest among physicists, unmotivatedt. An example is the investigation of the beginning phases of our universe. Inthis research, people assume without hesitation that rational laws are capable of explaining theevolution of the universe afterthe Big Bang. However,theirrationality of reality, which Pauli strongly emphasises, meansthatevolutionhasan irrational aspect which, in each quantum step, appears as a choice between different possibilities. This choice cannot be described by any rational theory. In several places Pauli criticises the way biologists use the concept of chance in neo-Darwinistic theories. The same criticism applies to cosmic evolution, if this is considered as a stepwise stochastic process. Dl. A pertinent term for describing the reality itself in Pauli seems to have interpreted the irrationality of reality as a teleological aspect, using in this connecquantum theory is veiled reality, introduced by tiontheterm will, borrowedfromSchopenhauer. dEspagnat [S]. We are going to use this term here in This, of course, makes purely rational description of perhaps a slightly more general way than dEspagnat Creation can be evolution impossible,inprinciple. himself, namely for describing the nature reality in of a world where causality is not deterministic but statis- understood in this way, and this concept, therefore, cannot be excluded from the scientific picture of the tical: the irrationality ofreality forms a veil which world. makes each rational description of reality incomplete. In fact, many physicists consider modern cosmoCharacteristic of Paulis 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 creationif knowledge. He was especially interested in the concreation itself is considered to be an act which,in cept of archetype, which is importantboth in the principle, belongs to the realm of religion. psychology of C G Jung and in the Neo-Platonian The conception of reality which we are now studyphilosophy of the Renaissance; the latter acentral was ing makes such ideas quite unfounded-a, one can theme in Paulis extensive article concerning Kepler say:unscientific. Creation is irrational by its very [6]. The emphasis put on the irrationality of reality cannot, in Paulis thought, be separated from the role nature, and any attempt todescribe it with the aid of rational scientific theories implies a fundamental played by the unconscious. The irrationality of realmisconception. The great interest in these theories of ity, i.e. the veil which hidesreality fromhuman the evolution of the universe seems to be connected knowledge, 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). 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. His cannot, of course, be directly ascribed to Pauli. They are, realism, however, was totally different the from however, rather straightforward consequences of the picture of Paulis philosophy I have been able to form for realism which aims at describing the outer world myself. without any subjective elements of psychic origin.

Atoms and complementary consciousness as elements

o reality f


spin states are not disturbed between the interaction in the beginning and the subsequent observation of the spin states. It is important to note that the result is independent of the direction of the magnetic fields in A and B, supposing that these fields are parallel. In the spinsinglet state, the spins the two particles are opposite of to each other, but the direction of the spins is indefinite. Thus, we can freely choose the direction of the magnetic field in the region A, if only the field in B is then chosen parallel to it. Thus, 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, we know with certainty thespin state of particle 2 which is far away in region B. The paradox in this situation is that we can influence the spin state of particle 2 by turning the magnetic field in A. The direction of this magnetic field can be freely chosen, and as soon as the spin state of particle 1 is observed (it is either up or downwith respect to the field direction), particle 2 in region B also has a definitespin state.It is as ifwe,by freely turning the magnetic field in A, could turn the spin direction of the other particle far away. This is a typical quantum mechanical situation and it is worth adetaileddiscussion. Spin is atypical quantum theoretical variable with discrete values (up or down) in each definite case. Theparadox arises from mixing macrophysical ideas with microphysical ones. Microphysical systems are not describable any rational way any more than in allowed by the quantum theoretical description. 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. It is important to make a distinction, as especially 4. The EPR problem emphasised by dEspagnat, between the empirical reality which we investigate in physics, and the indeConsider a system of two identical particles withspin pendent reality which always remains behind a veil in +;we call them particles 1 and 2 . 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, and then they fly far apart in a situation pletely in anyrational way. Paradoxes arise from where the spin states are not disturbed in any way. confusing these twoconcepts,andpeoplewho, in The spin state of one the particles, say particle 1, is of principle, do not accept any irrationality reality are in a littlelater observedin aspace region A while particle forced to confuse these two concepts of reality. 2 is simultaneously in a regionB far fromregion A (as The propertiesof empirical reality are described by can be inferred from the conservation momentum). of using quantumtheoreticalconcepts,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). The spin-singlet state, formed as 1 of particle 2 in region B far away. a result of an interaction between the particles 1 and We consider thesimplest case and suppose that the 2 , is described with the aid of a spin function which spin states of both particles are observed, at first, by refers to this system as a whole. With the aid of this using parallel magnetic fields in the regions A and B. wavefunction we can make certain predictions of the If the spin states are not disturbed, as we supposed, behaviour ofthissystemwithrespect to spins. In the results of these correlated spin observations are particular, this wavefunction gives definite probalways opposite to each other. Thischaracteristic of abilities for the spin state of particle 2 , if the spin of is the spin-singlet state which was produced by the inter- particle 1 is given, and in certain cases these predicaction of bothparticles.This is the result with a tions are certain (probability 100%). When the spin probability of 100% if the situation is such that the 1 state of particle is observed, thespin state is changed religion for a scientist. Some scientists actively use these new scientific myths a infight againstthe traditional religious beliefs, while Pauli often emphasised that for him the motivating forcesof both scientific understanding and religious belief are the same. Of course such extrapolations approaching the very beginningof the universe have certain interest, as some kind of rational game, but one should be more awareofthe limitsof science than physicists and astronomers seem often to be. An analogouscriticism is needed with respect to the general trend of basic research in atomic theory. In general it aims today at findinga way of rescuing the objectivity of the outer world, in spite of the problems which the complementarity of the atomic world created. means one has This that tries to describerealityneglecting the roleofspirit(of the observer). 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, as if a materialistic conception of reality is accepted. I have presented some criticism of such attempts wish here. elsewhere [ 1,4] and do not to go into details An enormous amount of unnecessary work has been doneand will continuetobe so because this of unfounded aim. Instead of criticising attempts, which fromour point of view are made in the wrong direction, let us think of a positive example of how the consideration of consciousness eliminates the paradoxes of quantum theory in a natural way. We think of the typical EPR situation [7], in the form David Bohm has proposed for it.


K V Laurikainen

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

complementary consciousness and as elements Atoms

of reality


only because paying attention toit presupposes other harmonious fusion of these great theories is decisive, kinds of ideas than we are familiar with in physical and the development of purely discretephysics may a research. Irrational aspects of reality cannot be omitted be necessary as a starting point. only because it is not possible to describe them in the Quantum field theories explicitly concern these same convincing way as rational aspects. questions. It is important to note that Pauli was not Logic without intuition creates a distorted picture at all satisfied with the present field theories. He found of the world-even in pure physics! Clarity (Klarheit) the concept of field to be unsatisfactory, both in the form inwhich it appears inclassical field theories and andtruth(Wahrheit)arecomplementary,asBohr in its quantum theoretical form. He found metaphysi- often said. cal analogies between the concept of field in physics and the concept of the unconscious inpsychology [ 1l]. Thus, for Pauli the concept field seems to have of Appendlx. Quotations from Paulis letters had a very decisive role, closely connected with the and articles role of the spirit in the conception reality (see A8). of
6. 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. In the spin experiment,we can freely choose the direction of the magneticfield to be used when measuring the spin of particle 1. When we have made our choice, nature also has a choice in reacting to the problem we have posed to it: nature chooses either the state spin up 1. or spin down for particle This is the very nature of the irrationality of reality: nature always makes a choicebetweendifferent states which are possible according to the statistical law. In general, there are differentpossibilities, and nature choosesbetween them in each individual case. After these two choices have been made-ne is made by theobserver,theotherone by nature-a certain state (situation) has created in the empiribeen cal reality. The irrationality of reality always contains apossibility for creating something new. Empirical reality is created in those choices made by the observer and by nature, and the irrationalityimplies afreedorn which makes the creativity possible (see A9). The creative elementin the world is clearly connected with the future; the conservative element, which finds its expression in the laws of nature, is connected with the past. This moment, now, contains both of these aspects, and the constructive creativity presupposes a balance between these basic elements of existence. These remarks perhaps show that the irrationality of reality opens new vistas, not only for physics itself but also for its relations to more general questions of existence. Such views will be discussedin another journal [ 121. The normal attitude among physicists today is to presupposethateverything inphysics can be described without anyreference to psychic or metaphysical concepts. It is important, however, to think that empirical knowledgeis based on unconscious processes in which the observer becomes conscious of something. These unconscious processes also produce our basic concepts. Itis quite arbitrary to cut the other off partoftheprocess of observation, consciousness,

The quotations presented this appendix aim to in give characteristic examples of Paulis writings related to thequestions discussed inthisarticle.The English translations of letters havebeen made by Eugene Holman, Department of English, University of Helsinki, and are taken from the authors book Beyond the Atom [l], where the original German text has also been published. Paulis articles quoted here are not available in English translation.

Al. The unity of the outer world and the inner world Letter Markus to 0092.078) Fierz, October 13, 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. If two observers d o the same thing even physically it is, indeed, really no longer the same: only the statistical averages remain, ingeneral, thesame. 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 individual case is occasio and not causa. 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). La donna e mobile-so are the anima mundi and the occasio. Heresomethinghasremainedopen which previously appeared to be closed, and it is my hope that new concepts, which are uniformly simultaneously physical and psychological, can force themselves through this gap in place of parallelism. May more successful offspring attain this.

t Pauli letter collection;

see [l].


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, dass dieWechselwirkungen der Messinstrumente mit dem beobachteten System teilweise unbestimmbar bleiben, sobald die Endlichkeit des Wirkungsquantums insSpiel kommt. Zur Festlegung der Eigenschaften der atomaren Objekte hat der Beobachter gemass dieser Theorie die freie Wahl zwischen Versuchsanordnungen, die einander im allgemeinen ausschliessen. Insbesondere betrifft dies Bewegungsgrosse und Energie einerseits, den taumzeitlichen Ablauf der Prozesse andererseits (Heisenbergs Unsicherheitsrelation, N Bohrs Komplementaritat). Die Stellung des Beobachters andert sich dementsprechend in der Quantenphysik von der zu der eines Haneines verborgenen Zuschauers delnden, dessen Wirkungenaufdasvonihm mit geeigneten Instrumentenbeobachtete System nicht mehr kompensiert werden konnen. Ibidem Es erscheint mirnuniiberausbemerkenswert,dass auchdie neueste Richtung in der Psychologiedes Unbewussten, namlich die von C G Jung vertretene, eine Entwicklung in Richtung der Anerkennung des Nichtpsychischen in Verbindung mit dern Problem der psychophysischen Einheit genommen Der hat. erste Schritt hierzu war ihre Begegnung mit der Alchemie, die ich hier als ein echtes Symbol auffassen mochte. . . Dem Nichtpsychischen versucht Jung durch einen besonderen Begriff psychoid Rechnung zu tragen, ferner durch eine Veranderung seines alteren Begriffes Archetypen, der ursprunglich synonym mit urtiimliches Bild gebraucht wurde. Dieser Begriff der Psychologie Jungs, den ich hier nichtals bekannt voraussetze, moge durch die folgenden chronologisch geordnetenZitate,auch hinsichtlichseiner allmahlichen Veranderung und Entwicklung kurz erlautert werden.Er istnicht zu trennenvon Jungs bereits erwahnterIdee einer kollektiv-archaischen Schicht desUnbewussten,dieimstandeist,mythologische Motive spontan zu reproduzieren.

einen Seite und den Begriffen auf der andern Seite, die von der reinen Logik nicht konstruiert werden kann, beruht nach dieser Auffassung auf einer unserer Willkurentzogenen kosmischen Ordnung,die von der Welt der Erscheinungen verschieden ist und sowohl Psyche als Physis, sowohl Subjekt als Objekt umfasst. Die moderne Psychologie hat betreffend die Erkenntnissituation Nachweis den erbracht, dass jedes Verstehen ein langwieriger Prozess ist,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 nichtgedacht, sondern gleichsam malend geschaut werden. 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, von denen auch die vorbegrimiche Schicht der symbolischen Bilder beherrscht wird. Es ist interessant, dass das Wort Archetypus, das zum Beispiel Kepler fur die (platonischen)praexistenten Bilder verwendet, nunmehr von C G Jung auch fur unanschauliche, anordnende Faktoren, die sich sowohl psychisch als auch physisch manifestieren sollen, gebraucht wird. A2. Statistical causalltylstatistical correspondence Letter to Fierz, November 26, 1949 (PLC 0092.063)

Bohrs expression correspondence served as an aid to me when, then, I was trying to give a name to the positive principle which lies at the basis of quantum mechanics. (After putting forwardwave mechanics he continues to speak ofa correspondence argument see Naturw. 21 245-250, 1933, particularly the passage on page 246, top of the second column.) That statistical behaviour of many similar individual systems which have no contact whatsoever with another (windowless monads), without, on the other hand, being causally determined, has,of course, 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). In my lecture oncomplementarity, originally published in the journal Theorie und Experiment (1952 Tire de Dialectica 6/2) Experientia and now available as anoffprint, I thus Ich mochte deshalb in Anlehnung an die Philosophie tried to use the expression correspondence in a more general sense than Bohr had, in a way which would Platos vorschlagen, den Vorgang des Verstehens der specifically characterise the positive side of quantum a Natur sowie auch dieBegliickung, die der Mensch beim Verstehen, das heisst bewusstwerden einer neuen mechanical description of nature. It is certainly this statistical correspondence which mediates between Erkenntnis empfindet, als eine Entsprechung, das heisst als ein zur Deckung kommen von praexistenten continuum (wave image) and discontinuum (particle image). (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. Die cal theory in Bohrs writings.) There I did not explicitly Brucke zwischen den Sinneswahrnehmungen auf der

complementary consciousness and as elements Atoms

of reality


statethatformethe intellectualderivative ofthe correspondentia of the Middle Ages (correlations) clearly seem to glimmer through in the term correspondence. In both cases, however, 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. (This is also the case with Leibnizs pre-estabilised harmony.) The single systems of quantum mechanics are windowless monadsand, nevertheless, thecorrect fraction can always be found which reacts as calculated (apart, naturally, from the expected statistical fluctuations).

which prevents the $-function remaining from P1atonicthat is to from say, remaining in a metaphysical space. Because of it the reality of the $-function becomes symbolic, whichis something completely different from crystalclear, very much to the distress of the Spinozists (Einstein), the Cartesians (de Broglie) and the intellectual aestheticians (Schrodinger). Bohr is typically antiplatonic (cf to his complementarity of clarity and truth) and he now would like to see in complementarity, as it was manifested in physics, a general model f o r the resolution of conflicts, for unifying pairs of opposites-I myself like to say conjunctio. For example,he attempted to apply to this ethics (good-evil, justice-love), but he was particularly Wahrscheinlichkeit und Physik (1954 Dialectica 8/2) physisinterested in applying it totheopposition psyche (the psycho-physical problem). For him the Erst die Wellen- oder Quantenmechanik konnte die Existenz primarer Wahrscheinlichkeiten in den Natur- central point here is always observation. Why does Bohr havea so extraordinarily strong gesetzen behaupten, 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. 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. He says that in this psychology it should also allen voran M Born, W Heisenberg und N Bohr, denen be emphasisedthataftereachobservation a new auch ich mich angeschlossen habe-fur unwiderruflich. phenomenon comes into being. He senses here at once a certain danger that the concept the unconscious of hasthe tendency towithdrawPlatonicallyinto a metaphysical space. Thesymbol which expresses A3. The irrationality of reality reality validly and adequately must, rather, differently from what is the case in classical physics and in such Wahrscheinlichkeit und Physik (1954 Dialectica 8/2) things as its field concept, also give expression to the Hierdurch bekommt die Beobachtung den Charakter irrationalintervention of observationand its consequences as potentiality. der irrationalen, einmal{Gen Aktualitat mit nicht vorIt is only in this sense that the struggle for wholehersagbarem Resultat. Uberdies bedingt die Unmogness in physics can be a model (if you desire,a lichkeit, die Versuchsanordnung zu unterteilen, ohne das Phanomen wesentlich zu andern,einen neuen Zug prefiguration) for the larger conflict Kepler versus Fludd. Personal is not the opposite of objective! What von Ganzheitlichkeit im physikalischen Geschehen. I mean by the objective significance of the counter Diesem irrationalen Aspektderkonkreten Erscheinungen, die derAktualitiit nach festgestellt sind, steht position to the natural sciences is an opposition to of gegenuber der rationale Aspekt einer abstrakten Ord- private. For example, a call to an institution higher nung der Moglichkeiten von Feststellungen mit Hilfe education is personal, but not private. That which is Wahrscheinlichkeitsbegriffes personal can also be of interest for everyone, for the des mathematischen universality, for the public. This is what the dreams und der $-Funktion. under discussion appear to me to emphasising and be Draft entitled Das Ganzheitsstreben in der Physik this is what I have designatedas objective. The und der Konflikt Naturwissenschaft-gefuhlsmassigposition which stands in opposition to the natural intuitive Gegenposition 1953 (PLC 0092.107) sciences is thus not private, it may well be personal. Actually, every feeling is personal, even if feeling is as Recently the word wholeness is used by Bohr more widespread as thinking. Perhaps personality is specifically this unique irrational intervention in the regularly and more frequently, always in conjunction phenomena, which can only be expressed in objecwith complementarity, among other things also within physics. This happens when he speaks of the tive description of natural science symbolically, as a wholeness and indivisibility of an experimental propossibility. cedure used in quantum mechanics. He wants, 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,since the observation modern physics gives a model for the unification of interrupts the connection of phenomena in an irraopposites (conjunctio). The problem of Kepler versus tional way. It is thisirrationality of observation Fludd has re-emerged to the surface today as a conJict


K V Laurikainen

and it demands a conjunctio, bothin the world of ideas and in the life of concrete personalities. A4. Archetypes as the bridge between spirit and matter

like to preliminarily name: the idea of the reality of the symbol.

A6. The irrational reductlon of the state function

See the quotations in A l . Natunvissenschaftliche erkenntnistheoretische und Aspekte derIdeen vom Unbewussten(1954 Dialectica 8/41 Dieses unterschwellige Etwas, das gleichsam von hinterder Szene das Bewusstsein lenkt,wurdedas Unterbewusste genannt. Freud, sein erster Entdecker und Erforscher, wollte es ursprunglich zuruckfuhren auf aus dem Bewusstsein Verdrangtes, so dass dieses Unterbewusste durch aufheben der Verdrangung wieder beseitigt werden kann. Das Unterbewusste envies sich bald als von verwickelterer Struktur alsurspriinglich angenommen wurde. Insbesondere fuhrte Jung den Nachweis, dass es nur zum kleinen Teil aus Verdrangtem, zu einem wesentlichen Teil jedoch aus archaischen, kollektiven Inhalten besteht, die vorher niemals im Bewusstsein waren und eben die Autonomie und Eigengesetzlichkeit des Unbewussten bedingen, wie es, zur alteren TerminologiederPhilosophenzuriickkehrend,nun wieder genannt wurde. 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, einem Regulator,der Vorstellungen anordnet. Personlich erblicke ich hierin erste Anzeichendes Erkennens von Ordnungsprinzipien, die in bezug auf die Unterscheidung psychisch-physisch neutral, aber im Gegensatzzurkonkretischen psychophysischen Einheitssprachederalten Alchemie ideal-abstrakt, das heisst an und fur sich unanschaulich sind.
AS. A new conception of reailty is necessary

See PLC 0092.107 cited above in A3. Wahrscheinlichkeit und Physik (1954 Dialectica 8/2) See the quotation at the beginning of A3. Wenntrotzder logischen Geschlossenheitundder mathematischenEleganzderQuantenmechanik bei einigen Physikern eine gewisse regressive Hoffnung besteht, der geschilderte erkenntnistheoretische Sachverhalt mogesich als nicht endgultig enveisen,so liegt diesmeines ErachtensanderMachttraditioneller Denkformen, die unter dem Namen Ontologie oder Realismus zusammengefasst werden. Auch die Physiker, die sich nicht einseitig zu den Sensualisten oder Empiristen zahlen,miissen aber die infolge des Postulatcharakters dieser traditionellen Denkformen mogliche und infolge des Vorhandenseins der Quantenmechanik unerlassliche Frage stellen, ob diese Denkformen eine notwendige Bedingung die fur Moglichkeit der Physik uberhaupt sind oder o b ihnen andere, allgemeinere Denkformen gegenubergestellt werden konnen. Die Analyse der theoretischen Grundlage der Wellen- oder Quantenmechanik hat gezeigt, dass die zweite Alternative die zutreffende ist. Am klarsten sind die Postulate der in Rede stehenden Denkformen in ihrer Anwendung auf die Physik von Einstein formuliert worden, zum Beispiel neuerdings in der Fassung:Es gibt so etwas wie den realen Zustand eines physikalischen Systems, was unabhangig von jederBeobachtungoderMessungobjektiv existiert und mit den Ausdrucksmitteln der Physik im Prinzip beschriebenwerden kann. Auch diese Formulierungen Einsteins umschreiben jedoch nur das Ideal einer besonderen Form der Physik, namlich der klassischen Form. Dieses von Einstein so treffend charakterisierte Ideal mochte ich das des losgelosten seiend und Beobachters nennen.InderTatsind nicht-seiend oder real und irreal keine eindeutigen Charakterisierungen komplementaren von Eigenschaften, die nur kontrolliert werden konnen statisin tischen Versuchsreihen mit verschiedenen frei wahlbaren Anordnungen, die einander unter Umstanden ausschliessen. Die neue Theorie verallgemeinert vielmehrjene klassischen IdealeundPostulate. Diese logische Verallgemeinerung hat sich unter dem Druck der unter dem Stichwort Endlichkeit des Wirkungsquantumszusammengefassten 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, August 12, 1948 When the layman says reality he usually thinks that he is speaking about something which is self-evidently known; 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. This is alsowhat I mean when I always emphasise that science and religion must have something to d o with one another . . . That which I have in mind with respect to the new idea of reality I would

consciousness and Atoms

as complementary elements

of reality


irrationale Aktualitut des Einmaligen aufzunehmen. AIS Zusammenfassung des rationalen und des irrationalen Aspektes einer wesentlich paradoxen Wirklichkeit kann sie auch als eineTheoriedesWerdens bezeichnet werdent. Dass der mathematische Wahrscheinlichkeitsbegriff sich auch indieser neuen,mitKomplementaritat bezeichneten Situation bewahrt scheint hat, mir hdchst bedeutungsvoll. Es scheint diesem eine Wirklichkeit in der Natur zutiefst zu entsprechen, da er fur den zwischen Kontinuum (Welle) und Diskontinuum (Teilchen) vermittelnden Typus Naturgesetze, der welche die klassisch-deterministische Naturerklarung verallgemeinern und furdie ichden Namenstatistische Korrespondenz vorgeschlagen habe, eine tragfahige logische Grundlage geliefert hat.
A7. Space time continuum in modern physlcs

Letter to Fierz, March 30, 1947 (PLC 0092.039) Im more and more expecting a further revolutionising of the basic concepts in physics. In connection with this particularly the manner in which the spacetime continuumis currently introduced into appears it to me to be increasingly unsatisfactory. (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. If, however, instead of brilliant we say foolhardy it would be at least as true. Something only really happens when an observation is being made, and in conjunction with which, as Bohr and Stern have finally convinced me, entropy necessarily increases. Between the observations nothing at all happens, only time has, in the interval, irreversibly progressed on the mathematical papers.) See also Enz C P 1987 The Space, Time and Field Concepts in Wolfgang Paulis Work Symp. on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1987: The Copenhagen Interpretation 60 Years after the Como Lecture Singapore: World Scientific) A8. The concept of field Letter to Fierz, October 3, 1951 (PLC 0092.077) 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. You presented the regulation for the reality of the field very nicely on page 14: But Faraday thought that the field must be present,whether we prove it or not, exactly in the way, as we believe, that man exists, whether we look on him or not. The further addition

can be made: exactly as we assume that the movement of the moon is the same, whether we observe it ornot (which goesconsiderablybeyond itsmere existence)$. That is naturallytheentiresnag,with respect to both physics (quantisedfield theory) and the psychological analogy. 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. 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. In actual fact, however, is like this it in the present theory:if we take e # 0, thus describing light fields, then these, whether classical fields or photons, are mathematically possible without charges; if we take e = 0 and describe electrons, positrons and photons (Schwinger), 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, m = electron mass). Thetruerelation of complementarity between the possibilityofperceiving the same physicalobjects, 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. (NB Of what is it to me thatno empty use space is possible?) A9. The creation of a new state (new attributes) in an observation See quotations in A3. Letter to Bohr, February 15, 1955 (PLC 0014.51) Like the moon has definiteposition Einstein said to a me last winter, whether or not we look at the moon, the same must also hold for the atomic objects, as there is no sharp distinction possible between these and macroscopic objects. Observation cannot create an element of reality like a position, there must be something contained in the complete description of physical reality whichcorresponds tothepossibility of observing a position, already before the observation has been actually made. I hope, that I quoted Einstein correctly; it is always difficult to quotesomebody out of memory with whom one does not agree. It is precisely this kind of postulate which I call the ideal of the detached observer. In quantum mechanics, on the contrary, 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.

1I might name that the classical idea of objective reality in the cosmos.


K V Laurikainen

observed systema in way not contained in the mathematically formulated laws, which only apply to the automatical time dependence of the state of a closed system. 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. As it is allowed to consider the instruments of observation as a kind of prolongation of the sense organs of the observer,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.

To put it in non-technical common language one cancomparethe roleof the observerin quantum theory with thatof a person, who by its freely chosen experimental arrangements recordings and brings forth a considerable trouble in nature, without being outcome and able to influence its unpredictable results which afterwards can be objectively checked by everyone.
[l] Laurikainen K V 1988 Beyond the Alom. The Philosophical Thought of Wolfgang Pauli (Heidelberg: Springer). 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, Band 15) (Braunschweig: Vieweg) Enz C P and von Meyenn K 1988 Wolfgang Pauli. Das Gewissen der Physik (Braunschweig: Vieweg) [2] Herbert N 1985 Quantum Reality. Beyond the New Physics (New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday) [3] Pauli analyses the fundamental significance of statistical causality, e.g. in his letter to Fierz of October 13, 1951 (PLC 0092.078). See also Paulis 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] dEspagnat 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] dEspagnat B 1979 Sci. Am. 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 dEspagnat B 1987 Found. Phys. 17 507 [9] Bastin T 1971 Quantum Theory and Beyond ed T Bastin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) p 213. The idea has been developed further by Noyes P et 01, especially at the meetings of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association. [IO] Lehto A 1984 On (3 + 3)-Dimensional Discrete SpaceTime (Report Series in Physics, University of Helsinki, HU-P-236) [l l] Enz C P 1987 Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics [4], see also Beyond the Atom [l] pp 84, 91 and 130 [l21 Laurikainen K V, Zygon; J . Religion Sci. submitted