IMG80

Ernst Mach

force-cxplanation and from causal and Platonie realism in being pre* sentationalist rather than representationalist in epistcmology. He did, however, adopt a representationalist theory o£ refcrencc in his opposi-tion to "the privatc languagc theory" which went back to Lockc. In other words, even though Wittgenstcin gradually camc to con-sciously opposc the phenomenalism of Mach and the Vicnna Circlc and espccially their theory of refcrencc he still fell far short, cven in his latcr “language-gamc” ycars, of fully adopting causal, representa-tional realism, that is, the realism of traditional (i.e., Galilcan) common sen sc.

VI

In view of Machs opposition to the atomie theory and his fcrocious controvcrsy with Max Planck, the rccognizcd founder of quantum physics, it would seem out of the qucsiion that Mach could havc sig-nificantly influeneed the dcyelopmcnt of quantum theory. Yct, two different arguments or cascs have bcen advanced to suggest just that; namcly, Ernst Mach anticipated and may have influeneed Max Planck’s discovery of discontinuous phenomena; and Mach’s usc of a multidimensional mathematical theory of atoms prccedcd by fifty ycars and hclpcd open the way for a similar methodological approach in quantum mcchanics.

Heinrich Lówy published an articlc in 1933, “An Historical Notę on Quantum Theory," in which he hcld that Mach had written in favor , of discontinuous phenomena in a lcttcr to Poppcr-Lynkeus dated five ycars beforc Planck’s discovery.²⁸ Mach also included similar remarks in his 1896 Principlcs of Heat Theory, a book that Planck is known to have read with somc carc.²⁹ On the basis of Lowy’s articlc and the Icttci to Popper-Lynkeus one of Mach’s followcrs in the field of balis-tics and shock wavcs, General Viktor von Niesiołowski, wrotc a scath-ing indietment of Max Planck in a letter to Ludwig Mach (Fcbru* ary 14, 1941): "The above shows that Joseph Poppcr and Ernst Mach were undoubtedly prccursors of Max Planck*s quantum theory. 'By their frutts ye shall \notv them' wrotc Planck at the end of his lccturc ‘The Unity of the World Picture' in Lcydc 11 on Dccembcr 9, 1908 against Ernst Mach. And now this must happen to himll Oh ‘the irony of world history'!!! Profcssor Bibl rcccntly (1940) wrotc a wholc book on the matter.”

Mach s anticipation conccrncd a phcnomenalistic contrast of physics with chcmistry. Physical appcaranccs, such as in mcchanics, movcd or changcd continuously, but chcmical appcaranccs, such as from a gas to a liąuid, discontinuously evo!ved into somcthing very different.⁸⁰ Oxygcn and hydrogen gases, for cxamplc, were qualitativcly quitc rcmotc from water, that is, when notieed as sensations rather than understood as groupings of atoms or moleeules.

On the face of it, Mach’s chcmical theory was irrclcvant to Plancka physical guantum discoycry, which conccrncd energy emission, nevcr-thclcss, one could conceivc that Planck in his search to understand black body radiation and spectrum intensities did consciously or un-consciously rccall Machs notion of discontinuity in such 3 way as to suggest energy quanta. Carlton Berenda Wcinberg (1937) and Joachim Thiele (1968) have attempted to rcvivc a rncasure of interest in Mach’s theory of chcmical discontinuity. Whether it should be regarded as a gcnuinc “anticipation” of or as a significant "iniluence" on Max Planck’s quamum discovcry, howcver, may best be lcft to the readers discretion.

VII

C. B. Weinberg pointed out in 1937 how Mach’s pre-1870 ideas on using ‘'w-dimensions” in atomie theory anticipated the later work of Erwin Schrddinger and other rcccnt quantum physicists:

[Thcrc is] substantial cvidcnce . . . that Mach anticipated. by about half a ccntury, sonie of the basie, methodological notions of present da\ quantum mcchanics of the atom. For it is within the domain of spectros-copy of the elcmcnts, that modern quanium mechanists find it sery con-vcnicnt to talk about "n-dimcnsional spacc”. ... In comparing Machs vicws upon w-dimensional atomie theory with thosc of modern writers. the difTiculty of interpretation docs not arise with Mach, but rather, with Schrddinger, Heisenberg and others. Mach’s theory is set within a elear philosophical context—and that can scarcely be said of contcmporary atomie theorics. . . .

From what has alicady bccn said, it should be cvidcnt that the purposc which lics bchind Machs introduction of /i-space, is the desire to permit intcratomic functions the greatest number of degrees of frecJom necessary. for a correct representation of what can be observcd and measured t.e.g. atomie spectra). The ascription of n-spacc or of «• degrees of freedom is determined and coutiollcd by the observable facts which arc to be repro sented and placctl within a convcnicnt comprchcnsivc symbolism. Ihat is.