Frasi di Wolfgang Pauli

Wolfgang Pauli photo
7   0

Wolfgang Pauli

Data di nascita: 25. Aprile 1900
Data di morte: 15. Dicembre 1958

Pubblicità

Wolfgang Ernst Pauli è stato un fisico austriaco.

Fu fra i padri fondatori della meccanica quantistica. Suo è il principio di esclusione, per il quale vinse il Premio Nobel nel 1945, secondo il quale due elettroni in un atomo non possono avere tutti i numeri quantici uguali.

Autori simili

Erwin Schrödinger photo
Erwin Schrödinger11
fisico e matematico austriaco
Fritjof Capra photo
Fritjof Capra18
fisico e saggista austriaco
Ludwig von Mises photo
Ludwig von Mises19
filosofo, economista
Peter Altenberg photo
Peter Altenberg23
scrittore, poeta e aforista austriaco
Hugo Wolf photo
Hugo Wolf3
compositore austriaco
Daniel Glattauer photo
Daniel Glattauer16
giornalista e scrittore austriaco
Georg Trakl photo
Georg Trakl22
poeta austriaco

Frasi Wolfgang Pauli

Pubblicità

„Anche Dirac ha una propria religione che al primo comandamento recita: Dio non esiste, ma Dirac è il suo profeta.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
citato in Etienne Klein, Sette volte la rivoluzione – I grandi della fisica contemporanea, traduzione di M. Schianchi, Raffaello Cortina Editore

„Le leggi generali della natura dovrebbero conservare invariata la loro forma anche nei sistemi non galileiani. Questa possibilità è offerta dal cosiddetto principio di equivalenza. Nella teoria newtoniana, un sistema situato in un campo gravitazionale uniforme è perfettamente equivalente, dal punto di vista meccanico, a un sistema di riferimento uniformemente accelerato. La richiesta che anche tutti gli altri processi fisici debbano svolgersi nei due sistemi secondo le stesse leggi, costituisce il principio di equivalenza di Einstein, che è uno dei pilastri fondamentali della teoria della relatività generale, da lui sviluppata più tardi. Poiché il decorso di un processo in un sistema accelerato può venire calcolato, risulta possibile valutare l'influenza di un campo gravitazionale uniforme su un processo qualunque. In questo consiste tutto il valore euristico del principio di equivalenza. Einstein è pervenuto in questo modo al risultato secondo cui orologi situati in punti di basso potenziale gravitazionale procedono più lentamente di orologi situati in punti di più alto potenziale, e ha previsto lo spostamento verso il rosso delle righe spettrali emesse dal sole rispetto a quelle emesse da sorgenti terrestri. Risultò inoltre che la velocità della luce in un campo gravitazionale è variabile, e di conseguenza i raggi luminosi vengono incurvati, come se ad ogni energia corrispondesse non solo una massa inerziale, ma anche una massa gravitazionale in E=m/c2. In un lavoro successivo Einstein mostrò che la curvatura dei raggi luminosi ha per conseguenza uno spostamento delle stelle fisse visibili in prossimità del bordo del sole, suscettibile di verifica sperimentale. L'effetto calcolato allora risultò uguale a 0,83 secondi d'arco.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
pp. 212-213

„Einstein has a feeling for the central order of things. He can detect it in the simplicity of natural laws.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: At the dawn of religion, all the knowledge of a particular community fitted into a spiritual framework, based largely on religious values and ideas. The spiritual framework itself had to be within the grasp of the simplest member of the community, even if its parables and images conveyed no more than the vaguest hint as to their underlying values and ideas. But if he himself is to live by these values, the average man has to be convinced that the spiritual framework embraces the entire wisdom of his society. For "believing" does not to him mean "taking for granted," but rather "trusting in the guidance" of accepted values. That is why society is in such danger whenever fresh knowledge threatens to explode the old spiritual forms. The complete separation of knowledge and faith can at best be an emergency measure, afford some temporary relief. In western culture, for instance, we may well reach the point in the not too distant future where the parables and images of the old religions will have lost their persuasive force even for the average person; when that happens, I am afraid that all the old ethics will collapse like a house of cards and that unimaginable horrors will be perpetrated. In brief, I cannot really endorse Planck's philosophy, even if it is logically valid and even though I respect the human attitudes to which it gives rise. Einstein's conception is closer to mine. His God is somehow involved in the immutable laws of nature. Einstein has a feeling for the central order of things. He can detect it in the simplicity of natural laws. We may take it that he felt this simplicity very strongly and directly during his discovery of the theory of relativity. Admittedly, this is a far cry from the contents of religion. I don't believe Einstein is tied to any religious tradition, and I rather think the idea of a personal God is entirely foreign to him. But as far as he is concerned there is no split between science and religion: the central order is part of the subjective as well as the objective realm, and this strikes me as being a far better starting point. Statements after the Solvay Conference of 1927, as quoted in Physics and Beyond (1971) http://www.edge.org/conversation/science-and-religion by Werner Heisenberg

Pubblicità

„What now is the answer to the question as to the bridge between the perception of the senses and the concepts, which is now reduced to the question as to the bridge between the outer perceptions and those inner image-like representations.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: What now is the answer to the question as to the bridge between the perception of the senses and the concepts, which is now reduced to the question as to the bridge between the outer perceptions and those inner image-like representations. It seems to me one has to postulate a cosmic order of nature — outside of our arbitrariness— to which the outer material objects are subjected as are the inner images... The organizing and regulating has to be posited beyond the differentiation of physical and psychical... I am all for it to call this "organizing and regulating" "archetypes." It would then be inadmissible to define these as psychic contents. Rather, the above-mentioned inner pictures (dominants of the collective unconscious, see Jung) are the psychic manifestations of the archetypes, but which would have to produce and condition all nature laws belonging to the world of matter. The nature laws of matter would then be the physical manifestation of the archetypes. Letter to Markus Fierz (1948)

„All we can observe is their effect on other living people, whose spiritual level and whose personal unconscious crucially influence the way these contents actually manifest themselves.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: Although I have no objection to accepting the existence of relatively constant psychic contents that survive personal ego, it must always be born in mind that we have no way of knowing what these contents are actually like "as such." All we can observe is their effect on other living people, whose spiritual level and whose personal unconscious crucially influence the way these contents actually manifest themselves. "Modern Examples of Background Physics" ["Moderne Beispiele zur Hintergrundsphysik"] (1948) as translated by David Roscoe in Atom and Archetype (1992) edited by Carl Alfred Meier

„This is to show the world that I can paint like Titian.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: This is to show the world that I can paint like Titian. [A big drawing of a rectangle] Only technical details are missing. In a letter to George Gamow, 1958, commenting on Werner Heisenberg's claim to a journalist that Pauli and Heisenberg have found a unified field theory, "but the technical details were missing"; as quoted in Hyperspace : A Scientific Odyssey through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the Tenth Dimension (1995) by Michio Kaku, p. 137

„I rather think the idea of a personal God is entirely foreign to him. But as far as he is concerned there is no split between science and religion: the central order is part of the subjective as well as the objective realm, and this strikes me as being a far better starting point.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: At the dawn of religion, all the knowledge of a particular community fitted into a spiritual framework, based largely on religious values and ideas. The spiritual framework itself had to be within the grasp of the simplest member of the community, even if its parables and images conveyed no more than the vaguest hint as to their underlying values and ideas. But if he himself is to live by these values, the average man has to be convinced that the spiritual framework embraces the entire wisdom of his society. For "believing" does not to him mean "taking for granted," but rather "trusting in the guidance" of accepted values. That is why society is in such danger whenever fresh knowledge threatens to explode the old spiritual forms. The complete separation of knowledge and faith can at best be an emergency measure, afford some temporary relief. In western culture, for instance, we may well reach the point in the not too distant future where the parables and images of the old religions will have lost their persuasive force even for the average person; when that happens, I am afraid that all the old ethics will collapse like a house of cards and that unimaginable horrors will be perpetrated. In brief, I cannot really endorse Planck's philosophy, even if it is logically valid and even though I respect the human attitudes to which it gives rise. Einstein's conception is closer to mine. His God is somehow involved in the immutable laws of nature. Einstein has a feeling for the central order of things. He can detect it in the simplicity of natural laws. We may take it that he felt this simplicity very strongly and directly during his discovery of the theory of relativity. Admittedly, this is a far cry from the contents of religion. I don't believe Einstein is tied to any religious tradition, and I rather think the idea of a personal God is entirely foreign to him. But as far as he is concerned there is no split between science and religion: the central order is part of the subjective as well as the objective realm, and this strikes me as being a far better starting point. Statements after the Solvay Conference of 1927, as quoted in Physics and Beyond (1971) http://www.edge.org/conversation/science-and-religion by Werner Heisenberg

Pubblicità

„At the dawn of religion, all the knowledge of a particular community fitted into a spiritual framework, based largely on religious values and ideas.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: At the dawn of religion, all the knowledge of a particular community fitted into a spiritual framework, based largely on religious values and ideas. The spiritual framework itself had to be within the grasp of the simplest member of the community, even if its parables and images conveyed no more than the vaguest hint as to their underlying values and ideas. But if he himself is to live by these values, the average man has to be convinced that the spiritual framework embraces the entire wisdom of his society. For "believing" does not to him mean "taking for granted," but rather "trusting in the guidance" of accepted values. That is why society is in such danger whenever fresh knowledge threatens to explode the old spiritual forms. The complete separation of knowledge and faith can at best be an emergency measure, afford some temporary relief. In western culture, for instance, we may well reach the point in the not too distant future where the parables and images of the old religions will have lost their persuasive force even for the average person; when that happens, I am afraid that all the old ethics will collapse like a house of cards and that unimaginable horrors will be perpetrated. In brief, I cannot really endorse Planck's philosophy, even if it is logically valid and even though I respect the human attitudes to which it gives rise. Einstein's conception is closer to mine. His God is somehow involved in the immutable laws of nature. Einstein has a feeling for the central order of things. He can detect it in the simplicity of natural laws. We may take it that he felt this simplicity very strongly and directly during his discovery of the theory of relativity. Admittedly, this is a far cry from the contents of religion. I don't believe Einstein is tied to any religious tradition, and I rather think the idea of a personal God is entirely foreign to him. But as far as he is concerned there is no split between science and religion: the central order is part of the subjective as well as the objective realm, and this strikes me as being a far better starting point. Statements after the Solvay Conference of 1927, as quoted in Physics and Beyond (1971) http://www.edge.org/conversation/science-and-religion by Werner Heisenberg

„The purely psychological interpretation only apprehends half of the matter. The other half is the revealing of the archetypal basis of the terms actually applied in modern physics.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: The purely psychological interpretation only apprehends half of the matter. The other half is the revealing of the archetypal basis of the terms actually applied in modern physics. What the final method of observation must see in the production of "background physics" through the unconscious of modern man is a directing of objective toward a future description of nature that uniformly comprises physis and psyche, a form of description that at the moment we are experiencing only in a prescientific phase. To achieve such a uniform description of nature, it appears to be essential to have recourse to the archetypal background of the scientific terms and concepts. Letter to Carl Jung, (16 June 1948)

„I gradually came to acknowledge that such fantasies or dreams are neither meaningless nor purely arbitrary but rather convey a sort of "second meaning" of the terms applied.“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: Later, however, I came to recognize the objective nature of these dreams or fantasies … Thus it was that I gradually came to acknowledge that such fantasies or dreams are neither meaningless nor purely arbitrary but rather convey a sort of "second meaning" of the terms applied. After having dreams about physical terms, which he initially dismissed as a "misuse of physics terminology" by the unconscious, in a letter to Carl Jung (16 June 1948)

„How can one look happy when he is thinking about the anomalous Zeeman effect?“

—  Wolfgang Pauli
Context: A colleague who met me strolling rather aimlessly in the beautiful streets of Copenhagen said to me in a friendly manner, “You look very unhappy”; whereupon I answered fiercely, “How can one look happy when he is thinking about the anomalous Zeeman effect?”. Writings on Physics and Philosophy (1994), p. 15

Avanti
Anniversari di oggi
Heinz Guderian photo
Heinz Guderian3
generale tedesco 1888 - 1954
Igor Stravinskij photo
Igor Stravinskij6
compositore russo naturalizzato francese, e in seguito s... 1882 - 1971
Joseph Addison photo
Joseph Addison9
politico, scrittore e drammaturgo britannico 1672 - 1719
Sergio Corazzini photo
Sergio Corazzini6
poeta italiano 1886 - 1907
Altri 80 anniversari oggi
Autori simili
Erwin Schrödinger photo
Erwin Schrödinger11
fisico e matematico austriaco
Fritjof Capra photo
Fritjof Capra18
fisico e saggista austriaco
Ludwig von Mises photo
Ludwig von Mises19
filosofo, economista
Peter Altenberg photo
Peter Altenberg23
scrittore, poeta e aforista austriaco