What Wolfgang Pauli did mean?

[Yuri Danoyan]

What Wolfgang Pauli does mean?

 

I meet book W..Heisenberg (Physics and

Beyond, Harper and Row, New York (1974), where talking about some Christmascard send by Pauli to Heisenberg about some incomplete idea.

Text was very enigmatic:

"Division and reduction of symmetry, this then is the kernel of the

brute! The former is an ancient attribute of the devil."

 

i send letter to Professor Hans Primas, a explorer legacy of Pauli for more detail and get letter

 

From Hans Primas Professor for Theoretical Chemistry at ETH; Zuerich, Switzerland

 

 

 

Dear Yuri Danoyan,

 

 

The original German quotation is:

 

 

"Zweiteilung und Symmetrievemindeung, das ist des Pudels Kern. Zweiteilung ist ein sehr altes Attribut des Teufels. (Das Wort Zweifel soll urspЁ№nglichch Zweiteilung bedeutet haben)."

 

 

It is in a letter by Pauli to Heisenberg, who quote it (without given the date of the letter) in:

 

 

W. Heisenberg, Wolfgang Paulis philosophische Auffassungen, Die Naturwissenschaften, vol. 46 (1959), pp.661-663.

 

 

It is again quoted in W. Heisenberg, Der Teil und das Ganze , Piper Verlag , Muenchen (1969), p.317. In the English translation of this book (Physics and Beyond, Harper and Row, New York (1974), p.234) it is translated as:

 

 

"Division and reduction of symmetry, this then is the kernel of the

brute! The former is an ancient attribute of the devil."

 

 

It is notoriously difficult to translate Pauli's striking and succinct German in another language. Here Pauli refers to Goethe's Faust, part 1, second scene "Faust's study":

 

To my mind Pauli enigmatic phrase "Division and reduction of symmetry" can get more clear and plain if used John Wheeler idea "Everything is information".

 

I would like to show couple of examples where Pauli-Wheeler united idea let to get some ineresting results:

1)Mp/Me=1836

Dividing this record half-and-half and every half sum up get 99;

9+9=18 1+8=9; 9 to binary 1001.Beautiful mirror symmetry look like charge conjugation.

2)Fine-structure constant 137

137 to binary 10001001.Dividing this record half-and-half we get

two decimal numbers 1000 and 1001.For full identity better be 1000 and1000,but reminding about CP-violation about 1/1000.

Exactly the same value...here.

Edited July 18, 2008 by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

[Yuri Danoyan]

2 interesting articles devoted to Pauli legacy

1)"Concepts of Symmetry

in the Work of Wolfgang Pauli"

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00003913/01/PauliSymmetries_net.pdf

 

2)"Pauli’s ideas on mind and matter

in the context of contemporary science"

http://www.igpp.de/english/tda/pdf/paulijcs8.pdf

 

W. Heisenberg book address

http://www.amazon.com/Physics-BeyonW. Heisenbergd-Conversations-Werner-Heisenberg/dp/B000GJXVZ6

Edited July 20, 2008 by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

[Yuri Danoyan]

i have some upgrade

[Yuri Danoyan]

What Wolfgang Pauli does mean?

 

I meet book W..Heisenberg (Physics and Beyond, Harper and Row, New York (1974), where talking about some Christmascard send by Pauli to Heisenberg about some incomplete idea.Text was very enigmatic:

 

"Division and reduction of symmetry, this then is the kernel of the brute! The former is an ancient attribute of the devil."

 

I send letter to Professor Hans Primas,Professor for Theoretical Chemistry at ETH; Zuerich, Switzerland

a explorer legacy of Pauli for more detail and get next letter from him:

 

Dear Yuri Danoyan,

 

The original German quotation is: "Zweiteilung und Symmetrievemindeung, das ist des Pudels Kern. Zweiteilung ist ein sehr altes Attribut des Teufels. (Das Wort Zweifel soll urspЁ№nglichch Zweiteilung bedeutet haben)." It is in a letter by Pauli to Heisenberg, who quote it (without given the date of the letter) in: W. Heisenberg, Wolfgang Paulis philosophische Auffassungen, Die Naturwissenschaften, vol. 46 (1959), pp.661-663.

It is again quoted in W. Heisenberg, Der Teil und das Ganze , Piper Verlag , Muenchen (1969), p.317. In the English translation of this book (Physics and Beyond, Harper and Row, New York (1974), p.234) it is translated as: "Division and reduction of symmetry, this then is the kernel of the brute! The former is an ancient attribute of the devil."

It is notoriously difficult to translate Pauli's striking and succinct German in another language. Here Pauli refers to Goethe's Faust, part 1, second scene "Faust's study".

[Martin]

Yuri, your posts are facinating and entertaining. One reason is that Pauli was a very witty man and his communications are often expressed in a unique memorable way.

 

Probably this is not ordinary physics, but is more about the historical LITERARY side of physics.

 

I love literature as well as physics, so I am happy with this. Someone else may feel differently and want to move your discussion to some other forum, but don't worry about this.

 

I think part of understanding Pauli's words here has to do with the fact that all that generation had to read GOETHE in school just like Russian kids had to read PUSHKIN. So they could all make jokes about it, with literary references.

 

So you need to find Part I scene 2 of Faust, on line.

 

It will be where Faust is in his study thinking about all things, and Mephistofeles comes in. A devil whose aim is to CONFUSE us, to put DOUBTS in our mind, and tempt us---according to the old tradition.

 

The words for doubt and confusion in Geman are the same root as the word for TWO. Zweifel and Verzweifelung are related to Zwei (two) and the idea of being of two minds, unsure, confused. A German speaker will hear the connection immediately. Also the word Teufel, for Devil, is probably related to Zweifel (doubt) at an etymology level.

 

So Pauli is laughing with Heisenberg and telling him that some physical idea contains the seeds of damnation---doubt, confusion, the Devil. He is not serious. He is just laughing. And he makes witty use of a reference to a book that they both had to read in school.

 

I have to go do something else. Sometime you or I should GOOGLE "Goethe Faust Part 1" and look at scene 2 of the play and see actually what the Devil named Mephistofeles says to Faust in his study. Maybe there is an echo with Pauli.

===================

 

about the PUDEL. Mephistofeles first appears to Faust in the shape of a dog ( Pudel) that sees him in the street and follows him home. Then the dog appears in Faust's study while Faust is reading the Bible. The dog is maddened by the Bible, he turns out to be a monster. The dog suddenly turns into the figure of a man Mephistofeles, who pretends to be a scholar, like Faust. then they begin to argue and discuss stuff, and Faust realizes that the man is really the Devil.

 

So when Pauli say "des Pudels Kern" (essential core nature of the Dog) he is referring to Goethe's play, where that Dog is not a real dog but is one of the shapes of the Devil.

Edited July 28, 2008 by Martin

[Yuri Danoyan]

I guess you are not read Werner Heisenberg book.After your reading we can talk about it. I think you did wrong accent,because more important analising content this book,than Goethe Faust.

 

Werner Heisenberg Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Converstations (Harper & Row, 1971)

 

p.234 and following pages

Edited July 28, 2008 by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

[swansont]

Wait s minute. You ask a question, presumably because you don't know the answer. But when an answer is given, you say it's wrong?

[Yuri Danoyan]

I proposed other interpretation Pauli's phrase.See my thread.

I invited read this book before for detail discussion.

Edited July 29, 2008 by Yuri Danoyan

[Martin]

Well it is fine with me. Yuri has studied this so he has his own ideas based on a lot more information.

 

The connection with Goethe Faust was just one layer to the cake----one small angle on it. That your email correspondence brought up. So I commented on that.

 

About the other stuff, Yuri, you are right that I have not read the Heisenberg book and I am afraid I can't offer any help.

[Yuri Danoyan]

Thank you for attention!

[pioneer]

The traditional perception of reality, up to the turn of the 20th century, was analogous to rational and ordered. The deviate principle was the Devil. Einstein was more traditional and didn't wish to place dice with the universe or allow the deviate principle in. But physics decided to go the way of the chaotic or devilish principle. We even called it chaos and uncertainty in honor. Rather that look for a logical explanation for uncertainty, we assumed this ruled and built upon this assumption. This is why physics can't unify. It is under the spell of its own deviate assumption.

 

The Heinsenberg uncertainty has a logical explanation. I think I found the proof. The metal gold is unique because of its golden color. Based on conventional calculations it should be silver. To compensate for the unique color one needs to add electron relativity. The color is due to a SR affect on the light that is reflected from the outer electrons of gold. What this implies it is possible for electrons to be in another space-time reference within atoms. That is the nature of the uncertainty, two references. The assumption is one reference for both, leading to a mathematical illusion. Einstein didn't have the gold proof to fight of the devil so to speak.

[Yuri Danoyan]

I don't like empty philosophy!

 

Pauli"s "Division and reduction of symmetry" approach demonsrated in thread Extended Supersymmetry And Extended Supergravity Theories. http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34372

Edited July 30, 2008 by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

[Yuri Danoyan]

Hi,

 

I'm not familiar with the quote or its context, so I can only

speculate. It might refer to "reduction" of the wave packet, with

the idea that this might allow a fully symmetric initial or basic

wave function to describe the universe as we observe it, which has

reduced symmetry.

 

All best wishes,

Frank Wilczek

May 27 2004

 

From Gerhard t'Hooft

 

Pauli cannot have meant to say that continuous symmetry should not be

examined. We should examine everything. What he meant may have been

that in Nature one sees the tendency of symmetries to be reduced or even

disappear. This could be caused by explicit forces or effects which simply

aren't symmetric, such as the weak interaction causing transitions

among particles that otherwise would be forbidden, but in more interesting

cases it could be that, although all forces are symmetric, it is the

asymmetric solutions of the equations that often dominate. Famous example

is the Donkey of Buridan: it was given two identical haystacks, some

distance apart. Since they were identical, the donkey could not choose,

so it died of starvation. Of course, real donkeys will immediately choose

one of the two and start eating, but whatever solution it takes, the

solution will break the perfect symmetry between the two haystacks.

Pauli probably meant that Nature is full of such Donkeys, choosing

one haystack, no matter which, and breaking symmetries that way.

This holds both for discrete and for continuous symmetries, so I

don't think Pauli wanted to make any distinction there.

G. 't H

June 08 2004

Edited August 3, 2008 by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

[Yuri Danoyan]

Pauli's idea about "Division and reduction the symmetry" see thread http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=34142

and Wheeler's idea "It from Bit" http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=34160

have common base.

Wheeler:"Tryihg to wrap my brain around idea of information theory as the basis of existence,i came ap with the phrase "it from bit".The universe and all that it contains("it") may arise from the myriad yes-no choices of mearusement(the"bits")".

"Information may not be just what we learn about the world.It may be what makes the world".

Quote as favourite saying "Less is more" Wheeler continued:"it is good principle of physics research.In thinking about the world in the large.As Philip Anderson told"More is different".When you put enough elementary units together,you can get something that is more than the sum of these units."More is different" may have something to do with "it from bit"

 

What mean Pauli?Pauli first of all thinking about division,about binary splitting of symmetry until end,for understanding nature of embryonic symmetry.But embryonic symmetry lead as the same binary relations "yes or no","0 or 1".That's i would like to say about common between Pauli an Wheeler ideas

[pioneer]

Traditionally and historically, heaven was perfect and hell was for all the deviates. The Devil or Satan was the principle that adds confusion to the universe. He tempted Eve and Adam to remove the optimization of paradise, etc. If you look at Genesis, to be able to form the universe in one day, hypothetically, implies or requires, zero confusion or zero uncertainty. The more confusion you add the longer it is going to take. God was assumed zero confusion so he could do it. I am not supporting this creationist model but the historical efficiency implies perfect ordering and not a bunch random throws of the dice.

 

Physics took the path of the traditional devil principle partly because of the uncertainty principle. Rather than look for a logical explanation to give this a sense of order, it was swallowed whole in favor the devil principle. Einstein worked under the assumption of rational order, which was the basis for the age of enlightenment. This was the end of that. Physics decided to use a confusion principle, which had been used before the age of enlightenment.

 

Now the Satan principle is trying to get rid of order, by designing confusion into everything, even though the forces of nature are designed to attract and create order. We are now postulating a universal repulsive force to expand the universe so the devil wins. But tradition also says the devil is the master of illusions using half truths, tricks and special affects. So far the analogy is good, so maybe we should extrapolate the analogy all the way.

 

The logical explanation of uncertainty is two references, one for electrons and one for nuclei. One runs into the problem of trying to use the nuclei or stationary reference clock to describe both references. The fast electron reference will be uncertain.

 

Try this conceptual analysis. We have train moving near C. The only clock you we are allowed to use is the stationary clock. The other constraint is we are not allow to use SR. There will be uncertainty in the train's position when you set the experiment in the same way as the uncertainty principle. It is one of those special affects.

[Yuri Danoyan]

How your comment related to my thread?

[Yuri Danoyan]

"Still, the general direction is always toward the reductionist—understanding complexity in terms of an underlying simplicity."(Burton Richter)

http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc...s_10/8_1.shtml