Wolfgang Pauli 1900 to 1930: His Early Physics in Jungian Perspective

A Dissertation
Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School
of the University of Minnesota

by
John Richard Gustafson

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Advisor: Roger H. Stuewer

Minneapolis, Minnesota July 2004

i

© John Richard Gustafson 2004

ii

To my father and mother Rudy and Aune Gustafson

        iii 

Abstract

Wolfgang Pauli’s philosophy and physics were intertwined. His philosophy was a variety of Platonism, in which Pauli’s affiliation with Carl Jung formed an integral part, but Pauli’s philosophical explorations in physics appeared before he met Jung. Jung validated Pauli’s psycho-philosophical perspective. Thus, the roots of Pauli’s physics and philosophy are important in the history of modern physics. In his early physics, Pauli attempted to ground his theoretical physics in positivism. He then began instead to trust his intuitive visualizations of entities that formed an underlying reality to the sensible physical world. These visualizations included holistic kernels of mathematical-physical entities that later became for him synonymous with Jung’s mandalas. I have connected Pauli’s visualization patterns in physics during the period 1900 to 1930 to the psychological philosophy of Jung and displayed some examples of Pauli’s creativity in the development of quantum mechanics. By looking at Pauli’s early physics and philosophy, we gain insight into Pauli’s contributions to quantum mechanics. His exclusion principle, his influence on Werner Heisenberg in the formulation of matrix mechanics, his emphasis on firm logical and empirical foundations, his creativity in formulating electron spinors, his neutrino hypothesis, and his dialogues with other quantum physicists, all point to Pauli being the dominant genius in the development of quantum theory. Because Pauli was in a difficult individuation process during his early years, his own writings on philosophy tend to be sparse and often contradictory. My analysis of Pauli’s physics and philosophy is based upon published and unpublished sources, and Pauli’s later reflections. A pattern has emerged. Pauli changed his mind from relying on high rationality and empiricism, to valuing intuitive metaphysical visualizations. This coupled with disturbing events in his life precipitated a breakdown and led Pauli to seek treatment at the Jung Clinic. Pauli’s psychological tension diminished after 1932. His physics consistently involved symmetry and invariants. His philosophy allied with Jung’s resembled a Platonism of combined psyche and physics.
Pauli sought a rational unification and foundation for his philosophy, but that goal was cut short by his untimely death at the age of 58.

iv Acknowledgements

This dissertation is the product of a long and arduous journey. I could not have written it without the contributions of many people. Dennis Gustafson encouraged me to love life and live it, and his spirit has found its way into this dissertaion. Daniel Gustafson was a wonderful role model for me, and awakened in me my love of physics.
The American Philosophical Society kindly granted me permission to include significant excerpts from Thomas S. Kuhn’s 1963 interview of Werner Heisenberg. The staff of the Niels Bohr Library assisted me in locating several important documents. Erika Eberhardt helped me with translations of German articles, and also introduced me to Jungian psychology. Karl von Meyenn provided me important information about Wolfgang Pauli’s early education. The faculty and staff of the University of Minnesota’s Program in the History of Science and Technology made this whole adventure possible. Members of my committee– Benjamin F. Bayman, John M. Eyler, James H. Fetzer, Michel H.P. Janssen, Alan E. Shapiro, and Roger H. Stuewer–provided numerous important suggestions. My friends and family were understanding of my numerous absences from important activities and they continued to support my work. I am deeply grateful to the above people and organizations. Any errors and shortcomings, of course, are all mine.

My advisor, Roger H. Stuewer, needs to be thanked and recognized in a special way. He inspired me to see joy in the history of physics. He provided me with countless insights and clarifications of important concepts. He has a special way of demanding intellectual rigor while encouraging creativity. Using his editorial skill, he is directly responsible for transforming my ramblings into cogent paragraphs. He continued with me long after he had formally retired from the University of Minnesota. I am indebted to Roger. I thank you.

My wife Karen Johnson Gustafson knew I needed to

…(Full text truncated)…