Abstract
Traditional nomological accounts of scientific explanation have assumed that a good scientific explanation consists in the derivation of the explanandum’s description from theory (plus antecedent conditions). But in more recent philosophy of science the adequacy of this approach has been challenged, because the relation between theory and phenomena in actual scientific practice turns out to be more intricate. This critique is here examined for an explanatory paradigm that was groundbreaking for 20th century physics and chemistry (and their interrelation): Bohr’s first model of the atom and its explanatory relevance for the spectrum of hydrogen. First, the model itself is analysed with respect to the principles and assumptions that enter into its premises. Thereafter, the origin of the model’s explanandum is investigated. It can be shown that the explained “phenomenon” is itself the product of a host of modelling accomplishments that stem from an experimental tradition related to 19th century chemistry, viz. spectroscopy. The relation between theory and phenomenon is thus mediated in a twofold way: by (Bohr’s) theoretical model and a phenomenological model from spectroscopy. In the final section of the paper an account is outlined that nevertheless permits us to acknowledge this important physico-chemical achievement as a case of (nomological) explanation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
P. Achinstein (1968) Concepts of Science: A Philosophical Analysis Johns Hopkins Press Baltimore and London
J.J. Balmer (1885) ArticleTitleNotiz über die Spectrallinien des Wasserstoffs Annalen der Physik and Chemie N.F. 25 80–87
N. Bohr (1981) On the Constitution of Atoms and Molecules I U. Hoyer (Eds) Niels Bohr: Collected Works North Holland Amsterdam 161–185
N. Bohr (1981) On the Spectrum of Hydrogen U. Hoyer (Eds) Niels Bohr:Collected Works North Holland Amsterdam 283–301
S. Bromberger (1966) Why-Questions R.G. Colodny (Eds) Mind and Cosmos University of Pittsburgh Press Pittsburgh 86–108
N. Cartwright (1983) How the Laws of Physics Lie Oxford University Press Oxford
N. Cartwright (1989) Nature’s Capacities and their Measurement Clarendon Press Oxford
N. Cartwright, T. Shomar and M. Suárez. The Toolbox of Science: Tools for the Buildings of Models with a Superconductivity Example. In W. H. Herfel et al. (Ed.), Theories and Models in Scientific Process, (= Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities), vol. 44, pp.137–149, Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 1995.
O. Darrigol (1992) From c-Numbers to q-Numbers: The Classical Analogy in the History of Quantum Theory University of California Press Berkeley
B. Falkenburg. Modelle, Korrespondenz and Vereinheitlichung in der Physik. In B. Falkenburg and S. Hauser (Eds.), Modelldenken in den Wissenschaften (= Dialektik 1997/1), pp. 27–42. Hamburg: Meiner, 1997.
H. Haken H.C. Wolf (1993) Atom- and Quantenphysik: Einführung in Die Experimentellen and Theoretischen Grundlagen EditionNumber5 Springer Berlin, New York
J.L. Heilbron. Lectures on the History of Atomic Physics 1900–1922. In C.Weiner (Ed.), History of Twentieth Century Physics, (= Rendiconti della scuola internazionale di fisica “Enrico Fermi” 57), pp. 40–108. New York and London: Academic Press, 1977.
J.L. Heilbron (1985) ArticleTitleBohr’s First Theories of the Atom Physics Today 38 IssueID10 28–36
J.L. Heilbron T.S. Kuhn (1969) ArticleTitleThe Genesis of the Bohr Atom Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 1 211–290
C.G. Hempel (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science The Free Press New York
C.G. Hempel P. Oppenheim (1953) The Logic of Explanation H. Feigl M. Brodbeck (Eds) Readings in the Philosophy of Science Appleton-Century-Crofts New York 319–352
M.B. Hesse (1963) Models and Analogies in Science Sheed and Ward London and New York
P. Kitcher W. Salmon (1987) ArticleTitleVan Fraassen on Explanation The Journal of Philosophy 48 IssueID6 315–330
E.A. Lloyd C.G. Anderson (1993) ArticleTitleEmpiricism, Objectivity and Explanation Midwest Studies in Philosophy 18 121–131
W. McGucken (1969) Nineteenth-Century Spectroscopy: Development of the Understanding of Spectra 1802-1897 Johns Hopkins Press Baltimore and London
E. McMullin (1968) What Do Physical Models Tell Us? B. Rootselaar Particlevan J.F. Staal (Eds) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science III North-Holland Amsterdam 385–396
E. McMullin (1985) ArticleTitleGalilean Idealization Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 16 IssueID3 247–273 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0039-3681(85)90003-2 Occurrence HandleMR802443
J. Mehra H. Rechenberg (1982) The Historical Development of Quantum Theory Springer New York, Berlin
M.S. Morgan M. Morrison (Eds) (1999) Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science Cambridge University Press Cambridge
M. Morrison. Models as Autonomous Agents. In Morgan and Morrison (Eds.), 1999, pp. 38–65.
H. Schellen (1883) Die Spectralanalyse in ihrer Anwendung auf die Stoffe der Erde und die Natur der Himmelskörper EditionNumber3 Westermann Braunschweig
B. Fraassen Particlevan (1980) The Scientific Image Clarendon Press Oxford
H.W. Vogel. Über die photographische Aufnahme von Spectren der in Geisslerröhren eingeschlossenen Gase. Monatsberichte der königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, pp. 115–119, 1879a.
H.W. Vogel. Über die Spectra des Wasserstoffs, Quecksilbers und Stickstoffs. Monatsberichte der königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, pp. 586–604, 1879b.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wilholt, T. Explaining Models: Theoretical and Phenomenological Models and Their Role for the First Explanation of the Hydrogen Spectrum. Found Chem 7, 149–169 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-004-5958-x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-004-5958-x