Schrödinger Equation Anniversary 1926-2026

In March 1926 the 39 year old Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger published an article entitled Quantisation as Eigenvalue Problem presenting a mathematical model of a Hydrogen atom with one electron in terms of classical continuum mechanics, which kick-started modern physics into the era of Quantum Mechanics, since it exactly captured the observed spectrum of Hydrogen.

The success was complete, and Schrödinger was very happy with his one-electron mathematical model as a wave equation in terms of a wave function representing electron charge density of clear physical nature like any density of classical continuum mechanics. 

But the happiness did not last long, since his one-electron model was quickly generalised to atoms with $N>1$ electrons in the hands of Bohr-Born-Heisenberg BBM in terms of a wave function $\Psi$ depending on $3N$ spatial coordinates, which could only be given a probabilistic meaning and so could not be accepted by Schrödinger with his deep conviction of physics as reality. The effect was that Schrödinger was quickly "cancelled" and had to spend the rest of his life as outsider without any say. The success was turned into its opposite.      

At a Dublin 1952 Colloquium Schrödinger restated his deep conviction carried for 26 lonely years that history took the wrong turn after March 1926 when his Schrödinger equation for Hydrogen was hijacked by Bohr-Born-Heisenberg to form the Copenhagen Interpretation as Standard Quantum Mechanics StdQM, which has filled text books, students and physicists minds for 100 years and still does:    

• Let me say at the outset, that in this discourse, I am opposing not a few special statements of quantum mechanics held today,
• I am opposing as it were the whole of it, I am opposing its basic views that have been shaped 25 years ago, when Max Born put forward his probability interpretation, which was accepted by almost everybody.
• It has been worked out in great detail to form a scheme of admirable logical consistency that has been inculcated ever since to every young student of theoretical physics.
• The view I am opposing is so widely accepted, without ever being questioned, that I would have some difficulties in making you believe that I really, really consider it inadequate and wish to abandon it. 
• It is, as I said, the probability view of quantum mechanics. You know how it pervades the whole system. It is always implied in everything a quantum theorist tells you. Nearly every result he pronounces is about the probability of this or that or that ... happening-with usually a great many alternatives. The idea that they be not alternatives but all really happen simultaneously seems lunatic to him, just impossible. 
• He thinks that if the laws of nature took this form for, let me say, a quarter of an hour, we should find our surroundings rapidly turning into a quagmire, or sort of a featureless jelly or plasma, all contours becoming blurred, we ourselves probably becoming jelly fish. 
• It is strange that he should believe this. For I understand he grants that unobserved nature does behave this way-namely according to the wave equation. The aforesaid alternatives come into play only when we make an observation, which need, of course, not be a scientific observation.
• Still it would seem that, according to the quantum theorist, nature is prevented from rapid jellification only by our perceiving or observing it. 
• And I wonder that he is not afraid, when he puts a ten pound-note {his wrist-watch} into his drawer in the evening, he might  find it dissolved in the morning, because he has not kept watching it.

Real Quantum Mechanics RealQM is an alternative to StdQM formed in the spirit of Schrödinger. It is quite possible that RealQM would have made Schrödinger happy again. If you are unhappy with StdQM, try RealQM! To get started check out recent posts e g the previous on Unified Field Theory with RealQM.