Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    SciTechDaily
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Earth
    • Health
    • Physics
    • Science
    • Space
    • Technology
    Facebook X (Twitter) Pinterest YouTube RSS
    SciTechDaily
    Home»Physics»100 Years Before Quantum Mechanics, a Physicist Spotted Its Hidden Clue
    Physics

    100 Years Before Quantum Mechanics, a Physicist Spotted Its Hidden Clue

    By Robyn Arianrhod, Monash UniversityFebruary 1, 202610 Comments6 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Reddit
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Telegram Email Reddit
    Quantum Physics Loops Energy
    Long before quantum mechanics existed, a scientist developed a powerful way of describing motion by drawing an analogy between particles and light. What began as a mathematical insight in the 19th century later turned out to anticipate the strange wave–particle nature of the quantum world. Credit: Shutterstock

    Hamilton’s 19th-century insight connecting light and motion became a cornerstone of quantum mechanics and modern physics.

    William Rowan Hamilton, the Irish mathematician and physicist born 220 years ago last month, is often remembered for an unusual act in 1843, when he carved a mathematical formula into the stone of Dublin’s Broome Bridge.

    During his own lifetime, however, Hamilton’s standing rested on breakthroughs he made much earlier, in the 1820s and early 1830s, while he was still in his twenties. In that period, he introduced powerful new mathematical methods for analyzing the paths of light rays (or “geometric optics”) and describing how physical objects move (“mechanics”).

    An intriguing feature of Hamilton’s work was his use of an analogy between the trajectory of a light ray and the motion of a material particle. That comparison made sense if light were composed of particles, as Isaac Newton had argued. But it raised a deeper question if light behaved instead like a wave: why should the mathematics of waves and particles resemble one another at all?

    The significance of this question would only become clear a hundred years later. As quantum mechanics emerged in the early twentieth century, physicists recognized that Hamilton’s framework was not merely a clever analogy, but an early window into the fundamental structure of the physical world.

    The puzzle of light

    To understand Hamilton’s place in this story, we need to go back a little further. For ordinary objects or particles, the basic laws (or equations) of motion were published by Newton in 1687. Over the next 150 years, researchers such as Leonard Euler, Joseph-Louis Lagrange, and then Hamilton made more flexible and sophisticated versions of Newton’s ideas.

    “Hamiltonian mechanics” proved so useful that it wasn’t until 1925 – almost 100 years later – that anybody stopped to revisit how Hamilton had derived it.

    His analogy with light paths worked regardless of light’s true nature, but at the time, there was good evidence that light was a wave. In 1801, British scientist Thomas Young performed his famous double-slit experiment, in which two light beams produced an “interference” pattern like the overlapping ripples on a pond when two stones are dropped in. Six decades later, James Clerk Maxwell realised light behaved like a rippling wave in the electromagnetic field.

    But then, in 1905, Albert Einstein showed some of light’s properties could only be explained if light could also behave as a stream of particle-like “photons” (as they were later dubbed). He linked this idea to a suggestion made by Max Planck in 1900, that atoms could only emit or absorb energy in discrete lumps.

    Energy, frequency, and mass

    In his 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect, where light dislodges electrons from certain metals, Einstein used Planck’s formula for these energy lumps (or quanta): E = hν. E is the amount of energy, ν (the Greek letter nu) is the photon’s frequency, and h is a number called Planck’s constant.

    But in another paper the same year, Einstein introduced a different formula for the energy of a particle: a version of the now-famous E = mc ². E is again the energy, m is the mass of the particle, and c is the speed of light.

    So here were two ways of calculating energy: one, associated with light, depended on the light’s frequency (a quantity connected with oscillations or waves); the other, associated with material particles, depended on mass.

    Did this suggest a deeper connection between matter and light?

    This thread was picked up in 1924 by Louis de Broglie, who proposed that matter, like light, could behave as both a wave and a particle. Subsequent experiments would prove him right, but it was already clear that quantum particles, such as electrons and protons, played by very different rules from everyday objects.

    A new kind of mechanics was needed: a “quantum mechanics.”

    The wave equation

    The year 1925 ushered in not one but two new theories. First was “matrix mechanics”, initiated by Werner Heisenberg and developed by Max Born, Paul Dirac, and others.

    A few months later, Erwin Schrödinger began work on “wave mechanics”. Which brings us back to Hamilton.

    Schrödinger was struck by Hamilton’s analogy between optics and mechanics. With a leap of imagination and much careful thought, he was able to combine de Broglie’s ideas and Hamilton’s equations for a material particle, to produce a “wave equation” for the particle.

    An ordinary wave equation shows how a “wave function” varies through time and space. For sound waves, for example, the wave equation shows the displacement of air, due to changes in pressure, in different places over time.

    But with Schrödinger’s wave function, it was not clear exactly what was waving. Indeed, whether it represents a physical wave or merely a mathematical convenience is still controversial.

    Waves and particles

    Nonetheless, the wave-particle duality is at the heart of quantum mechanics, which underpins so much of our modern technology – from computer chips to lasers and fibre-optic communication, from solar cells to MRI scanners, electron microscopes, the atomic clocks used in GPS, and much more.

    Indeed, whatever it is that is waving, Schrödinger’s equation can be used to predict accurately the chance of observing a particle – such as an electron in an atom – at a given time and place.

    That’s another strange thing about the quantum world: it is probabilistic, so you can’t pin these ever-oscillating electrons down to a definite location in advance, the way the equations of “classical” physics do for everyday particles such as cricket balls and communications satellites.

    Schrödinger’s wave equation enabled the first correct analysis of the hydrogen atom, which only has a single electron. In particular, it explained why an atom’s electrons can only occupy specific (quantised) energy levels.

    It was eventually shown that Schrödinger’s quantum waves and Heisenberg’s quantum matrices were equivalent in almost all situations. Heisenberg, too, had used Hamiltonian mechanics as a guide.

    Today, quantum equations are still often written in terms of their total energy – a quantity called the “Hamiltonian”, based on Hamilton’s expression for the energy of a mechanical system.

    Hamilton had hoped the mechanics he developed by analogy with light rays would prove widely applicable. But he surely never imagined how prescient his analogy would be in our understanding of the quantum world.

    Adapted from an article originally published in The Conversation.The Conversation

    Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
    Follow us on Google and Google News.

    History Mathematics Quantum Mechanics The Conversation Wave Particle Duality
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Email Reddit

    Related Articles

    Why Louis De Broglie Walked Away From His Groundbreaking Quantum Theory

    Quantum Tunneling Explained With 40-Year-Old Mathematical Discovery

    Quantum Conundrum: Exploring Stronger Nonlocality With Rock, Paper, Scissors

    What Is Quantum Entanglement? A Physicist Explains Einstein’s “Spooky Action at a Distance”

    Physicists Prove That the Imaginary Part of Quantum Mechanics Really Exists!

    Max Planck and the Birth of Quantum Mechanics

    New Discovery Reveals Quantum Particles Can Travel Backwards

    Scientists Reveal Quantum Behavior in Fluid Dynamics

    “Schrödinger’s Hat” Conceals Matter Waves Inside an Invisible Container

    10 Comments

    1. Bao-hua ZHANG on February 1, 2026 3:21 pm

      A strange thing about the quantum world: it is probabilistic, so you can’t pin these ever-oscillating electrons down to a definite location in advance, the way the equations of “classical” physics do for everyday particles such as cricket balls and communications satellites.
      VERY GOOD!

      The mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics can be fully derived from the spin dynamics of topological vortices. Quantum reality is neither particle nor wave, but dynamic topological structure. Mathematics is not a “descriptive tool” for the physical world, but the necessary expression of its intrinsic logic.
      —— Excerpted from https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1999506461873690092.

      Reply
      • Bao-hua ZHANG on February 1, 2026 8:53 pm

        Please ask researchers to think deeply:
        If the so-called light does not interact with human senses, whether directly or indirectly, what form can it exist in and can it still be called light?

        Reply
    2. Bao-hua ZHANG on February 1, 2026 8:29 pm

      What began as a mathematical insight in the 19th century later turned out to anticipate the strange wave–particle nature of the quantum world. But it raised a deeper question if light behaved instead like a wave: why should the mathematics of waves and particles resemble one another at all?
      WHY? WHY? WHY?

      The Fluidized Absolute Space Theory (FAST) constructs an extremely minimalist spacetime framework through the three ideal fluid properties of “zero viscosity, zero compression, zero anisotropy,” and on this basis, attributes all physical phenomena to the emergent behavior of topological vortices [4, 8, 12]. The theory thoroughly implements the spirit of first principles in style [7, 13], replacing the complex parameters, fields, and forces of traditional theories with geometry and symmetry as the core, achieving a paradigm shift from “force-driven” to “geometry-emergent” [1, 2]. It suggests that the unification of physics may not necessarily require continuously adding new fields and particles but could lie in rediscovering the yet-untapped potential of topology and symmetry within spacetime geometry [10, 14]. Future work should focus on the differential geometric and topological formulation of this theory and explore potential dialogues with existing cosmology, quantum gravity, and topological states of matter in condensed matter physics [3, 5, 6, 16].

      —— Excerpted from https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/2001610166567712322.

      Reply
      • Bao-hua ZHANG on February 1, 2026 8:34 pm

        The value of scientific theory lies in revealing truth rather than maintaining dogma. In today’s physics, some so-called peer-reviewed publications — including the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Physical Review Letters, Science, Nature, and others—stubbornly insist on and promote the following:
        1. Even though θ and τ particles exhibit differences in experiments, physics can claim they are the same particle. This is science.
        2. Even though topological vortices and antivortices have identical structures and opposite rotational directions, physics can define their structures and directions as entirely different. This is science.
        3. Even though two sets of cobalt-60 rotate in opposite directions and experiments reveal asymmetry, physics can still define them as mirror images of each other. This is science.
        4. Even though vortex structures are ubiquitous—from cosmic accretion disks to particle spins—physics must insist that vortex structures do not exist and require verification. Only the particles that like God, Demonic, or Angelic are the most fundamental structures of the universe. This is science.
        5. Even though everything occupies space and maintains its existence in time, physics must still debate and insist on whether space exists and whether time is a figment of the human mind. This is science.
        6. Even though space, with its non-stick, incompressible, and isotropic characteristics, provides a solid foundation for the development of physics, physics must still insist that the ideal fluid properties of space do not exist. This is science.
        and so on.

        Contemporary physics and so-called peer-reviewed publications (including the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Physical Review Letters, Science, Nature, Science Bulletin, etc.) stubbornly believe that two sets of counter rotating cobalt-60 are two mirror images of each other, constructing a more shocking pseudoscientific theoretical framework in the history of science than the “geocentric model”. This pseudo scientific framework and system have seriously hindered scientific progress and social development.

        These guys and the so-called peer-reviewed publications they manipulate no longer know what shame is:

        Example 1
        Two sets of cobalt-60 are manually rotated in opposite directions, and even without detection, people around the world know that they will not be symmetrical because these two objects are not mirror images of each other at all. However, a group of so-called physicists and so-called academic publications do not believe it. They conducted experiments and the results were indeed asymmetric, but they still firmly believed that these two objects were mirror images of each other, and the asymmetry was due to a violation of the previous natural laws (CP violation). In the history of science, there can never be a dirtier and uglier operation and explanation than this.
        —— Excerpted from https://scitechdaily.com/what-happens-when-light-gains-extra-dimensions/#comment-947619.

        Example 2
        Please see how the so-called “mystery of θ – τ” is explained: θ and τ are completely identical in all measurable physical properties such as mass, lifetime, charge, spin, etc. However, experimental observations have shown that the θ meson decays into two π mesons, while the τ meson decays into three π mesons, making it difficult for physicists to explain why they are so similar. Physicist Martin Block proposed a highly challenging idea: θ and τ are the same particle, but in weak interactions, parity is not conserved. An easy to understand explanation is the following analogy:: There are two boxes of apples with identical weight, color, and taste. However, when one box is opened, there are two apples, while when the other box is opened, there are three apples. This confuses the old farmer who buys apples. He circled around the orchard and came up with a highly challenging idea: these two boxes of apples are not from the same tree, so they are the same.
        —— Excerpted from https://scitechdaily.com/what-happens-when-light-gains-extra-dimensions/#comment-947686.

        Any so-called evidence tainted by human intervention risks distorting our understanding and cognition of the intrinsic dynamics of natural laws.
        —— Excerpted from https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1996561896279667777.

        Reply
    3. Fiber Techs San Francisco on February 2, 2026 3:56 pm

      This article offers a fascinating reminder that scientific breakthroughs often build on insights from long before their formal discovery, highlighting how William Rowan Hamilton’s 19th‑century work on the deep analogy between light and mechanical motion anticipated key themes of quantum mechanics that would only be fully understood a century later; it’s a powerful example of how foundational ideas in physics can lie dormant for decades before being recognized as central to our modern understanding of wave‑particle duality and the mathematical structure underlying quantum theory, underscoring both the continuity and the surprises in the history of science.

      Reply
      • Bao-hua ZHANG on February 2, 2026 5:36 pm

        Continue to flatter.

        Reply
      • Bao-hua ZHANG on February 3, 2026 2:41 pm

        SUCH AS:

        Example 1
        Two sets of cobalt-60 are manually rotated in opposite directions, and even without detection, people around the world know that they will not be symmetrical because these two objects are not mirror images of each other at all. However, a group of so-called physicists and so-called academic publications do not believe it. They conducted experiments and the results were indeed asymmetric, but they still firmly believed that these two objects were mirror images of each other, and the asymmetry was due to a violation of the previous natural laws (CP violation). In the history of science, there can never be a dirtier and uglier operation and explanation than this.
        —— Excerpted from https://scitechdaily.com/what-happens-when-light-gains-extra-dimensions/#comment-947619.

        Example 2
        Please see how the so-called “mystery of θ – τ” is explained: θ and τ are completely identical in all measurable physical properties such as mass, lifetime, charge, spin, etc. However, experimental observations have shown that the θ meson decays into two π mesons, while the τ meson decays into three π mesons, making it difficult for physicists to explain why they are so similar. Physicist Martin Block proposed a highly challenging idea: θ and τ are the same particle, but in weak interactions, parity is not conserved. An easy to understand explanation is the following analogy:: There are two boxes of apples with identical weight, color, and taste. However, when one box is opened, there are two apples, while when the other box is opened, there are three apples. This confuses the old farmer who buys apples. He circled around the orchard and came up with a highly challenging idea: these two boxes of apples are not from the same tree, so they are the same.
        —— Excerpted from https://scitechdaily.com/what-happens-when-light-gains-extra-dimensions/#comment-947686.

        Reply
      • Christopher Busby on February 7, 2026 3:31 am

        I have figured this out in 2008. It is time that is quantised. Reality exists at moments. Like a computer bus. Turn the planck equation around put v as the subject. Then the speed of light is constrained by v.

        Reply
    4. Akram on February 4, 2026 12:00 am

      Mashallah ramdan

      Reply
    5. David on February 5, 2026 12:19 pm

      Such an amazing discovery right while England was committing G€N0C!DE against the Irish, by such a young guy oly in his twenties at the time.

      Reply
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • YouTube

    Don't Miss a Discovery

    Subscribe for the Latest in Science & Tech!

    Trending News

    Your Blood Pressure Reading Could Be Wrong Because of One Simple Mistake

    Astronomers Stunned by Ancient Galaxy With No Spin

    Physicists May Be on the Verge of Discovering “New Physics” at CERN

    Scientists Solve 320-Million-Year Mystery of Reptile Skin Armor

    Scientists Say This Daily Walking Habit May Be the Secret to Keeping Weight Off After Dieting

    New Therapy Rewires the Brain To Restore Joy in Depression Patients

    Giant Squid Detected off Western Australia in Stunning Deep-Sea Discovery

    Popular Sugar-Free Sweetener Linked to Liver Disease, Study Warns

    Follow SciTechDaily
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Pinterest
    • Newsletter
    • RSS
    SciTech News
    • Biology News
    • Chemistry News
    • Earth News
    • Health News
    • Physics News
    • Science News
    • Space News
    • Technology News
    Recent Posts
    • This Weird Sea Creature May Have Rewritten Life’s Genetic Rulebook
    • The Hidden Types of Dementia Most People Have Never Heard Of
    • Scientists Discover Why Alcohol Prevents the Liver From Healing, Even After You Quit
    • Scientists Solve a 60-Year-Old Fat Cell Mystery — and It Changes What We Know About Obesity
    • A Crucial Atlantic Current Is Weakening and Weather Could Change Worldwide
    Copyright © 1998 - 2026 SciTechDaily. All Rights Reserved.
    • Science News
    • About
    • Contact
    • Editorial Board
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.