Why does Schrödinger get more credit for quantum mechanics than Heisenberg, even though Heisenberg’s work came first?

Question

In the 1920s, quantum mechanics went through huge changes thanks to two different approaches: Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics and Schrödinger’s wave mechanics. Heisenberg was first, publishing his matrix mechanics in 1925. His approach used complex mathematical matrices to predict quantum behavior, though it was challenging to understand and didn’t have an obvious physical meaning.

Then, in 1926, Schrödinger introduced his wave mechanics, which described particles as wave functions that felt more familiar and intuitive. Even though Heisenberg’s work came first, Schrödinger’s approach quickly became more popular and is often what people think of when they hear “quantum mechanics.” Schrödinger’s equation is widely taught and used in physics and chemistry, while Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics seems less emphasized.

So, why does Schrödinger get more credit for the discovery of quantum mechanics, despite Heisenberg laying the groundwork earlier? Did Schrödinger’s approach gain popularity just because it was easier to understand, or were there other reasons that led to him being more closely associated with quantum mechanics?

Answer 1

Posting as an extended comment (comment section is too short, I can add references if asked):

The two approaches kind of appeared at the same time. Heisenberg paper was first, but not so easily understood without the two follow-up papers with Born and Jordan (matrices were absent in the first paper, matrices appeared in the second one).

At that time, I think Schrödinger's equation could have been more popular [I am not even sure that it was] as it was more in line with common techniques of the time developed for waves and electromagnetism. Heisenberg's operators were kind of new. Maybe recently Schrödinger's equation is mentioned more because it is taught as the main postulate of quantum mechanics. Also it was Schrödinger who claimed to have proven the equality between the two methods. In popular sources, Schrödinger is mentioned more frequently because of the infamous Schrödinger cat.

All that said how are you measuring credit? Clearly the two are famous and won the Nobel Prize in Physics back-to-back. Heisenberg won the Nobel first.

Also what we call modern quantum mechanics now is neither Schrödinger's wave mechanics nor Heisenberg matrix mechanics, but Dirac's (and Von Neumann's) reformulation of both.

I can add further ideas on why Schrödinger could be more famous than Heisenberg, like the idea that Schrödinger sided often with Einstein on the interpretation of quantum mechanics, or that Heisenberg was the leader of the Nazi nuclear project, but without a proof from OP that it is the case that Schrödinger is more popular, we can only speculate.

Addition: I have thought of two counter examples: (1) Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is very famous even outside trained physicists, as it is usually used to explain the differences between quantum mechanics and classical mechanics (2) the protagonist of the highly popular TV series Breaking Bad chooses Heisenberg as his pseudonym.

Answer 2

There are eminent historians on this site who would provide the canonical answers to you. I am only a physicist.

I will try to rectify some of the most egregious mis-statements of yours in this, first.

First things first. Heisenberg got the 1932 Nobel Prize for his breakthrough, "for the creation of quantum mechanics, the application of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of the allotropic forms of hydrogen"; and Schroedinger shared the one next year, 1933, with Dirac, for elaborations on the former, "for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory".

Most top professional theorists (and I have dealt with the best), had no qualms about the owner of the racket, Heisenberg, and shared in his immoderate exasperation with the subsequent wave interface and ontology bit.

By dint of the subsequent evolution (a clear improvement!) of the math education of physicists and engineers, matrix methods were not as standard as they are today. Instead, physicists were taught waves and drilled in differential equations on account of electromagnetism and optics, so they found Wave mechanics easier and more familiar--they really had gaps in their linear algebra training. Thank heavens this is water under the bridge, by now.

Operator methods are much more elegant and powerful in matrix mechanics, and much subsequent work, including field quantization, relies on them. It was Dirac's mathematical genius that defused the misperceived dichotomy of methodology. Most professionals today, contrary to your insinuation, comfortably wiggle around the blend of the two formulations understood by Dirac. Your misperceptions of popularity appear to be predicated on clumsy, misleading, older "histories" of Quantum Mechanics.

In addition, for stick-in-the-mud applications in complex atoms and chemistry, it is easier to produce explicit numerical results for atoms and chemistry by solving elaborate ODEs (and PDEs) rather than matrix methods, so quantum chemists rely on wave mechanics. I dare assert that quantum field theorists really, really, live and breathe matrix mechanics.

Answer 3

Your assumption that "Schrodinger gets more credit for QM than Heisenberg" is not justified. It was already mentioned that Heisenberg was awarded Nobel Prize one year earlier.

Also Google ngram shows that both were mentioned with about the same frequency until approximately 2002.

In the recent years, Schrodinger wins in the ngram, probably because of the "Schrodinger equation", or for his cat, which was already mentioned.

Speaking of the credit for quantum mechanics, it was really a collective work: Heisenberg's paper was was immediately followed by papers of Born, Jordan, Heisenberg and Dirac. So they all really share the credit. Born and Dirac were awarded Nobel Prize, but later, and for other achievements, while Jordan never got it (because of his political views).

And that QM textbooks favor Schrodinger approach (with wave functions) is due to the intrinsic merits (generality) of this approach.