Defense of pilot wave theory against Motl

In summary, the conversation discusses the challenges of simplifying physics, particularly in relation to the Bohmian interpretation and the use of mathematics. The speaker also suggests that improving mathematical rigor can be achieved by considering quantum particles as arrow-like objects rather than point objects.
  • #1
Ilja
676
83
I remember somewhere (don't remember where) Motl's attack against pilot wave theory has been mentioned.

Here is my rebuttal: http://ilja-schmelzer.de/realism/Motl.php"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I liked your "If there is a simple way to do the things, use it". Simplifying physics is no easy task, especially for smart people who are rapid at learning complicated physics.

Regards,
Arjen
 
  • #3
ArjenDijksman said:
Simplifying physics is no easy task, especially for smart people who are rapid at learning complicated physics.
This is an excellent observation.
For brilliant physicists who fail to see the advantage of the Bohmian interpretation I often say something similar:
They are too clever to see the obvious.
 
  • #4
we could simplify things but ignoring mathematical rigour ;D
 
  • #5
zetafunction said:
we could simplify things but ignoring mathematical rigour ;D
But it is way better if we simplify things and improve rigour. A simple example is to stop considering quantum particles as point objects while they are in fact better represented by vectors, mathematical objects with spatial extension. So by considering quantum particles as arrow-like objects, we gain in physical and hence mathematical rigour.
 

1. What is the pilot wave theory?

The pilot wave theory is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that proposes that particles have definite positions and follow definite trajectories, guided by a "pilot wave" that determines their behavior. This theory was first proposed by Louis de Broglie in the 1920s and has been further developed by David Bohm and others.

2. How does the pilot wave theory differ from other interpretations of quantum mechanics?

The pilot wave theory differs from other interpretations of quantum mechanics, such as the Copenhagen interpretation, by rejecting the idea of wavefunction collapse. In the pilot wave theory, particles have definite positions at all times and do not randomly "collapse" into a single state when observed.

3. What is the main argument against the pilot wave theory by Motl?

The main argument against the pilot wave theory by Motl is that it violates the principle of locality. According to this principle, particles can only interact with each other if they are in each other's immediate vicinity. However, in the pilot wave theory, the pilot wave interacts with particles at a distance, which Motl argues is a violation of locality.

4. How do defenders of the pilot wave theory respond to Motl's argument?

Defenders of the pilot wave theory argue that while it may seem to violate the principle of locality, it actually maintains a local and deterministic description of particles. The pilot wave is not a physical entity, but rather a mathematical tool that guides the particles' behavior. It does not transmit any information or energy, so it does not violate the principle of locality.

5. What are the potential implications of the pilot wave theory if it is proven to be correct?

If the pilot wave theory is proven to be correct, it would provide a more intuitive and deterministic understanding of quantum mechanics. It would also have implications for fields such as quantum computing and cosmology, as it could potentially resolve some of the paradoxes and mysteries surrounding these areas. However, more research and evidence are needed to fully validate the pilot wave theory.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
3
Replies
99
Views
8K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top