- #1
- 8,131
- 1,878
This is a discussion aimed towards gaining a better understanding of Bohmian Mechanics (BM) - at least on my part. I would like to see BM in the best light possible.
My starting point in this journey is a reference to Sheldon Goldstein's summary in the Stanford Encyclopedia: Bohmian Mechanics
A couple of points for those of you new to this subject so we have a point of reference:
1. BM can reproduce most of the predictions of QM.
2. BM is "grossly non-local" (Bell) and is explicitly incompatible with Lorentz invariance.
3. BM is deterministic - a Hidden Variable variable theory. Knowledge of a particle's initial position and its wave function is sufficient to predict its future.
4. BM does not need to give a special position to the act of measurement as does QM, and therefore "solves" the measurement problem.
5. Spin does not exist as a fundamental property of particles within BM, but the measurable effects of spin can be explained in some if not all cases.
My starting point in this journey is a reference to Sheldon Goldstein's summary in the Stanford Encyclopedia: Bohmian Mechanics
A couple of points for those of you new to this subject so we have a point of reference:
1. BM can reproduce most of the predictions of QM.
2. BM is "grossly non-local" (Bell) and is explicitly incompatible with Lorentz invariance.
3. BM is deterministic - a Hidden Variable variable theory. Knowledge of a particle's initial position and its wave function is sufficient to predict its future.
4. BM does not need to give a special position to the act of measurement as does QM, and therefore "solves" the measurement problem.
5. Spin does not exist as a fundamental property of particles within BM, but the measurable effects of spin can be explained in some if not all cases.