Recent content by Demystifier

Thanks, I have corrected the typos. :smile:

I have just wrote a new, relatively long, insight article. Comments are welcome. :smile: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/how-can-every-physicist-become-a-bohmian/

Yes, that's particularly important in thermodynamics. No branch of physics is so profound in being precise about what is kept fixed in partial derivatives, as is thermodynamics. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_relations

I agree with other notes in your last post here, so I will only answer your question above. As long as we don't study photon creation or destruction, we can use a naive picture of Bohmian photon as a thing with a particle trajectory. In this picture the Bohmian photon does not have polarization...

@DrChinese here you are asking how entanglement is produced. It involves a creation of photons, and this can't be well explained by naive Bohmian mechanics in terms of particle trajectories. For that purpose one needs Bohmian QFT, which cannot be so easily visualized in terms of particle...

Zwiebach is an excellent start in string theory, but it assumes that you have already learned more basic stuff in physics and math. For physics, start with the theoretical minimum book series by Susskind. For math, learn calculus (as you said you will), linear algebra (vectors and matrices), and...

So you are one of those who hides behind the vague words, just sayin. :wink:

Unlike Copenhagen/orthodox type interpretations, which function as "let's just hide ugly stuff behind vague words, so when someone presses us to be more precise we can hide behind the shut-up-and-calculate doctrine, and when someone objects that we don't understand the meaning of those...

Let me answer your questions in the reverse order. 1. Bohmian mechanics (BM) makes the same measurable predictions as standard quantum theory, in this sense it obeys "the rest of physics". Some principles, like the Born rule, the uncertainty principle and the principle of Lorentz invariance...

In QM, the Bell theorem tells us that this hidden state cannot be local, in the sense that it cannot obey purely local laws of physics.

That's also true for determinism. The difference between determinism and superdeterminism is the following: Determinism postulates deterministic equations of motion, while superdeterminisim, in addition, postulates also a law for the initial conditions. In QM, the idea of superdeterminism (as...

Yes, at the practical level, that's correct. But at the conceptual level, the origin of UP is explained somewhat differently. In my opinion, the important principle of QM is not uncertainty but contextuality. This means that measurement changes the system and influences its properties. The so...

Fine, but there are interpretations of QM that include randomness in an apparent sense, not in a fundamental sense. Examples are Bohmian mechanics and many world interpretation.

We don't know that. That's an assumption, which may be true, or may be wrong.

No, it's apparent to anyone who cannot observe and compute all fine details of the huge number of degrees of freedom of the macroscopic measuring apparatus.