Recent content by olcay

:bugeye: Isn't B.J. Hiley a prominent figure? What's the standard? Publish a list of prominent figures.

Demistifyer, Sorry to ignore you. I meaned "more other bohmians". :) Yes, rules are rules. I will continue to ask my questions with published papers of Hiley anymore.

I'm dazzled... In case of defending an argument, rules you mentioned should be rational and efficient. But To point a paper to ask stg. about a subject, isn't it so weird to forbiden talking about it because it's unpublished? When was it accepted as unscientific to discuss(not to defend!) a...

Ok, you are right. I'm just kidding. But I did not claim any argument as truth or any paper as a proper article. Just asked a few about what that text is trying to say. No need for scientific elitism(which is really necessary when arguing latest findings). other papers I mentioned, of course...

"A quantum potential approach to the Wheeler delayed-choice experiment" - Nature 315, 294 - 297 (23 May 1985); doi:10.1038/315294a0 "What is Erased in the Quantum Erasure?" Foundations of Physics Volume 36, Number 12 / December, 2006 DOI 10.1007/s10701-006-9086-4 In these papers...

Hi, Some of you may have read this article about defence of Bohmian trajectories against ESSW papers. Quantum Trajectories, Real, Surreal or an Approximation to a Deeper Process? B. J. Hiley, R. E. Callaghan and O. Maroney. http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0010020" In a nutshell it...

Bohmian "surreal" trajectories Hi guys... I have read most of bohmian argument and critics about it here. But unfortunately, I'm an economist, have not a physics B.A.! I want to ask stg., I'll be grateful if you answer... I read Englert's argument (ESSW paper) and also replies... But...

Shortly, I read about stg. on wave-only view. It says particle concept of electron is wrong and could be understood as wave-packets. "Physical" means these waves are real in contrary to Born's statistical interpretation. In 1926, Born was debate with Schroedinger about reality of...

Hi, In some books and sites it's said to be nothing but physical wave packet for physical particles. They says a real-physical wave packet can exhibit all the features of a massive particle. Is it true(shown with experiments?), or is it one of the interpretations?

Let's clarify You say the differences between a classical(mechanical and electro-magnetic) wave and quantum wave is 1. You can not see quantum waves. 2. It has a property of collapse to a particle Right? all the problems is that?

Is there an e-text that explains differences between classical wave and quantum wave, conceptually and physically?

scientists explain wave collapse using real waves picture. Interference experiment is being explained with waves' interference, coherence and decoherence. but when it's time to name it, they say it is not a classical wave! I can't understand. What's the difference between classical waves and...

I think the orthodox copenhagen interpretation says only about observations. So according to this, wave structure of electron is mentioned as a probability distributions to find particles on screen, right? In a recent article about myths in quantum mechanics Nikolic says "electrons and...

Hi, Some writers on quantum physics, especially on copenhagen interpretation, talk about waves as "real" before measurement/hitting the screen/disturbing. Electron, in nature, is nothing but a real physical wave. They say particle like appearence as normally collapsing of this wave function...