Bohmian trajectories vs. Feynman paths, always continuous?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of Bohmian trajectories in the context of quantum mechanics, particularly comparing them to Feynman paths. Participants explore whether Bohmian paths are continuous and how they relate to concepts such as particle creation and annihilation, as well as the implications of smooth versus non-differentiable trajectories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that Bohmian trajectories are expected to be continuous, with the assumption that particles exist along the entire trajectory.
  • Others clarify that particle creation and annihilation are aspects of Quantum Field Theory, where fields are quantized rather than particles.
  • One participant references a paper suggesting that the smoothness of Bohmian trajectories can be inferred from the smoothness of the functions involved.
  • Another participant questions whether generalized forms of Bohmian mechanics could allow for non-differentiable trajectories, citing the possibility of stochastic trajectories like those in a Wiener process.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of a Wiener process being non-differentiable and whether this affects the physical interpretation of trajectories.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the continuity and differentiability of Bohmian trajectories. While some argue for their smoothness, others propose the possibility of non-differentiable or stochastic trajectories, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

There are references to mathematical requirements and assumptions regarding the differentiability of trajectories, as well as the implications of the guiding equation in Bohmian mechanics. The discussion also touches on the relationship between classical mechanics and quantum interpretations.

asimov42
Messages
376
Reaction score
4
After reading some of the other posts on the Forum, I'm clear on the fact that Bohmian trajectories (of the de Broglie Bohm formulation) and the paths of the Feynman path integral formulation are very different things.

I'm wondering (and it's a naive question, no doubt), when talking about Bohmian paths - if you have a particle at position A, and then later observe the particle at position B, are you assured that the path the particle took from A to B was continuous? That is, there is no uncertainty and the particle is assumed to 'exist' along the whole trajectory? (wondering in part how the de Broglie Bohm formulation deals with particle creation / annihilation along a trajectory)

Thanks all.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
asimov42 said:
I'm wondering (and it's a naive question, no doubt), when talking about Bohmian paths - if you have a particle at position A, and then later observe the particle at position B, are you assured that the path the particle took from A to B was continuous? That is, there is no uncertainty and the particle is assumed to 'exist' along the whole trajectory? (wondering in part how the de Broglie Bohm formulation deals with particle creation / annihilation along a trajectory)

Yes that's true.

Particle creation and annihilation is part of Quantum Field Theory where the fundamental thing is the field - not a particle. Here is how it works. You take a field. Model it as a large number of blobs and apply quantum rules to those blobs. You then take the blob size to zero and you get a QFT. Particles then emerge from the field - but it's the field that is quantised. The field blobs are what you apply the BM interpretation to.

The particles arise in an abstract way similar to the quantum harmonic oscillator:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_harmonic_oscillator

Thanks
Bill
 
An argument for Bohmian trajectories to be smooth is given in http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2034 "Furthermore, as (10) is a smooth function of its arguments, one expects that particle trajectories are smooth too."

I am not sure whether the "expects" is the physicists intuition or whether it can be stated as a mathematical requirement.
 
atyy said:
An argument for Bohmian trajectories to be smooth is given in http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2034 "Furthermore, as (10) is a smooth function of its arguments, one expects that particle trajectories are smooth too.".

It's a particle under the influence of the quantum potential. That its continuously differentiable is the usual assumption in mechanical systems where particles are subject to a potential.

Thanks
Bill
 
Although the phase function is multivalued, its gradient is a single valued function and we have a velocity field picture where trajectories (integral curves) cannot cross or touch. The effective potential (Q + V) always acts so as to preserve this single-valuedness , which follows from the properties of the phase/Hamilton's principle function(action).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
bhobba said:
It's a particle under the influence of the quantum potential. That its continuously differentiable is the usual assumption in mechanical systems where particles are subject to a potential.

But could a more generalized form admit non-differentiable trajectories? Before the comment on smooth trajectories, Nikolic says "In principle, the trajectories could be stochastic." So could one have something like a Wiener process in which the trajectories are not differentiable?

Edit: The OP asked about continuous, and the Wiener process trajectories are continuous even if they are not differentiable. So maybe asking whether the trajectory could be like white noise, in which the trajectories are not continuous, would be a better question.
 
Last edited:
atyy said:
But could a more generalized form admit non-differentiable trajectories?

It obeys a differential equation which means at least its first derivative must exist. Normally, in mechanics, it is assumed to be continuously differentiable.

See its guiding equation
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/#eqs

I suspect, similar to rigged Hilbert spaces, it would be fruitful to consider the physically realizable solutions as continuously differentiable and rapidly decreasing to all orders so as to apply Fourier transforms easily.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
atyy said:
Edit: The OP asked about continuous, and the Wiener process trajectories are continuous even if they are not differentiable. So maybe asking whether the trajectory could be like white noise, in which the trajectories are not continuous, would be a better question.
What's the actual upshot of a Wiener process being non-differentiable? Usually you have finite data and are computing finite differences to approximate derivatives, and the time series of a Wiener process is no exception, so it's not obvious to me there is any penalty for this fact.
 
atyy said:
So could one have something like a Wiener process in which the trajectories are not differentiable?
Yes. See e.g. the recent paper
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1510.06391
and references therein.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: atyy

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 376 ·
13
Replies
376
Views
24K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 159 ·
6
Replies
159
Views
14K
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
16K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K