These questions were originally asked to one of PF.com's member, but he wanted me to post it publically so more people could benefit from the answers: Also if anyone else got enough knowledge about this interpretation to answer these too, go ahead. #1 In dBB (deBroglieBohm), what does the pilot wave consist of if not matter? How can this wavefunctional "non matter" control all the matter in the universe? I've read some different explanations of this like "it exists in some high dimensional abstract space". This SCREAMS crackpot to me. If you are going to postulate the existence of some unobserved dimension and space, you need extraordinary evidence or all you are doing is spitting on Occam's grave. #2 In the double slit experiment, deBroglie's explanation makes sense to me, until you bring in the fact about placing a detector at one of the slits which in return removes the interference pattern, how does dBB explain this ? Why do a detector **** up the wave pattern if there truly is a wave there? In a little (layman) detail if you wouldn't mind. #3 Also why doesn't the pilot waves continue to affect our world? (by the way, is there only ONE universal pilot wave, or many for each particle?) If I emit a photon, the photon is a quanta/particle surfing on this wave, but after the photon is absorbed, the wave continues to propagate through space. However, it's without any detectable influence on any other matter anymore... Why is this? Isn't this indirect disproof of it's existence? #4 Nonlocality, infinite speed, or finite but faster than light speed? Also where exactly (in layman terms) are the nonlocality introduced to Bohms interpretation. What does it explain in dBB? Why is it needed? #5 According to all I've read on dBB it's 100% deterministic, so uncertaintly principle doesn't really state that particles doesn't have definite location and momentum, because they do have that, but rather that we as humans are limited so we can't figure out both at the same time right? Also there is no inherit randomness in nature at all, it's all 100% deterministic and objective(according to dBB) ? #6 Why Bohm instead of Copenhagen, MWI, TI etc.? Is there any experiments that lead you (the supporter of Bohm) to believe dBB is more likely/has indirect evience favouring it over other interpretations?