What is De-Broglie's interpretation and how does it relate to DBB theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bhobba
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interpretation
  • #151
atyy said:
Walchover's article is yet another well-known crackpot article!

You keep doing whatever it takes not to understand the following correct understanding of what occurs physically in nature.

"Since 1954, when this passage was written, I have come to support wholeheartedly an hypothesis proposed by Bohm and Vigier. According to this hypothesis, the random perturbations to which the particle would be constantly subjected, and which would have the probability of presence in terms of ψ, arise from the interaction of the particle with a “subquantic medium” which escapes our observation and is entirely chaotic, and which is everywhere present in what we call “empty space"."

A correct understanding of what occurs physically in nature in terms of wave-particle duality put forward by a Nobel laureate in 1954 ignored in order for mainstream physicists not to understand the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment is evidence the particle always travels through a single slit.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
liquidspacetime said:
It's just a matter of time until they will get the math correct. de Broglie had the correct understanding 60 years ago.

"Since 1954, when this passage was written, I have come to support wholeheartedly an hypothesis proposed by Bohm and Vigier. According to this hypothesis, the random perturbations to which the particle would be constantly subjected, and which would have the probability of presence in terms of ##\psi##, arise from the interaction of the particle with a “subquantic medium” which escapes our observation and is entirely chaotic, and which is everywhere present in what we call “empty space"."

But until that is done, I think these pop science articles are misleading. The Wolchover article is especially misleading because she considers de Broglie-Bohm theory, which needs no help from these experiments. The experiments can never produce de Broglie-Bohm theory, because for mutiple particles, the wave is in configuration space.
 
  • #153
liquidspacetime said:
You keep doing whatever it takes not to understand the following correct understanding of what occurs physically in nature.

"Since 1954, when this passage was written, I have come to support wholeheartedly an hypothesis proposed by Bohm and Vigier. According to this hypothesis, the random perturbations to which the particle would be constantly subjected, and which would have the probability of presence in terms of ψ, arise from the interaction of the particle with a “subquantic medium” which escapes our observation and is entirely chaotic, and which is everywhere present in what we call “empty space"."

A correct understanding of what occurs physically in nature in terms of wave-particle duality put forward by a Nobel laureate in 1954 ignored in order for mainstream physicists not to understand the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment is evidence the particle always travels through a single slit.

No. We already agreed it works for single particles. Show me the formulation for multiple particles. Wolchover's article is rubbish.
 
  • #154
Closed pending moderation.

All: remember the PF rules on acceptable sources. Don't post them, and if you see someone else posting them, don't argue, report the post.
 
Back
Top