3 ms·
> De-Broglie-Bohm theory includes the same set of non-intuitive behaviors that all valid interpretations of quantum mechanics have, in other words it is not tes
by wolfgke 10y ago
> De-Broglie-Bohm theory includes the same set of non-intuitive behaviors that all valid interpretations of quantum mechanics have, in other words it is not testable different from other interpretations.
There exist opinions that disagree:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory&oldid=740277352#Non-equivalence https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=De_Broglie%E2%80%...
"In 2016, Pisin Chen and Hagen Kleinert argued that the Copenhagen interpretation and the De Broglie–Bohm theory yield different results for the ratio of peak intensities in the double-slit experiment. They concluded that they are thus not mathematically equivalent."
> http://www.ejtp.com/articles/ejtpv13i35p1.pdf http://www.ejtp.com/articles/ejtpv13i35p1.pdf
- davorak 10y agoThanks for the citation, I had not seen that recent paper(2016). Pisin Chen and Hagen Kleinert say that De-Broglie-Bohm theory does not agree with experimental results or the rest of quantum mechanics. This is surprising since there evidence of this is from a 1979 paper, their citation [15] [15] C. Philippidis, C. Dewdney and B. J. Hiley, Il Nuovo Cimento 52B, 15 (1979) can be found online(republished) at: http://www.pbx-brasil.com/FisQuan/Notas/Area01/semana041/papers/QuantumInterferenceAndTheQuantumPotential.pdf http://www.pbx-brasil.com/FisQuan/Notas/Area01/semana041/pap... I would want to do some additional research before agreeing with Pisin Chen and Hagen Kleinert that the De-Broglie-Bohm theory has been experimentally disproven. Other then combining the existing research double checking the numerical simulation and algorithms in [15] would be my approach. Pisin Chen and Hagen Kleinert paper seems to lack such an examination which would have made for a more conclusive argument.