Talk:de Broglie–Bohm theory

Archives: Index 1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

ESSW, surreal trajectories, many hydrodynamic results.

The (tiny) experimental section has a cryptic comment about ESSW. There is actually quite a lot of work related to this paper.

Frumkin, Valeri, and John WM Bush. "Misinference of interaction-free measurement from a classical system." Physical Review A 108.6 (2023): L060201.
Frumkin, Valeri, et al. "Real surreal trajectories in pilot-wave hydrodynamics." Physical Review A 106.1 (2022): L010203.
https://thales.mit.edu/bush/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Bush-AnnRev2015.pdf

In particular some of the work out of JWM Bush's group shows that the surreal trajectories of ESSW are real trajectories in classical hydrodynamics. Johnjbarton (talk) 19:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrodynamic quantum analogs: "Experiments cannot be reproduced"

In the section on hydrodynamic quantum anologs, it says "Hydrodynamic pilot-wave analogs have been claimed to duplicate the double slit experiment, tunneling, quantized orbits, and numerous other quantum phenomena which have led to a resurgence in interest in pilot wave theories."

Shortly afterwards the article says "These results have been disputed: the experiments cannot be reproduced."

Attached to this second quote are the following two references:

These references do not say the experiments cannot be reproduced, they are only concerned with the double slit experiment in particular. The Elysian Vector Fields (talk) 02:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the text. I made a quick pass sometime ago to remove some of the egregious claims in the article. The hydrodynamics analog work is rather convoluted and the fluid dynamics of it has taken on life of its own. That makes simple statements on the relationship to QM difficult either way. Johnjbarton (talk) 03:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review ref

This recent review should be useful

Benseny, A., Albareda, G., Sanz, Á. et al. Applied Bohmian mechanics. Eur. Phys. J. D 68, 286 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjd/e2014-50222-4

Johnjbarton (talk) 01:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Implications of the article in Nature July 2025

This publication says in the abstract:

We find that the measured energy–speed relationship does not align with the particle dynamics postulated by the guiding equation in Bohmian mechanics.

I think this is highly relevant for this Wikipedia article. Is there an expert who could update it?

PS: This article (in German) claims that this might be "the end" for the de Broglie–Bohm theory. But I think this statement is an exaggeration. Kallichore (talk) 22:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The linked article is

Sharoglazova, V., Puplauskis, M., Mattschas, C. et al. Energy–speed relationship of quantum particles challenges Bohmian mechanics. Nature 643, 67–72 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09099-4

I think we should wait until the article has some citations. I would consider this as a extraordinary claim in that it asserts that a QM model now 70 years old makes an incorrect prediction. Since Bohmian mechanics is generally considered to be equivalent to other QM interpretations it seems likely to me that we will see alternative interpretations of the the measurements discussed in the paper. Johnjbarton (talk) 23:18, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is WP:TOOSOON.--ReyHahn (talk) 07:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]