Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1002.1568

Bhomian Mechanics vs. Standard Quantum Mechanics: a Difference in Experimental Predictions

Artur Szczepański

Published Feb 8, 2010• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Standard Quantum Mechanics (QM) predicts an anti-intuitive fenomenon here referred to as "quantum autoscattering", which is excluded by Bhomian Mechanics. The scheme of a gedanken experiment testing the QM prediction is briefly discussed.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1002.1568

Related papers

Experiment can decide between standard and Bohmian quantum mechanics

Mehdi Golshani, Omid Akhavan

In this investigation, we have considered two thought experiments to make a comparison between predictions of the standard and the Bohmian quantum mechanics. Concerning this, a two-particle system has been studied at two various situations of the entangled and the unentangled states. In the first experiment, the two theories can predict different results at the individual level, while their statistical results are the same. In the other experiment, not only they are in disagreement at the individual level, but their equivalence at the statistical level also breaks down, if one uses selective detection. Furthermore, we discuss about some objections that can be raised against the results of the two suggested experiments.

arXiv:quant-ph/0103100•Mar 17, 2001•4 citations

On the Experimental Incompatibility Between Standard and Bohmian Quantum Mechanics

Mehdi Golshani, Omid Akhavan

Recently, three experiments have been proposed in order to show that the standard and Bohmian quantum mechanics can have different predictions at the individual level of particles. However, these thought experiments have encountered some objections. In this work, it is our purpose to show that our basic conclusions about those experiments are still intact.

arXiv:quant-ph/0110123•Oct 20, 2001•1 citation

Bohmian prediction about a two double-slit experiment and its disagreement with standard quantum mechanics

Mehdi Golshani, Omid Akhavan

The significance of proposals that can predict different results for standard and Bohmian quantum mechanics have been the subject of many discussions over the years. Here, we suggest a particular experiment (a two double-slit experiment) and a special detection process, that we call selective detection, to distinguish between the two theories. Using our suggested experiment, it is shown that the two theories predict different observable results at the individual level for a geometrically symmetric arrangement. However, their predictions are the same at the ensemble level. On the other hand, we have shown that at the statistical level, if we use our selective detection, then either the predictions of the two theories differ or where standard quantum mechanics is silent or vague, Bohmian quantum mechanics makes explicit predictions.

arXiv:quant-ph/0103101•Mar 17, 2001•32 citations

Session F: Contributed Oral Papers – F4: Theory: A non-QM explanation of Jacques' (2007) ``Wheeler gedanken experiment with delayed choice,'' without delayed choice

Jeffrey H. Boyd

The publication in Science in 2007 of Jacques et al ``Experimental realization of Wheeler's delayed-choice gedanken experiment,'' appears to demonstrate many counter-intuitive ideas. The solidity of those conclusions depends on whether quantum mechanics (QM) provides the ONLY available explanation of the experiment. By thinking outside the box we have arrived at a different explanation of that experiment. QM is the box outside of which we think, not because of criticism of QM, but in order to explore an unconventional viewpoint. Our explanation is based on elementary waves. We find no delayed choice. What appears to be delayed choice is an illusion. We also find local cause and effect. This does not prove that our way of thinking is correct. It simply means that we propose an alternative explanation of the experiment that does not lead to all those counter-intuitive ideas.

•Nov 19, 2011•0 citations

Bohmian mechanics for instrumentalists

Hrvoje Nikolić

We formulate Bohmian mechanics (BM) such that the main objects of concern are macroscopic phenomena, while microscopic particle trajectories only play an auxiliary role. Such a formulation makes it easy to understand why BM always makes the same measurable predictions as standard quantum mechanics (QM), irrespective of the details of microscopic trajectories. Relativistic quantum field theory (QFT) is interpreted as an effective long-distance theory that at smaller distances must be replaced by some more fundamental theory. Analogy with condensed-matter physics suggests that this more fundamental theory could have a form of nonrelativistic QM, offering a simple generic resolution of an apparent conflict between BM and relativistic QFT.

arXiv:1811.11643•International Journal of Quantum Information•May 23, 2019•8 citations

Optical test of quantum mechanics

Christopher C. Gerry, P. L. Knight

Over the past three decades or so, experiments of the type called Gedanken have become real. Recall the Schrödinger quote from Chapter 8: “… we never experiment with just one electron or atom or (small) molecule.” This is no longer true. We can do experiments involving single atoms or molecules and even on single photons, and thus it becomes possible to demonstrate that the “ridiculous consequences” alluded to by Schrödinger are, in fact, quite real. We have already discussed some examples of single-photon experiments in Chapter 6, and in Chapter 10 we shall discuss experiments performed with single atoms and single trapped ions. In the present chapter, we shall elaborate further on experimental tests of fundamentals of quantum mechanics involving a small number of photons. By fundamental tests we mean tests of quantum mechanics against the predictions of local realistic theories (i.e. hidden variable theories). Specifically, we discuss optical experiments demonstrating violations of Bell's inequalities, violations originally discussed by Bell in the context of two spin-one-half particles. Such violations, if observed experimentally, falsify local realistic hidden-variable theories. Locality refers to the notion, familiar in classical physics, that there cannot be a causal relationship between events with space-like separations. That is, the events cannot be connected by any signal moving at, or less than, the speed of light; i.e. the events are outside the light-cone. But in quantum mechanics, it appears that nonlocal effects, effects seemly violating the classical notion of locality in a certain restricted sense, are possible.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 28, 2004•0 citations
In this investigation, we have considered two thought experiments to make a comparison between predictions of the standard and the Bohmian quantum mechanics. Concerning this, a two-particle system has been studied at two various situations of the entangled and the unentangled states. In the first experiment, the two theories can predict different results at the individual level, while their statistical results are the same. In the other experiment, not only they are in disagreement at the individual level, but their equivalence at the statistical level also breaks down, if one uses selective detection. Furthermore, we discuss about some objections that can be raised against the results of the two suggested experiments.
The significance of proposals that can predict different results for standard and Bohmian quantum mechanics have been the subject of many discussions over the years. Here, we suggest a particular experiment (a two double-slit experiment) and a special detection process, that we call selective detection, to distinguish between the two theories. Using our suggested experiment, it is shown that the two theories predict different observable results at the individual level for a geometrically symmetric arrangement. However, their predictions are the same at the ensemble level. On the other hand, we have shown that at the statistical level, if we use our selective detection, then either the predictions of the two theories differ or where standard quantum mechanics is silent or vague, Bohmian quantum mechanics makes explicit predictions.
The publication in Science in 2007 of Jacques et al ``Experimental realization of Wheeler's delayed-choice gedanken experiment,'' appears to demonstrate many counter-intuitive ideas. The solidity of those conclusions depends on whether quantum mechanics (QM) provides the ONLY available explanation of the experiment. By thinking outside the box we have arrived at a different explanation of that experiment. QM is the box outside of which we think, not because of criticism of QM, but in order to explore an unconventional viewpoint. Our explanation is based on elementary waves. We find no delayed choice. What appears to be delayed choice is an illusion. We also find local cause and effect. This does not prove that our way of thinking is correct. It simply means that we propose an alternative explanation of the experiment that does not lead to all those counter-intuitive ideas.
We formulate Bohmian mechanics (BM) such that the main objects of concern are macroscopic phenomena, while microscopic particle trajectories only play an auxiliary role. Such a formulation makes it easy to understand why BM always makes the same measurable predictions as standard quantum mechanics (QM), irrespective of the details of microscopic trajectories. Relativistic quantum field theory (QFT) is interpreted as an effective long-distance theory that at smaller distances must be replaced by some more fundamental theory. Analogy with condensed-matter physics suggests that this more fundamental theory could have a form of nonrelativistic QM, offering a simple generic resolution of an apparent conflict between BM and relativistic QFT.
Over the past three decades or so, experiments of the type called Gedanken have become real. Recall the Schrödinger quote from Chapter 8: “… we never experiment with just one electron or atom or (small) molecule.” This is no longer true. We can do experiments involving single atoms or molecules and even on single photons, and thus it becomes possible to demonstrate that the “ridiculous consequences” alluded to by Schrödinger are, in fact, quite real. We have already discussed some examples of single-photon experiments in Chapter 6, and in Chapter 10 we shall discuss experiments performed with single atoms and single trapped ions. In the present chapter, we shall elaborate further on experimental tests of fundamentals of quantum mechanics involving a small number of photons. By fundamental tests we mean tests of quantum mechanics against the predictions of local realistic theories (i.e. hidden variable theories). Specifically, we discuss optical experiments demonstrating violations of Bell's inequalities, violations originally discussed by Bell in the context of two spin-one-half particles. Such violations, if observed experimentally, falsify local realistic hidden-variable theories. Locality refers to the notion, familiar in classical physics, that there cannot be a causal relationship between events with space-like separations. That is, the events cannot be connected by any signal moving at, or less than, the speed of light; i.e. the events are outside the light-cone. But in quantum mechanics, it appears that nonlocal effects, effects seemly violating the classical notion of locality in a certain restricted sense, are possible.