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:1104.5594

Particle Physics challenges to the Bohm Picture of Relativistic Quantum Field Theory

Abel Miranda

Published Apr 29, 2011• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

I discuss topics in Particle Physics applying the novel ontological formulation of Relativistic Quantum Field Theory due to David Bohm. I argument that particle physicists might too benefit from this truly novel way of thinking Physics.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1104.5594

Related papers

A vision for a Bohm-style theory of quantum electrodynamics

Roderich Tumulka

Abstract Despite many successes of quantum electrodynamics (QED), we do not presently have a good understanding of this field of physics. QED has all of the foundational problems that standard non-relativistic quantum mechanics has, and further ones in addition. I discuss some of these problems and some options for what a Bohm-style theory of QED, with an ontology in space and time, could look like. I also point out why the proposal made by Bohm himself in 1952 for QED is not quite convincing. Finally, I outline the kind of Bohm-type theory of QED that I would consider convincing, and report about recent progress toward this kind of theory.

arXiv:2409.07784•Apr 1, 2025•2 citations

BohmÕs Alternative to Quantum Mechanics This theory, ignored for most of the past four decades, challenges the probabilistic, subjectivist picture of reality implicit in the standard formulation of quantum mechanics

David Z. Albert

he study of the behavior of subatomic particles in this century is supposed to have established at least three exceedingly curious facts about the physical world. First, pure chance governs the innermost workings of nature. Second, although material objects always occupy space, situations exist in which they occupy no particular region of space. Third and perhaps most surprising, the fundamental laws that govern the behaviors of OordinaryO physical objects somehow radically fail to apply to objects that happen to be functioning as Omeasuring instrumentsO or Oobservers.O That at any rate is what the founders of quantum mechanics decided; that is what has since become the more or less oUcial dogma of theoretical physics; and that is what it says, to this day, in all the standard textbooks on that subject. But it is now emerging that those conclusions were settled on somewhat too quickly. As a matter of fact, a radically diÝerent, fully worked-out theory exists that accounts for all known behaviors of subatomic particles. In this theory, chance plays no role at all, and every material object invariably does occupy some particular region of space. Moreover, this theory takes the form of a single set of basic physical laws that apply in exactly the same way to every physical object that exists. That theory is principally the work of the late David J. Bohm of Birkbeck College, London. Although his formulation has existed in the scientiÞc literature for more than 40 years, it has until quite recently been mostly ignored. Throughout that period, the thinking about such matters has been dominated by the standard dogma, usually referred to as the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics because it can more or less be traced back to the Danish physicist Niels Bohr and his circle. I will begin this article with an outline of the main arguments for the standard dogma. I will then indicate briesy how BohmOs theory manages to get around some of those arguments. Finally, I will say a little about how and where BohmOs theory Þts into contemporary speculation about the foundations of quantum mechanics.

•Jan 1, 1994•0 citations

The quest for understanding in relativistic quantum physics

Detlev Buchholz A, Rudolf Haag

We discuss the status and some perspectives of relativistic quantum physics.

arXiv:hep-th/9910243•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Jun 1, 2000•34 citations

Perspectives About the Quantum Entropy in Bohm's Approach to Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory

Davide Fiscaletti

Quantum Matter•Jul 2, 2015•0 citations

Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Field Theory

Tian Yu Cao

Introduction: Conceptual issues in quantum field theory Part I. Philosophers' Interests in Quantum Field Theory: 1. Why are we philosophers interested in quantum field theory 2. Quantum field theory and the philosopher Part II. Three Approaches to the Foundations of Quantum Field Theory: 3. The usefulness of a general theory of quantized fields 4. Effective field theory in condensed matter physics 5. The triumph and limitations of quantum field theory 6. Comments Discussions Part III. Does Quantum Field Theory Need a Foundation: 7. Does quantum field theory need a foundation? Part IV. Mathematics, Statistical Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory: 8. Renormalization group theory: its basis and formulation in statistical physics 9. Where does quantum field theory fit into the big picture? 10. The unreasonable effectiveness of quantum field theory 11. Comment: the quantum field theory of physics and of mathematics Part V. Quantum Field Theory and Spacetime: Introduction 12. Quantum field theory and spacetime: formalism and reality 13. Quantum field theory of geometry 14. 'Localization' in quantum field theory: how much of QFT is compatible with what we know about spacetime 15. Comments VI. 16. What is quantum field theory and what did we think it was? 17. Comments Discussions Part VII.Renormalization Group: 18. What is fundamental physics? A renormalization group perspective 19. Renormalization group: an interesting yet puzzling idea Part VIII. Non-Abelian Gauge Theory: 20. Gauge fields, gravity and Bohm's theory 21. Is the Aharonov-Bohm effect local? Discussions Part IX. The Ontology of Particles or Fields: 22. The ineliminable classical face of quantum field theory 23. The logic of quanta 24. Do Feynman diagrams endorse a particle ontology? 25. On the ontology of QFT Part X. Panel Discussion.

•Mar 1, 2004•25 citations

Four Ideas of David Bohm on the Relationship between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity

Rémy Lestienne

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1977•1 citation
Abstract Despite many successes of quantum electrodynamics (QED), we do not presently have a good understanding of this field of physics. QED has all of the foundational problems that standard non-relativistic quantum mechanics has, and further ones in addition. I discuss some of these problems and some options for what a Bohm-style theory of QED, with an ontology in space and time, could look like. I also point out why the proposal made by Bohm himself in 1952 for QED is not quite convincing. Finally, I outline the kind of Bohm-type theory of QED that I would consider convincing, and report about recent progress toward this kind of theory.
he study of the behavior of subatomic particles in this century is supposed to have established at least three exceedingly curious facts about the physical world. First, pure chance governs the innermost workings of nature. Second, although material objects always occupy space, situations exist in which they occupy no particular region of space. Third and perhaps most surprising, the fundamental laws that govern the behaviors of OordinaryO physical objects somehow radically fail to apply to objects that happen to be functioning as Omeasuring instrumentsO or Oobservers.O That at any rate is what the founders of quantum mechanics decided; that is what has since become the more or less oUcial dogma of theoretical physics; and that is what it says, to this day, in all the standard textbooks on that subject. But it is now emerging that those conclusions were settled on somewhat too quickly. As a matter of fact, a radically diÝerent, fully worked-out theory exists that accounts for all known behaviors of subatomic particles. In this theory, chance plays no role at all, and every material object invariably does occupy some particular region of space. Moreover, this theory takes the form of a single set of basic physical laws that apply in exactly the same way to every physical object that exists. That theory is principally the work of the late David J. Bohm of Birkbeck College, London. Although his formulation has existed in the scientiÞc literature for more than 40 years, it has until quite recently been mostly ignored. Throughout that period, the thinking about such matters has been dominated by the standard dogma, usually referred to as the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics because it can more or less be traced back to the Danish physicist Niels Bohr and his circle. I will begin this article with an outline of the main arguments for the standard dogma. I will then indicate briesy how BohmOs theory manages to get around some of those arguments. Finally, I will say a little about how and where BohmOs theory Þts into contemporary speculation about the foundations of quantum mechanics.
Introduction: Conceptual issues in quantum field theory Part I. Philosophers' Interests in Quantum Field Theory: 1. Why are we philosophers interested in quantum field theory 2. Quantum field theory and the philosopher Part II. Three Approaches to the Foundations of Quantum Field Theory: 3. The usefulness of a general theory of quantized fields 4. Effective field theory in condensed matter physics 5. The triumph and limitations of quantum field theory 6. Comments Discussions Part III. Does Quantum Field Theory Need a Foundation: 7. Does quantum field theory need a foundation? Part IV. Mathematics, Statistical Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory: 8. Renormalization group theory: its basis and formulation in statistical physics 9. Where does quantum field theory fit into the big picture? 10. The unreasonable effectiveness of quantum field theory 11. Comment: the quantum field theory of physics and of mathematics Part V. Quantum Field Theory and Spacetime: Introduction 12. Quantum field theory and spacetime: formalism and reality 13. Quantum field theory of geometry 14. 'Localization' in quantum field theory: how much of QFT is compatible with what we know about spacetime 15. Comments VI. 16. What is quantum field theory and what did we think it was? 17. Comments Discussions Part VII.Renormalization Group: 18. What is fundamental physics? A renormalization group perspective 19. Renormalization group: an interesting yet puzzling idea Part VIII. Non-Abelian Gauge Theory: 20. Gauge fields, gravity and Bohm's theory 21. Is the Aharonov-Bohm effect local? Discussions Part IX. The Ontology of Particles or Fields: 22. The ineliminable classical face of quantum field theory 23. The logic of quanta 24. Do Feynman diagrams endorse a particle ontology? 25. On the ontology of QFT Part X. Panel Discussion.