The reality of Bohm's intellectual journey is very different from what is often claimed by the proponents of "Bohmian Mechanics" and others as we will explain in this paper. He did not believe a mechanical explanation of quantum phenomena was possible. Central to his thinking, and incidentally to Bohr's also, was the notion of 'unbroken wholeness', a notion that is crucial for understanding quantum properties like quantum nonlocality. His proposals were based on a primitive notion of `process' or `activity', producing a more 'organic' approach to quantum phenomena. He published many papers outlining these new ideas, some plausible, some less so, but was not able to develop a coherent mathematical structure to support the work. Over the last ten years much of that missing mathematics has been put in place. This paper will report this new work, concentrating on providing a coherent overview of the whole programme.
The reality of Bohm's intellectual journey is very different from what is often claimed by the proponents of "Bohmian Mechanics" and others as we will explain in this paper. He did not believe a mechanical explanation of quantum phenomena was possible. Central to his thinking, and incidentally to Bohr's also, was the notion of 'unbroken wholeness', a notion that is crucial for understanding quantum properties like quantum nonlocality. His proposals were based on a primitive notion of process' or activity', producing a more 'organic' approach to quantum phenomena. He published many papers outlining these new ideas, some plausible, some less so, but was not able to develop a coherent mathematical structure to support the work. Over the last ten years much of that missing mathematics has been put in place. This paper will report this new work, concentrating on providing a coherent overview of the whole programme.
This chapter provides a fully comprehensive overview of the Bohmian formulation of quantum phenomena. It deals with a historical review of the difficulties found by Louis de Broglie, David Bohm and John Bell to convince the scientific community about the validity and utility of Bohmian mechanics. The chapter presents a formal explanation of Bohmian mechanics for nonrelativistic single-particle quantum systems. It explains a didactic introduction of the Bohmian formalism and a self-contained summary for any newcomer interested in using Bohmian mechanics in their daily research activity. The quantum theory revolves around the notions of particles and waves. Einstein died in 1955, convinced that a correct reformulation of quantum theory would preserve local causality. Aerodynamics and hydrodynamics are examples of such continuous material systems. The initial formulation of quantum mechanics with Bohmian trajectories developed by de Broglie and Bohm was performed for dynamical systems with associated velocities much slower than the speed of light.
In this paper we discuss the notion of a ‘particle’ and its ‘trajectory’ in the Bohm approach to quantum theory in the context of a non-commutative dynamics which has classical mechanics as a commutative sub-algebra. We study the von Neumann-Moyal algebra and show that the key equations used in the Bohm approach are already contained within this structure. They appear as projections from the non-commutative phase space into space-time. This structure leads us to a more radical view of quantum processes involving individual particles.
This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the Bohmian formulation of quantum mechanics. It starts with a historical review of the difficulties found by Louis de Broglie, David Bohm, and John S. Bell to convince the scientific community about the validity and utility of Bohmian mechanics. Then, a formal explanation of Bohmian mechanics for nonrelativistic, single-particle quantum systems is presented. The generalization to many-particle systems, where the exchange interaction and the spin play an important role, is also presented. After that, the measurement process in Bohmian mechanics is discussed. It is emphasized that Bohmian mechanics exactly reproduces the mean value and temporal and spatial correlations obtained from the standard, that is the Copenhagen or orthodox, formulation. The ontological characteristics of Bohmian mechanics provide a description of measurements as another type of interaction without the need for introducing the wave function collapse. Several solved problems are presented at the end of the chapter, giving additional mathematical support to some particular issues. A detailed description of computational algorithms to obtain Bohmian trajectories from the numerical solution of the Schrodinger or the Hamilton-Jacobi equations are presented in an appendix. The motivation of this chapter is twofold: first, as a didactic introduction to Bohmian formalism, which is used in the subsequent chapters, and second, as a self-contained summary for any newcomer interested in using Bohmian mechanics in his or her daily research activity.
Since its inception Bohmian mechanics has been generally regarded as a hidden-variable theory aimed at providing an objective description of quantum phenomena. To date, this rather narrow conception of Bohm’s proposal has caused it more rejection than acceptance. Now, after 65 years of Bohmian mechanics, should still be such an interpretational aspect the prevailing appraisal? Why not favoring a more pragmatic view, as a legitimate picture of quantum mechanics, on equal footing in all respects with any other more conventional quantum picture? These questions are used here to introduce a discussion on an alternative way to deal with Bohmian mechanics at present, enhancing its aspect as an efficient and useful picture or formulation to tackle, explore, describe and explain quantum phenomena where phase and correlation ( entanglement ) are key elements. This discussion is presented through two complementary blocks. The first block is aimed at briefly revisiting the historical context that gave rise to the appearance of Bohmian mechanics, and how this approach or analogous ones have been used in different physical contexts. This discussion is used to emphasize a more pragmatic view to the detriment of the more conventional hidden-variable (ontological) approach that has been a leitmotif within the quantum foundations. The second block focuses on some particular formal aspects of Bohmian mechanics supporting the view presented here, with special emphasis on the physical meaning of the local phase field and the associated velocity field encoded within the wave function. As an illustration, a simple model of Young’s two-slit experiment is considered. The simplicity of this model allows to understand in an easy manner how the information conveyed by the Bohmian formulation relates to other more conventional concepts in quantum mechanics. This sort of pedagogical application is also aimed at showing the potential interest to introduce Bohmian mechanics in undergraduate quantum mechanics courses as a working tool rather than merely an alternative interpretation.
Prologue A memorial conference for John Bell, open to the public, was held at Rutgers University around 20 years ago. I gave a short talk there on Bell's views about David Bohm's “hidden variables” formulation of quantum mechanics, a version of quantum mechanics often called the de Broglie–Bohm theory or Bohmian mechanics. This theory was in fact discovered by Louis de Broglie in 1927. In 1952, it was rediscovered and developed by Bohm, who was the first to appreciate its connection to the predictions of standard quantum mechanics. I did not publish the talk. I have decided that it would be appropriate to publish a very lightly edited version of it here, in this volume devoted to the work of Bell on the foundation of quantum mechanics. One reason for doing so is that the connection between Bell and Bohm continues to be somewhat underplayed, with the strength of his advocacy of Bohmian mechanics not properly appreciated. For example, about half of the papers in Bell's collected works on the foundations of quantum mechanics deal with Bohmian mechanics. But in his fine introduction to the revised edition of this great book [1], Alain Aspect mentions this theory in only a single sentence, and parenthetically at that. For several decades after Bell proved his nonlocality theorem, based in part on Bell's inequality, it was widely claimed that Bell had shown that hidden variables – and Bohmian mechanics in particular – were impossible, that they were incompatible with the predictions of quantum mechanics. For example, the great physicist Eugene Wigner, who, unlike most of his contemporaries, was profoundly concerned with the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics and usually wrote on the subject with great clarity and insight, has written that This [hidden variables] is an interesting idea and even though few of us were ready to accept it, it must be admitted that the truly telling argument against it was produced as late as 1965, by J. S. Bell … This appears to give a convincing argument against the hidden variables theory.
The biggest and most lasting among David Bohm's (1917-1992) many achievements is to have proposed a picture of reality that explains the empirical rules of quantum mechanics. This picture, known as pilot wave theory or Bohmian mechanics among other names, is still the simplest and most convincing explanation available. According to this theory, electrons are point particles in the literal sense and move along trajectories governed by Bohm's equation of motion. In this paper, I describe some more recent developments and extensions of Bohmian mechanics, concerning in particular relativistic space-time and particle creation and annihilation.