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:1708.06697

The locality of quantum subsystems III: A 'subsystem compatible' interpretation of quantum mechanics

Adam Brownstein

Published Aug 22, 2017• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A local description of quantum subsystems can be used to construct ontologies of the full quantum predictions. This paper communicates one possible way to do so. A retrocausal interpretation of quantum mechanics where the de Broglie-Bohm particles are the retrocausal agents is developed. This interpretation is constrained to be compatible with the existence of a local realist description of quantum subsystems.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1708.06697

Related papers

The locality of quantum subsystems I

Adam Brownstein

Many of the contemporary formulations of quantum mechanics describe the marginal probability distributions of entangled many-body systems in a non-local way. Unlike the non-locality of joint distributions, the non-locality of marginal distributions is not forced by theory or experiment. This paper investigates the issue in the context of the Copenhagen, de Broglie-Bohm and sum-over-paths interpretations. A dissociation between information flow into quantum subsystems and the tensor product structure of wavefunctions is highlighted in connection to the problem.

arXiv:1708.06677•Aug 22, 2017•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics and Reality

Virendra Singh

We begin by discussing ``What exists?'', i.e. ontology, in Classical Physics which provided a description of physical phenomena at the macroscopic level. The microworld however necessitates a introduction of Quantum ideas for its understanding. It is almost certain that the world is quantum mechanical at both microscopic as well as at macroscopic level. The problem of ontology of a Quantum world is a difficult one. It also depends on which interpretation is used. We first discuss some interpretations in which Quantum Mechanics does not provide a complete framework but has to be supplemented by extra ingredients e.g. (i) Copenhagen group of interpretations associated with the names of Niels Bohr, Heisenberg, von-Neumann, and (ii) de-Broglie-Bohm interpretations. We then look at some interpretations in which Quantum mechanics is supposed to provide the entire framework such as (i) Everett-deWitt many world, (ii) quantum histories interpretations. We conclude with some remarks on the rigidity of the formalism of quantum mechanics, which is sharp contrast to it's ontological fluidity.

arXiv:quant-ph/0412148•Dec 20, 2004•0 citations

Notes on the ontology of Bohmian mechanics

Shan Gao

It is argued that in Bohmian mechanics the effective wave function of a subsystem of the universe does not encode the influences of other par-ticles on the subsystem. This suggests that the ontology of Bohmian mechanics does not consist only in Bohmian particles and their posi-tions. It is nonetheless pointed out that since the wave function in configuration space may represent the state of ergodic motion of non-Bohmian particles in three-dimensional space, the ontology of Bohmian mechanics may still consist only in particles. Bohmian mechanics, which is also called the de Broglie-Bohm theory, is a realistic alternative to standard quantum mechanics initially proposed by de Broglie (1928) and later developed by Bohm (1952). According to the theory, a complete realistic description of a quantum system is provided by the configuration defined by the positions of its particles together with its wave function. It has been a hot topic of debate how to interpret the wave function in the theory. Recently Esfeld et al (2013) further developed the nomological interpretation of the wave function, as suggested by Dürr, Goldstein and Zangh̀ı (1997), Goldstein and Teufel (2001) and Goldstein and Zangh̀ı (2012). They argued that the ontology of Bohmian mechanics consists only in Bohmian particles and their positions, and in particular, the effective wave function of a subsystem of the universe encodes the influences of other particles in the universe on the subsystem. In this note, we will argue that this interesting view may be problematic. The Bohmian law of motion is expressed by two equations, a guiding equation for the configuration of particles in three-dimensional space and the Schrödinger equation, describing the time evolution of the wave function, which enters the guiding equation. The law can be formulated as follows: dQ(t) dt = vΨ(t)(Q(t)). (1)

•Jun 5, 2014•0 citations

Bohm's realist interpretation of Quantum mechanics

Virendra Singh

A brief account of the world view of classical physics is given first. We then recapitulate as to why the Copenhagen interpretation of the quantum mechanics had to renounce most of the attractive features of the clasical world view such as a causal description, locality, scientific realism and introduce a fundamental distinction between system and apparatus. The crucial role is played in this by the Bohr's insistence on the wavefunction providing the most complete description possible for an even individual system. The alternative of introducing extra dynamical variables, called hidden variables, in addition to the wavefunction of the system so as to be able to retain at least some of the desirable features of classical physics, is then explored. The first such successful attempt was that of Bohm in 1952 who showed that a realistic interpretation of the quantum mechanics can be given which maintains a causal description as well as does not treat systems and measuring appeartus differently. We begin with the construction of the Bohm's theory. He introduces particle positions as the hidden variables. The particle positions play a special role in Bohm theory. The particle trajectories are guided by the wavefunction. The Bohm theory is deterministic. The probability enters through a special assumption, ``quantum equilibrium'' hypothesis, for the initial conditions on the ensemble of particle trajectories. The ``wave or particle'' dilemma is resolved by a ``wave and particle'' resolution. The measurements in Bohm theory can be described without mysticism. Bohm's theory is however nonlocal.

arXiv:0805.1779•May 13, 2008•2 citations

The Bohmian interpretation of quantum mechanics : a pitfall for realism

A. Matzkin, Nvrock

The de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics (BM) has been favored as the preferred alternative to standard quantum mechanics on the ground that it allows a realist construal of the quantum world. We examine in the present work whether BM is consistent with scientific realism. Indeed, Bohmian mechanics makes strong ontological claims but accepts in principle the impossibility of generating epistemic warrants in support of its assumptions. We will argue that such a situation gives rise, at best, to an unsolvable underdetermination dilemma. This leads in turn to the following paradox: although Bohmian mechanics has frequently been invoked to reconcile quantum mechanics with realism, its status as a valid interpretation of quantum mechanics hinges nonetheless on nonevidential epistemological arguments traditionally associated with antirealism.

•Feb 1, 2004•0 citations

Quantum reference systems: reconciling locality with quantum mechanics

Gyula Bene

The status of locality in quantum mechanics is analyzed from a nonstandard point of view. It is assumed that quantum states are relative, they depend on and are defined with respect to some bigger physical system which contains the former system as a subsystem. Hence, the bigger system acts as a reference system. It is shown that quantum mechanics can be reformulated in accordance with this new physical assumption. There is an important consequence of this dependence: states may not be comparable, i.e., they cannot be checked by suitable measurements simultaneously. This special circumstance is fully reflected mathematically by the theory. Especially, it is shown that certain joint probabilities (or the corresponding combined events) which play a vital role in any proof of Bell's theorem do not exist. The conclusion is that the principle of locality is fully valid in quantum mechanics, and one has to give up instead of locality an intuitively natural-looking feature of realism, namely, the comparability of existing states.

arXiv:quant-ph/0008128•Aug 30, 2000•3 citations
A local description of quantum subsystems can be used to construct ontologies of the full quantum predictions. This paper communicates one possible way to do so. A retrocausal interpretation of quantum mechanics where the de Broglie-Bohm particles are the retrocausal agents is developed. This interpretation is constrained to be compatible with the existence of a local realist description of quantum subsystems.
Many of the contemporary formulations of quantum mechanics describe the marginal probability distributions of entangled many-body systems in a non-local way. Unlike the non-locality of joint distributions, the non-locality of marginal distributions is not forced by theory or experiment. This paper investigates the issue in the context of the Copenhagen, de Broglie-Bohm and sum-over-paths interpretations. A dissociation between information flow into quantum subsystems and the tensor product structure of wavefunctions is highlighted in connection to the problem.
We begin by discussing ``What exists?'', i.e. ontology, in Classical Physics which provided a description of physical phenomena at the macroscopic level. The microworld however necessitates a introduction of Quantum ideas for its understanding. It is almost certain that the world is quantum mechanical at both microscopic as well as at macroscopic level. The problem of ontology of a Quantum world is a difficult one. It also depends on which interpretation is used. We first discuss some interpretations in which Quantum Mechanics does not provide a complete framework but has to be supplemented by extra ingredients e.g. (i) Copenhagen group of interpretations associated with the names of Niels Bohr, Heisenberg, von-Neumann, and (ii) de-Broglie-Bohm interpretations. We then look at some interpretations in which Quantum mechanics is supposed to provide the entire framework such as (i) Everett-deWitt many world, (ii) quantum histories interpretations. We conclude with some remarks on the rigidity of the formalism of quantum mechanics, which is sharp contrast to it's ontological fluidity.
It is argued that in Bohmian mechanics the effective wave function of a subsystem of the universe does not encode the influences of other par-ticles on the subsystem. This suggests that the ontology of Bohmian mechanics does not consist only in Bohmian particles and their posi-tions. It is nonetheless pointed out that since the wave function in configuration space may represent the state of ergodic motion of non-Bohmian particles in three-dimensional space, the ontology of Bohmian mechanics may still consist only in particles. Bohmian mechanics, which is also called the de Broglie-Bohm theory, is a realistic alternative to standard quantum mechanics initially proposed by de Broglie (1928) and later developed by Bohm (1952). According to the theory, a complete realistic description of a quantum system is provided by the configuration defined by the positions of its particles together with its wave function. It has been a hot topic of debate how to interpret the wave function in the theory. Recently Esfeld et al (2013) further developed the nomological interpretation of the wave function, as suggested by Dürr, Goldstein and Zangh̀ı (1997), Goldstein and Teufel (2001) and Goldstein and Zangh̀ı (2012). They argued that the ontology of Bohmian mechanics consists only in Bohmian particles and their positions, and in particular, the effective wave function of a subsystem of the universe encodes the influences of other particles in the universe on the subsystem. In this note, we will argue that this interesting view may be problematic. The Bohmian law of motion is expressed by two equations, a guiding equation for the configuration of particles in three-dimensional space and the Schrödinger equation, describing the time evolution of the wave function, which enters the guiding equation. The law can be formulated as follows: dQ(t) dt = vΨ(t)(Q(t)). (1)
A brief account of the world view of classical physics is given first. We then recapitulate as to why the Copenhagen interpretation of the quantum mechanics had to renounce most of the attractive features of the clasical world view such as a causal description, locality, scientific realism and introduce a fundamental distinction between system and apparatus. The crucial role is played in this by the Bohr's insistence on the wavefunction providing the most complete description possible for an even individual system. The alternative of introducing extra dynamical variables, called hidden variables, in addition to the wavefunction of the system so as to be able to retain at least some of the desirable features of classical physics, is then explored. The first such successful attempt was that of Bohm in 1952 who showed that a realistic interpretation of the quantum mechanics can be given which maintains a causal description as well as does not treat systems and measuring appeartus differently. We begin with the construction of the Bohm's theory. He introduces particle positions as the hidden variables. The particle positions play a special role in Bohm theory. The particle trajectories are guided by the wavefunction. The Bohm theory is deterministic. The probability enters through a special assumption, ``quantum equilibrium'' hypothesis, for the initial conditions on the ensemble of particle trajectories. The ``wave or particle'' dilemma is resolved by a ``wave and particle'' resolution. The measurements in Bohm theory can be described without mysticism. Bohm's theory is however nonlocal.
The de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics (BM) has been favored as the preferred alternative to standard quantum mechanics on the ground that it allows a realist construal of the quantum world. We examine in the present work whether BM is consistent with scientific realism. Indeed, Bohmian mechanics makes strong ontological claims but accepts in principle the impossibility of generating epistemic warrants in support of its assumptions. We will argue that such a situation gives rise, at best, to an unsolvable underdetermination dilemma. This leads in turn to the following paradox: although Bohmian mechanics has frequently been invoked to reconcile quantum mechanics with realism, its status as a valid interpretation of quantum mechanics hinges nonetheless on nonevidential epistemological arguments traditionally associated with antirealism.
The status of locality in quantum mechanics is analyzed from a nonstandard point of view. It is assumed that quantum states are relative, they depend on and are defined with respect to some bigger physical system which contains the former system as a subsystem. Hence, the bigger system acts as a reference system. It is shown that quantum mechanics can be reformulated in accordance with this new physical assumption. There is an important consequence of this dependence: states may not be comparable, i.e., they cannot be checked by suitable measurements simultaneously. This special circumstance is fully reflected mathematically by the theory. Especially, it is shown that certain joint probabilities (or the corresponding combined events) which play a vital role in any proof of Bell's theorem do not exist. The conclusion is that the principle of locality is fully valid in quantum mechanics, and one has to give up instead of locality an intuitively natural-looking feature of realism, namely, the comparability of existing states.