This work is about Bohmian mechanics, a non-relativistic quantum theory about the motion of particles and their trajectories, named after its inventor David Bohm (Bohm,1952). This mechanics resolves all paradoxes associated with the measurement problem in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. It accounts for quantum randomness, absolute uncertainty, the meaning of the wave function of a system, collapse of the wave function, and familiar (macroscopic) reality. We review the purpose for which Bohmian trajectories were invented: to serve as the foundation of quantum mechanics, i.e., to explain quantum mechanics in terms of a theory that is free of paradoxes and allows an understanding that is as clear as that of classical mechanics. To achieve this we analyse an optical interferometry experiment devised and carried out 2005 by Shahriar Afshar (Afshar,2005). The radical claim of Afshar implies in his own words the 'observation of physical reality in the classical sense' for both 'which path (particle-like)' and 'interference (wave-like)' properties of photons in the same experimental setup through the violation of the Englert-Greenberger duality relation (Englert,1996) that according to Englert can be regarded as quantifying of the 'principle of complementarity'.
This work is about Bohmian mechanics, a non-relativistic quantum theory about the motion of particles and their trajectories, named after its inventor David Bohm (Bohm,1952). This mechanics resolves all paradoxes associated with the measurement problem in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. It accounts for quantum randomness, absolute uncertainty, the meaning of the wave function of a system, collapse of the wave function, and familiar (macroscopic) reality. We review the purpose for which Bohmian trajectories were invented: to serve as the foundation of quantum mechanics, i.e., to explain quantum mechanics in terms of a theory that is free of paradoxes and allows an understanding that is as clear as that of classical mechanics. To achieve this we analyse an optical interferometry experiment devised and carried out 2005 by Shahriar Afshar (Afshar,2005). The radical claim of Afshar implies in his own words the 'observation of physical reality in the classical sense' for both 'which path (particle-like)' and 'interference (wave-like)' properties of photons in the same experimental setup through the violation of the Englert-Greenberger duality relation (Englert,1996) that according to Englert can be regarded as quantifying of the 'principle of complementarity'.
In an interesting series of articles published few years ago Afshar and coworkers [1,2] reported an optical experiment in which they claimed to refute the well known N. Bohr principle of complementarity [3, 4]. Obviously this result, if justified, would constitute a serious attack against the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics (known as the Copenhagen interpretation). This work stirred much debate in different journals (see for examples references [5–12]). We think however that there are still some important misunderstandings concerning the interpretation of this experiment. In a preprint written originally in 2004 [5] (and following some early discussions with Afshar) we claimed already that the interpretation by Afshar et al. can be easily stated if we stay as close as possible from the texts written by Bohr. The aim of the present article (which was initially written in 2005 to precise a bit the thought developed in [5]) is to comment the interpretation discussed in [1]. We will in the following analyze the meaning of Bohr principle and show that far from disproving its content the experiment [1] is actually a complete confirmation of its general validity. The difficulties associated with the understanding of this principle are not new and actually complementarity created troubles even in Einstein mind [3] so that we are here in good company. To summarize a bit emphatically Bohr’s complementarity we here remind that this principle states that if one of a pair of non commuting observables of a quantum object is known for sure, then information about the second (complementary) is lost [3, 4, 15, 16]. This can be equivalently expressed as a kind of duality between different descriptions of the quantum system associated with different experimental arrangements which mutually exclude each other (read in particular [3,4]). Later in the discussion we will try to precise this definition but for the moment it is enough to illustrate the concepts by examples Consider for instance the well known Young double-pinholes interference experiment made with photons. The discrete nature of light precludes the simultaneous observation of a same photon in the aperture plane and in the interference pattern: the photon cannot be absorbed twice. This is already a trivial manifestation of the principle of Bohr. Here it implies that the two statistical patterns associated with the wave in the aperture plane and its Fourier (i. e., momentum) transform require necessarily different photons for their recording. It is in that sense that each experiment excludes and completes reciprocally the other. In the case considered before the photon is absorbed during the first detection (this clearly precludes any other detection). However even a non-destructive solution for detection implying entanglement with other quantum systems has a radical effect of the same nature: the complementarity principle is still valid. For example, during their debate Bohr and Einstein [3] discussed an ideal which-way experiment in which the recoil of the slits is correlated to the motion of the photon. Momentum conservation added to arguments based on the uncertainty relations are sufficient to explain how such entanglement photon-slits can erase fringes [15–19]. It is also important for the present discussion to remind that the principle of complementarity has a perfidious consequence on the experimental meaning of trajectory and path followed by a particle. Indeed the unavoidable interactions existing between photons and detectors imply that a trajectory existing independently of any measurement process cannot be unambiguously defined. This sounds even like a tragedy when we consider once again the two-holes experiment. Indeed for Bohr this kind of experiments shows definitely the essential element of ambiguity which is involved in ascribing conventional physical attributes to quantum systems. Intuitively (i. e., from the point of view of classical particle dynamic) one would expect that a photon detected in the focal plane of the lens must have crossed only one of the hole 1 or 2 before to reach its final destination. However, if this is true, one can not intuitively understand how the presence of the second hole (through which the photon evidently did not go) forces the photon to participate to an interference pattern (which obviously needs an influence coming from both holes). Explanations to solve this paradox have been proposed by de Broglie, Bohm, and others using concepts such as empty waves or quantum potentials [20, 21]. However all these explanations are in agreement with Bohr principle (since they fully reproduce quantum predictions) and can not be experimentally distinguished. Bohr and Heisenberg proposed for all needed purposes a much more pragmatic and simpler answer: don’t bother, the complementarity principle precludes the simultaneous observation of a photon trajectory and of an interference pattern. For Bohr [3]: This point is of great logical consequence, since it is only the circumstance that we are presented with a choice of either tracing the path
Bohmian mechanics, also known as pilot-wave theory or de Broglie-Bohm theory, is a formulation of quantum mechanics whose fundamental axioms are not about what observers will see if they perform an experiment but about what happens in reality. It is therefore called a "quantum theory without observers," alongside with collapse theories and many-worlds theories and in contrast to orthodox quantum mechanics. It follows from these axioms that in a universe governed by Bohmian mechanics, observers will see outcomes with exactly the probabilities specified by the usual rules of quantum mechanics for empirical predictions. Specifically, Bohmian mechanics asserts that electrons and other elementary particles have a definite position at every time and move according to an equation of motion that is one of the fundamental laws of the theory and involves a wave function that evolves according to the usual Schrödinger equation. Bohmian mechanics is named after David Bohm (1917-1992), who was, although not the first to consider this theory, the first to realize (in 1952) that it actually makes correct predictions.
Bohmian mechanics, also known as pilot-wave theory or de Broglie-Bohm theory, is a formulation of mechanics whose fundamental axioms are not about what observers will see if they perform an experiment but about what happens in reality. It is therefore called a quantum theory without observers, alongside with collapse theories and many-worlds theories and in contrast to orthodox mechanics. It follows from these axioms that in a universe governed by Bohmian mechanics, observers will see outcomes with exactly the probabilities specified by the usual rules of mechanics for empirical predictions. Specifically, Bohmian mechanics asserts that electrons and other elementary particles have a definite position at every time and move according to an equation of motion that is one of the fundamental laws of the theory and involves a wave function that evolves according to the usual Schr\odinger equation. Bohmian mechanics is named after David Bohm (1917-1992), who was, although not the first to consider this theory, the first to realize (in 1952) that it actually makes correct predictions.
Dedicated to the memory of J. S. Bell. Abstract. The quantum formalism is a \\measurement " formalism|a phenomenological formalism describing certain macroscopic regularities. We argue that it can be regarded, and best be understood, as arising from Bohmian mechanics, which is what emerges from Schrodinger's equation for a system of particles when we merely insist that \\particles " means particles. While distinctly non-Newtonian, Bohmian mechanics is a fully deterministic theory of particles in motion, a motion choreographed by the wave function. We nd that a Bohmian universe, though deterministic, evolves in such a manner that an appearance of randomness emerges, precisely as described by the quantum formalism and given, for example, by \\ = j j 2. " A crucial ingredient in our analysis of the origin of this randomness is the notion of the eective wave function of a subsystem, a notion of interest in its own right and of relevance to any discussion of quantum theory. When the quantum formalism is regarded as arising in this way, the paradoxes and perplexities so often associated with (nonrelativistic) quantum theory simply evaporate. KEY WORDS: Quantum randomness; quantum uncertainty; hidden variables; eective wave function; collapse of the wave function; the measurement problem; Bohm's causal inter-pretation of quantum theory; pilot wave; foundations of quantum mechanics. 1.
Bohmian mechanics, also known as pilot-wave theory or de Broglie–Bohm theory, is a formulation of quantum mechanics whose fundamental axioms are not about what observers will see if they perform an experiment but about what happens in reality. It is therefore called a “quantum theory without observers,” alongside with collapse theories and many-worlds theories and in contrast to orthodox quantum mechanics. It follows from these axioms that in a universe governed by Bohmian mechanics, observers will see outcomes with exactly the probabilities specified by the usual rules of quantum mechanics for empirical predictions. Specifically, Bohmian mechanics asserts that electrons and other elementary particles have a definite position at every time and move according to an equation of motion that is one of the fundamental laws of the theory and involves a wavefunction that evolves according to the usual Schr\\"odinger equation. Bohmian mechanics is named after David Bohm (1917–1992), who was, although not the first to consider this theory, the first to realize (in 1952) that it actually makes correct predictions.
Bohmian trajectories have been used for various purposes, including the numerical simulation of the time-dependent Schroedinger equation and the visualization of time-dependent wave functions. We review the purpose they were invented for: to serve as the foundation of quantum mechanics, i.e., to explain quantum mechanics in terms of a theory that is free of paradoxes and allows an understanding that is as clear as that of classical mechanics. Indeed, they succeed in serving that purpose in the context of a theory known as Bohmian mechanics, to which this article is an introduction.