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

Philosophy of Science

Discussion: Healey on the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

Tim Maudlin

Published Jun 1, 1998• 39 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Richard Healey (1997) argues that the Aharonov-Bohm effect demands the recognition of either nonlocal or nonseparable physics in much the way that violations of Bell's inequality do. A careful examination of the effect and the arguments, though, shows that Healey's interpretation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect depends critically on his interpretation of gauge theories, and that the analogy with violations of Bell's inequalities fails.

DOI
10.1086/392644

Related papers

Nonlocality and the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

Richard Healey

At first sight the Aharonov-Bohm effect appears nonlocal, though not in the way EPR/ Bell correlations are generally acknowledged to be nonlocal. This paper applies an analysis of nonlocality to the Aharonov-Bohm effect to show that its peculiarities may be blamed either on a failure of a principle of local action or on a failure of a principle of separability. Different interpretations of quantum mechanics disagree on how blame should be allocated. The parallel between the Aharonov-Bohm effect and violations of Bell inequalities turns out to be so close that a balanced assessment of the nature and significance of quantum nonlocality requires a detailed study of both effects.

Philosophy of Science•Mar 1, 1997•75 citations

Quantum Analogies: A Reply to Maudlin

Richard Healey

Quantum mechanics predicted the Aharonov-Bohm effect and violations of Bell inequalities before either phenomenon was experimentally verified. It is now commonly taken to explain both phenomena. Maudlin has pointed out significant disanalogies between these phenomena. But he has failed to appreciate the striking analogy that emerges when one examines the structure of their quantum mechanical explanations. The fact that each may be explained quantum mechanically in terms of a locally-acting, but nonseparable process suggests that the lesson of quantum nonlocality may be that while there is no action at a distance, the world is nonseparable.

Philosophy of Science•Sep 1, 1999•20 citations

A versus B! Topological nonseparability and the Aharonov-Bohm effect

Tim Oliver Eynck, Holger Lyre, Nicolai von Rummell

Since its discovery in 1959 the Aharonov-Bohm effect has continuously been the cause for controversial discussions of various topics in modern physics, e.g. the reality of gauge potentials, topological effects and nonlocalities. In the present paper we juxtapose the two rival interpretations of the Aharonov-Bohm effect. We show that the conception of nonlocality encountered in the Aharonov-Bohm effect is closely related to the nonseparability which is common in quantum mechanics albeit distinct from it due to its topological nature. We propose a third alternative interpretation based on the loop space of holonomies which serves to solve some of the problems and we trace back the topological nonlocality and thereby the Aharonov-Bohm effect to their quantum mechanical origin. All three discussed interpretations are, of course, empirically equivalent. In fact, they present us with an instructive case study for the thesis of theory underdetermination by empirical data.

•Sep 1, 2001•4 citations

Gauges: Aharonov, Bohm, Yang, Healey

Stephen Leeds

I defend the interpretation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect originally advanced by Aharonov and Bohm, i.e., that it is caused by an interaction between the electron and the vector potential. The defense depends on taking the fiber bundle formulation of electrodynamics literally, or almost literally.

Philosophy of Science•Dec 1, 1999•21 citations

Nonlocality of the Aharonov-Bohm effect

Yakir Aharonov, Eliahu Cohen, Daniel Rohrlich

Although the Aharonov-Bohm and related effects are familiar in solid-state and high-energy physics, the nonlocality of these effects has been questioned. Here we show that the Aharonov-Bohm effect has two very different aspects. One aspect is instantaneous and nonlocal; the other aspect, which depends on entanglement, unfolds continuously over time. While local, gauge-invariant variables may occasionally suffice for explaining the continuous aspect, we argue that they cannot explain the instantaneous aspect. Thus the Aharonov-Bohm effect is, in general, nonlocal.

arXiv:1502.05716•Physical Review A•Apr 14, 2016•63 citations

Can Unitary Gauge Provide a Local and Gauge-Invariant Explanation of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect?

Gao, Shan

How to explain the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect remains deeply controversial, particularly regarding the tension between locality and gauge invariance. Recently Wallace argued that the AB effect can be explained in a local and gauge-invariant way by using the unitary gauge. In this paper, I present a critical analysis of Wallace's intriguing argument. First, I show that the unitary gauge transforms the Schroedinger equation into the Madelung equations, which are expressed entirely in terms of local and gauge-invariant quantities. Next, I point out that an additional quantization condition needs to be imposed in order that the Madelung equations are equivalent to the Schroedinger equation, while the quantization condition is inherently nonlocal. Finally, I argue that the Madelung equations with the quantization condition can hardly explain the the AB effect, even if in a nonlocal way. This analysis suggests that the unitary gauge does not resolve the tension between locality and gauge invariance in explaining the AB effect, but highlights again the profound conceptual challenges in reconciling the AB effect with a local and gauge-invariant framework.

•Feb 4, 2025•0 citations
Richard Healey (1997) argues that the Aharonov-Bohm effect demands the recognition of either nonlocal or nonseparable physics in much the way that violations of Bell's inequality do. A careful examination of the effect and the arguments, though, shows that Healey's interpretation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect depends critically on his interpretation of gauge theories, and that the analogy with violations of Bell's inequalities fails.
At first sight the Aharonov-Bohm effect appears nonlocal, though not in the way EPR/ Bell correlations are generally acknowledged to be nonlocal. This paper applies an analysis of nonlocality to the Aharonov-Bohm effect to show that its peculiarities may be blamed either on a failure of a principle of local action or on a failure of a principle of separability. Different interpretations of quantum mechanics disagree on how blame should be allocated. The parallel between the Aharonov-Bohm effect and violations of Bell inequalities turns out to be so close that a balanced assessment of the nature and significance of quantum nonlocality requires a detailed study of both effects.
Quantum mechanics predicted the Aharonov-Bohm effect and violations of Bell inequalities before either phenomenon was experimentally verified. It is now commonly taken to explain both phenomena. Maudlin has pointed out significant disanalogies between these phenomena. But he has failed to appreciate the striking analogy that emerges when one examines the structure of their quantum mechanical explanations. The fact that each may be explained quantum mechanically in terms of a locally-acting, but nonseparable process suggests that the lesson of quantum nonlocality may be that while there is no action at a distance, the world is nonseparable.
Since its discovery in 1959 the Aharonov-Bohm effect has continuously been the cause for controversial discussions of various topics in modern physics, e.g. the reality of gauge potentials, topological effects and nonlocalities. In the present paper we juxtapose the two rival interpretations of the Aharonov-Bohm effect. We show that the conception of nonlocality encountered in the Aharonov-Bohm effect is closely related to the nonseparability which is common in quantum mechanics albeit distinct from it due to its topological nature. We propose a third alternative interpretation based on the loop space of holonomies which serves to solve some of the problems and we trace back the topological nonlocality and thereby the Aharonov-Bohm effect to their quantum mechanical origin. All three discussed interpretations are, of course, empirically equivalent. In fact, they present us with an instructive case study for the thesis of theory underdetermination by empirical data.
Although the Aharonov-Bohm and related effects are familiar in solid-state and high-energy physics, the nonlocality of these effects has been questioned. Here we show that the Aharonov-Bohm effect has two very different aspects. One aspect is instantaneous and nonlocal; the other aspect, which depends on entanglement, unfolds continuously over time. While local, gauge-invariant variables may occasionally suffice for explaining the continuous aspect, we argue that they cannot explain the instantaneous aspect. Thus the Aharonov-Bohm effect is, in general, nonlocal.
How to explain the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect remains deeply controversial, particularly regarding the tension between locality and gauge invariance. Recently Wallace argued that the AB effect can be explained in a local and gauge-invariant way by using the unitary gauge. In this paper, I present a critical analysis of Wallace's intriguing argument. First, I show that the unitary gauge transforms the Schroedinger equation into the Madelung equations, which are expressed entirely in terms of local and gauge-invariant quantities. Next, I point out that an additional quantization condition needs to be imposed in order that the Madelung equations are equivalent to the Schroedinger equation, while the quantization condition is inherently nonlocal. Finally, I argue that the Madelung equations with the quantization condition can hardly explain the the AB effect, even if in a nonlocal way. This analysis suggests that the unitary gauge does not resolve the tension between locality and gauge invariance in explaining the AB effect, but highlights again the profound conceptual challenges in reconciling the AB effect with a local and gauge-invariant framework.