This paper , based on Bohm' s ontological view of quantum measurement process and the concept of quantum potential and active information, analyses Bohm s comprehension about the ontological context of quantum object and the holistic context to comprehend the quantum measurement process, thus revealing the differences and links between Bohm' s holistic concept of quantum measurement process and Bohr's holistic concept of quantum measurement phenomenon. In addition, this paper analyses the similar and different relations between microcosmic particle and classical particle in the Bohm's interpretative
This paper , based on Bohm' s ontological view of quantum measurement process and the concept of quantum potential and active information, analyses Bohm s comprehension about the ontological context of quantum object and the holistic context to comprehend the quantum measurement process, thus revealing the differences and links between Bohm' s holistic concept of quantum measurement process and Bohr's holistic concept of quantum measurement phenomenon. In addition, this paper analyses the similar and different relations between microcosmic particle and classical particle in the Bohm's interpretative
The usual interpretation of the quantum theory is self-consistent, but it involves an assumption that cannot be tested experimentally, viz., that the most complete possible specification of an individual system is in terms of a wave function that determines only probable results of actual measurement processes. The term ‘ontological interpretation’ is sometimes applied to Bohm’s approach, as he set out to tackle the ontological problems of conventional quantum theory. However, the ontological interpretations are strikingly different. In the many worlds view, the differing branches are simultaneously and equally real, whereas Bohm’s inactive channels remain as unmanifested potentialities, with steadily declining likelihoods as more and more irreversible process (like measurement) pile up along the manifest branch. Bohm’s theory serves to illuminate some of the more interesting aspects of quantum theory (its contextuality and nonlocal nature) and demonstrates what is at stake from an ontological point of view.
Abstract The paper investigates David Bohm’s philosophy of science as a form of fallibilist realism that underpins his causal interpretation of quantum mechanics Bohm (Bohm 1952a, 1952b, 1984, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990; Bohm and Hiley 1975, 1984, 1993). Bohm’s central aim is to establish the superiority of his interpretation over the standard Copenhagen framework, particularly in contrast to that of Niels Bohr. Whereas Bohr asserts that knowledge of quantum phenomena is restricted to the statistical outcomes of measurement, Bohm’s approach is distinctly realist in orientation. Responding to the challenges posed by Einstein and other physicists, Bohm relies on extra-empirical criteria such as determinism, objectivity and intelligibility. The paper develops what will be termed the methodology of intuitive intelligibility (II), consisting of four stages: (1) reformulation of the standard quantum equations, (2) physical interpretation of the mathematical symbols, (3) drawing analogies with classical laws, and (4) drawing analogies with common experience. It is argued that Bohm applies the (II) methodology consistently, with the notable exception of the ontological status of the wave function and quantum potential. In attempting to explain causal relations from a 3N-dimensional configuration space (where N is the number of particles) to familiar three-dimensional space through an appeal to ‘information’, Bohm arguably commits a category mistake. A proposed resolution—drawing on Bohm’s own holistic analogies—is supported by the recent multi-field interpretation (Romano Multi-field and Bohm’s theory. Synthese, 198(30), 10587–10609, 2021). The term fallibilist realism aptly characterizes Bohm’s stance in the philosophy of science: he repeatedly emphasizes that the causal interpretation is not intended as a final theory. Nevertheless, holism constitutes a substantive ontological commitment that he is unwilling to abandon.
This paper introduces and analyses David Bohm's causal interpretation of quantum potential and his viewpoint of nonlocality. As the key of Bohm's causal interpretation of quantum theory, the interpretation of quantum potential has been paid serious attention to by Bohm since 1980's. Bohm reviews quantum potential from the perspective of information and puts forward some new views. Especially, Bohm probes into nonlocality on the basis of the view of quantum potential and active information. This is of great significance in both physics and philosophy.
Although David Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics is sometimes thought to be a kind of regression towards classical thinking, it is in fact an extremely radical metaphysics of nature. The view goes far beyond the familiar but perennially peculiar non-locality and entanglement of quantum systems. In this paper, a philosophical exploration, I examine three core features of Bohm's metaphysical views, which have been both supported by features of quantum mechanics and integrated into a comprehensive system. These are the holistic nature of the world, the role of a unique kind of information as the ontological basis of the world, and the integration of mentality into this basis as an essential and irreducible aspect of it.
For Bohr quantum mechanics is complete. It expresses all that can be said about the atomic world, which he regards as a newly discovered and separate ontological component of reality, operating at the Planck scale, and describable only with a separate physics, namely, quantum mechanics. The classical world, in contrast, represents its binary and symbiotic counterpart, which is also ontologically substantive, but operates according to 'classical concepts'. The different physics of each component indicates a different ontology, the classical one is accessible to us, as we are classical objects, where the Planck scale does not apply, while the other is not. The measurement problem cannot therefore be solved through the discovery of hidden variables as these are classical in nature and therefore ineffective in explaining the quantum world. The measurement problem is therefore not due to epistemological limitations but emerges directly from a 'two worlds' dualism. Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation has therefore been erroneously misunderstood as a positivist retreat rather than as a view of reality proposing an ontological structure which is dualistic. l then propose similarities between Bohr and a ‘two worlds’ view of Kant, where noumena is an ontology which is inherently unknowable as it is devoid of a priori agents, much as the quantum world is unknowable as it is devoid of Bohr's classical concepts. However, just as classical concepts in Bohr are crucial in constituting classical reality, a priori intuitions and concepts in Kant are crucial in constituting phenomena, which are real ontological objects and not just appearances. The noumenal and quantum realms are therefore both substantive, but impossible to investigate. The phenomenal and classical worlds are also substantive. They are where objects and therefore meaning condenses. They are therefore open to our investigations.