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

On the vicissitudes of Bohm’s 1952 interpretation of quantum mechanics

Olival Freire Junior

Published Apr 1, 2025• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract Nowadays, David Bohm’s hidden variables interpretation of quantum mechanics is one among other possible interpretations of quantum mechanics. In 1952 when he published this interpretation, he could not foresee the complex denouement it would have. I argue that the initial poor reception of Bohm’s proposal, as well as his discouragement in the late 1950s, was related to the prejudices among physicists concerning the hidden variables issues, and its later revival, in the mid-1970s, without any new evidence corroborating it, was related to a new intellectual ambiance concerning interpretational issues. However, even today, there is a persistent misunderstanding about what interpretations may be compatible with quantum mechanics. Lessons from this history for the practice of science are related to the role played by prejudices even in advanced fields of scientific research and the need to overcome them.

DOI
10.1093/oso/9780198901853.003.0005

Related papers

Science and exile: David Bohm, the hot times of the Cold War, and his struggle for a new interpretation of quantum mechanics

Olival Freire

This article focuses on the reception among physicists of Bohm's 1952 papers on the causal interpretation of quantum mechanics, which were poorly received at the time. I describe his Brazilian exile and analyze the culture of physics surrounding the foundations of quantum mechanics. I take into account the strength of the Copenhagen interpretation among physicists, the way in which issues concerning the foundations of quantum mechanics were present in the training of physicists, the low status of these issues on research agendas, and the kind of results Bohm and collaborators were able to achieve. I also compare the reception of Bohm's ideas with that of Hugh Everett's interpretation and argue that the obstacles growing from the cultural context of physics at that time had a more significant influence in the reception of Bohm's ideas than did the vicissitudes related to the McCarthyist climate.

arXiv:physics/0508184•Aug 24, 2005•18 citations

Science and exile: David Bohm, the cold war, and a new interpretation of quantum mechanics

Olival Freire

ABSTRACT In the early 1950s the American physicist David Bohm (1917-1992) produced a new interpretation of quantum mechanics and had to flee from McCarthyism. Rejected at Princeton, he moved to São Paulo. This article focuses on the reception of his early papers on the causal interpretation, his Brazilian exile, and the culture of physics surrounding the foundations of quantum mechanics. It weighs the strength of the Copenhagen interpretation, discusses the presentation of the foundations of quantum mechanics in the training of physicists, describes the results Bohm and his collaborators achieved. It also compares the reception of Bohm's ideas with that of Hugh Everett's interpretation. The cultural context of physics had a more significant influence on the reception of Bohm's ideas than the McCarthyist climate.

Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences•Sep 1, 2005•41 citations

The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics

Simon Kochen, Ernst P. Specker

Forty years after the advent of quantum mechanics the problem of hidden variables, that is, the possibility of imbedding quantum theory into a classical theory, remains a controversial and obscure subject. Whereas to most physicists the possibility of a classical reinterpretation of quantum mechanics remains remote and perhaps irrelevant to current problems, a minority have kept the issue alive throughout this period. (See Freistadt [5] for a review of the problem and a comprehensive bibliography up to 1957.) As far as results are concerned there are on the one hand purported proofs of the non-existence of hidden variables, most notably von Neumann’s proof, and on the other, various attempts to introduce hidden variables such as de Broglie [4] and Bohm [1] and [2]. One of the difficulties in evaluating these contradictory results is that no exact mathematical criterion is given to enable one to judge the degree of success of these proposals. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Birkhäuser Basel eBooks•Jan 1, 1990•43 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

Davida Bohma teoria zmiennych ukrytych

Tadeusz Pabjan

One of the most important interpretative problems of quantum mechanics concerns the so called hidden variables. Sometimes it is said that the Bell's theorem falsifies theories of such variables, but in fact, it falsifies only local ones. This paper deals with David Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is a kind of nonlocal hidden variable theory. This theory delivers a full deterministic and realistic description of quantum phenomena and predicts the same results as standard quantum mechanics. It is argued that this interpretation is still worth being investigated, because it remains in the full agreement with the mathematical formalism of this theory and it surpasses the standard interpretation as far as simplicity and lack of arbitrary assumptions are concerned.

Philosophical Problems in Science (Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce)•Jun 2, 2009•0 citations

Bell on Bohm

Sheldon Goldstein

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.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 31, 2016•0 citations
Abstract Nowadays, David Bohm’s hidden variables interpretation of quantum mechanics is one among other possible interpretations of quantum mechanics. In 1952 when he published this interpretation, he could not foresee the complex denouement it would have. I argue that the initial poor reception of Bohm’s proposal, as well as his discouragement in the late 1950s, was related to the prejudices among physicists concerning the hidden variables issues, and its later revival, in the mid-1970s, without any new evidence corroborating it, was related to a new intellectual ambiance concerning interpretational issues. However, even today, there is a persistent misunderstanding about what interpretations may be compatible with quantum mechanics. Lessons from this history for the practice of science are related to the role played by prejudices even in advanced fields of scientific research and the need to overcome them.
This article focuses on the reception among physicists of Bohm's 1952 papers on the causal interpretation of quantum mechanics, which were poorly received at the time. I describe his Brazilian exile and analyze the culture of physics surrounding the foundations of quantum mechanics. I take into account the strength of the Copenhagen interpretation among physicists, the way in which issues concerning the foundations of quantum mechanics were present in the training of physicists, the low status of these issues on research agendas, and the kind of results Bohm and collaborators were able to achieve. I also compare the reception of Bohm's ideas with that of Hugh Everett's interpretation and argue that the obstacles growing from the cultural context of physics at that time had a more significant influence in the reception of Bohm's ideas than did the vicissitudes related to the McCarthyist climate.
ABSTRACT In the early 1950s the American physicist David Bohm (1917-1992) produced a new interpretation of quantum mechanics and had to flee from McCarthyism. Rejected at Princeton, he moved to São Paulo. This article focuses on the reception of his early papers on the causal interpretation, his Brazilian exile, and the culture of physics surrounding the foundations of quantum mechanics. It weighs the strength of the Copenhagen interpretation, discusses the presentation of the foundations of quantum mechanics in the training of physicists, describes the results Bohm and his collaborators achieved. It also compares the reception of Bohm's ideas with that of Hugh Everett's interpretation. The cultural context of physics had a more significant influence on the reception of Bohm's ideas than the McCarthyist climate.
Forty years after the advent of quantum mechanics the problem of hidden variables, that is, the possibility of imbedding quantum theory into a classical theory, remains a controversial and obscure subject. Whereas to most physicists the possibility of a classical reinterpretation of quantum mechanics remains remote and perhaps irrelevant to current problems, a minority have kept the issue alive throughout this period. (See Freistadt [5] for a review of the problem and a comprehensive bibliography up to 1957.) As far as results are concerned there are on the one hand purported proofs of the non-existence of hidden variables, most notably von Neumann’s proof, and on the other, various attempts to introduce hidden variables such as de Broglie [4] and Bohm [1] and [2]. One of the difficulties in evaluating these contradictory results is that no exact mathematical criterion is given to enable one to judge the degree of success of these proposals. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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.
One of the most important interpretative problems of quantum mechanics concerns the so called hidden variables. Sometimes it is said that the Bell's theorem falsifies theories of such variables, but in fact, it falsifies only local ones. This paper deals with David Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is a kind of nonlocal hidden variable theory. This theory delivers a full deterministic and realistic description of quantum phenomena and predicts the same results as standard quantum mechanics. It is argued that this interpretation is still worth being investigated, because it remains in the full agreement with the mathematical formalism of this theory and it surpasses the standard interpretation as far as simplicity and lack of arbitrary assumptions are concerned.
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.