Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are There Observational Differences Between Bohmian Mechanics and Other Interpretations?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Physics and the Nature of Reality

Part of the book series: Fundamental Theories of Physics ((FTPH,volume 215))

  • 225 Accesses

Abstract

While there is a consensus that leading interpretations of quantum mechanics cannot be distinguished with today’s technology, it is unclear if a gedanken experiment which relies on unlimited technological power cannot do so. Another gedanken approach is considering sentient beings which have brains different from ours. Such gedanken situations will be analyzed with emphasis on a possible difference between Bohmian mechanics and the many-worlds interpretation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. D. Dürr, S. Goldstein, N. Zanghi, Bohmian mechanics and the meaning of the wave function, in Experimental Metaphysics: Quantum Mechanical Studies for Abner Shimony, ed. by M.R.S. Cohen, J. Stachel, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 1 (Kluwer, 1997), pp. 25–38

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. Dürr, S. Teufel, Bohmian mechanics, in Bohmian Mechanics (Springer, 2009), pp. 145–171

    Google Scholar 

  3. L. Vaidman, Many-Worlds interpretation of Quantum mechanics, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. ed. by E.N. Zalta (Stanford University, Metaphysics Research Lab, 2002). https://urldefense.com/v3/__. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/timethermo/__;!!NLFGqXoFfo8MMQ!vprs9m5l_WnJD262YutLOEjrctYKHQxmVxyqMmK3j9jx9VGPMCweSj3h5e1WNlCQJYochYf0E1PwDFXTbQsT4iw7TmlMeLmhMDzemjYoR2fFYoG1$

  4. D.M. Greenberger, The neutron interferometer as a device for illustrating the strange behavior of quantum systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 55(4), 875 (1983)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. L. Vaidman, On schizophrenic experiences of the neutron or why we should believe in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory. Int. Stud. Philos. Sci. 12, 245–261 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Y. Aharonov, A. Casher, Topological quantum effects for neutral particles. Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 319 (1984)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. A. Cimmino, G. Opat, A. Klein, H. Kaiser, S. Werner, M. Arif, R. Clothier, Observation of the topological Aharonov-Casher phase shift by neutron interferometry. Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 380 (1989)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. J.S. Bell, de Broglie–Bohm, delayed-choice, double-slit experiment, and density matrix, in Quantum Mechanics, High Energy Physics and Accelerators: Selected Papers of John Bell (with Commentary) (World Scientific, 1995), pp. 788–792

    Google Scholar 

  9. L. Vaidman, Time symmetry and the many-worlds interpretation, in Many Worlds?: Everett, Quantum Theory, & Reality, ed. by S. Saunders, J. Barrett, A. Kent, D. Wallace (Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 582–596

    Google Scholar 

  10. K.J. McQueen, L. Vaidman, How the many worlds interpretation brings common sense to paradoxical quantum experiments, in Scientific Challenges to Common Sense Philosophy, ed. by R. Peels, J. de Ridder, R. van Woudenberg (Routledge, 2020), pp. 40–60

    Google Scholar 

  11. M. Carlesso, S. Donadi, L. Ferialdi, M. Paternostro, H. Ulbricht, A. Bassi, Present status and future challenges of non-interferometric tests of collapse models. Nat. Phys. 18, 243–250 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. E.P. Wigner, Remarks on the mind-body question, in The Scientist Speculates, ed. by I. Good (Heinemann, London, UK, 1961)

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Frauchiger, R. Renner, Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself. Nat. Commun. 9, 1–10 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. M. Proietti, A. Pickston, F. Graffitti, P. Barrow, D. Kundys, C. Branciard, M. Ringbauer, A. Fedrizzi, Experimental test of local observer independence. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw9832 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  15. B.G. Englert, M.O. Scully, G. Süssmann, H. Walther, Surrealistic Bohm Trajectories. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A 47, 1175–1186 (1992)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. G. Naaman-Marom, N. Erez, L. Vaidman, Position measurements in the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics. Ann. Phys. 327, 2522–2542 (2012)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported in part by the Israel Science Foundation Grant No. 2064/19.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, 69978, Israel

    Lev Vaidman

Authors
  1. Lev Vaidman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lev Vaidman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy

    Angelo Bassi

  2. Department of Mathematics, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA

    Sheldon Goldstein

  3. Fachbereich Mathematik, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

    Roderich Tumulka

  4. Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Genova, Genova, Italy

    Nino Zanghì

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vaidman, L. (2024). Are There Observational Differences Between Bohmian Mechanics and Other Interpretations?. In: Bassi, A., Goldstein, S., Tumulka, R., Zanghì, N. (eds) Physics and the Nature of Reality. Fundamental Theories of Physics, vol 215. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45434-9_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation