Measurement understood through the quantum potential approach
- 221 Downloads
- 54 Citations
Abstract
We review briefly the quantum potential approach to quantum theory, and show that it yields a completely consistent account of the measurement process, including especially what has been called the “collapse of the wave function.” This is done with the aid of a new concept of active information, which enables us to describe the evolution of a physical system as a unique actuality, in principle independent of any observer (so that we can, for example, provide a simple and coherent answer to the Schrödinger cat paradox). Finally, we extend this approach to relativistic quantum field theories, and show that it leads to results that are consistent with all the known experimental implications of the theory of relativity, despite the nonlocality which this approach entails.
Keywords
Wave Function Field Theory Quantum Field Theory Quantum Theory Physical SystemPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.D. Bohm,Phys. Rev. 85, 166 (1952).Google Scholar
- 2.D. Bohm,Phys. Rev. 85, 180 (1952).Google Scholar
- 3.D. Bohm and J.-P. Vigier,Phys. Rev. 96, 208 (1954).Google Scholar
- 4.C. Philippidis, D. Bohm, and R. D. Kaye,Nuovo Cimento B 71, 75 (1982).Google Scholar
- 5.C. Philippidis, C. Dewdney, and B. J. Hiley,Nuovo Cimento B 52, 15 (1979).Google Scholar
- 6.C. Dewdney and B. J. Hiley,Found. Phys. 12, 27 (1982).Google Scholar
- 7.L. de Broglie,Une tentative d'interprétation causale et non linéaire de la mécanique ondulatoire: la théorie de la double solution (Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1956).Google Scholar
- 8.D. Bohm and B. J. Hiley,Found. Phys. 5, 93 (1975).Google Scholar
- 9.N. Bohr,Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (Science Editions, New York, 1961).Google Scholar
- 10.E. Wigner,The Scientist Speculates, I. J. Good, ed. (Putnam, New York, 1965).Google Scholar
- 11.H. Everett,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 454 (1957).Google Scholar
- 12.J. S. Bell, CERN Preprint TH1424 (1971).Google Scholar
- 13.A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and C. Roger,Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982).Google Scholar
- 14.D. Bohm and B. J. Hiley,Found. Phys. 12, 1001 (1982).Google Scholar
- 15.E. Madelung,Z. Phys. 40, 332 (1926).Google Scholar
- 16.A. Baracca, D. Bohm, B. J. Hiley, and A. E. G. Stuart,Nuovo Cimento B 28, 453 (1975).Google Scholar
- 17.D. Bohm, R. Shiller, and J. Tiomno,Nuovo Cimento (Suppl.)1 48 (1955).Google Scholar
- 18.D. Bohm,Quantum Theory (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1960), Chapter 22.Google Scholar
- 19.A. Daneri, A. Loinger, and G. M. Prosperi,Nucl. Phys. 44, 297 (1962);Nuovo Cimento B 44, 119 (1966).Google Scholar
- 20.D. Bohm,Quantum Theory (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1960), Chapter 8.Google Scholar
- 21.I. Prigogine,From Being to Becoming (Freeman, San Francisco, 1980).Google Scholar
- 22.R. L. Pfleegor and L. Mandel,Phys. Rev. 159, 1084 (1967);J. Opt. Soc. Amer. 58, 946 (1968).Google Scholar
- 23.P. A. M. Dirac,Nature (London)168, 906 (1951).Google Scholar
- 24.B. S. de Witt,General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey, S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, eds. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979).Google Scholar