Philosophers Look at Quantum Mechanics pp 107-118 | Cite as

# Bohmian Mechanics and Its Ontological Commitments

## Abstract

One of the putative lessons from quantum mechanics is that the mathematical structure of that theory and empirical evidence demand that we accept a view of our physical world in which fundamental physical processes at the microlevel are irreducibly and ineliminably indeterministic and even that there cannot exist an objective, observer-independent reality (or “truth of the matter”). This is certainly a world view that is consonant with the standard, or “Copenhagen”, interpretation of quantum mechanics, often associated with some of the founding fathers of quantum theory, such as Niels Bohr, Max Born and Werner Heisenberg. I first substantiate this representation of the Copenhagen interpretation by examining typical claims made by these founders and succinctly summarize those positions. I then argue that this common acceptance of the necessity of indeterminism is unfounded, since there exists an alternative version of quantum mechanics, one due to David Bohm, that can be in principle empirically indistinguishable from standard quantum mechanics. Moreover, in Bohmian mechanics (BM), fundamental physical processes at the microlevel are irreducibly and ineliminably deterministic and there exists an objective, observer-independent reality. While this alternative formulation of quantum mechanics **does** allow one to have an ontology that is much closer to that of classical physics than is usually associated with quantum phenomena, it does at the same time raise foundational questions about the status of the special theory of relativity and about the ontology of spacetime.

## References

- Bell, J. S. (1987).
*Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar - Beller, M. (1998). The Sokal Hoax: At whom are we laughing?
*Physics Today, 51*(9), 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Beller, M. (1999).
*The quantum revolution as dialogue and rhetoric*. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (to be published).Google Scholar - Bohm, D. (1951).
*Quantum theory*. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar - Bohm, D. (1952). A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of ‘hidden’ variables, I and II.
*Physical Review, 85*, 166–179–180–193.Google Scholar - Bohm, D. (1980).
*Wholeness and the implicate order*. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar - Bohr, N. (1934).
*Atomic theory and the description of nature*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar - Born, M. (1949).
*Natural philosophy of cause and chance*. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar - Born, M. (1951).
*The restless universe*. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar - Brown, H., Butterfield, J., & Pagonis, C. (Eds.). (1999).
*Philosophy and physics*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (to be published).Google Scholar - Cushing, J. T. (1981). Electromagnetic mass, relativity, and the Kaufmann experiments.
*American Journal of Physics, 49*, 1133–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Cushing, J. T. (1994).
*Quantum mechanics: Historical contingency and the Copenhagen hegemony*. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar - Cushing, J. T., & Bowman, G. (1999). Bohmian mechanics and Chaos. In H. Brown, J. Butterfield, C. Pagonis, et al. (Eds.),
*Philosophy and physics*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (to be published).Google Scholar - Cushing, J. T., Fine, A., & Goldstein, S. (Eds.). (1996).
*Bohmian mechanics and quantum theory: An appraisal*. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., & Zanghi, N. (1992a). Quantum equilibrium and the origin of absolute uncertainty.
*Journal of Statistical Physics, 67*, 843–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., & Zanghi, N. (1992b). Quantum chaos, classical randomness, and Bohmian mechanics.
*Journal of Statistical Physics, 68*, 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Einstein, A. (1949). Reply to criticisms. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.),
*Albert Einstein: Philosopher-scientist*(p. 666). La Salle: Open Court.Google Scholar - Heilbron, J. L. (1988). The earliest missionaries of the Copenhagen spirit. In E. Ullmann-Margalit (Ed.),
*Science in reflection*(pp. 201–233). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Heisenberg, W. (1958).
*Physics and philosophy*. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar - Holland, P. R. (1993).
*The quantum theory of motion*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Landau, L. D., & Lifshitz, E. M. (1977).
*Quantum mechanics: Non-relativistic theory*(3rd ed.). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar - Mermin, N. D. (1998). What is quantum mechanics trying to tell us?
*American Journal of Physics, 66*, 753–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Moore, W. (1989).
*Schrödinger, life and thought*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Quine, W. V. (1960).
*Word and object*. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar - Schilpp, P. A. (Ed.). (1949).
*Albert Einstein: Philosopher-scientist*. La Salle: Open Court.Google Scholar - Ullmann-Margalit, E. (Ed.). (1988).
*Science in reflection*. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar - Valentini, A. (1992).
*On the pilot-wave theory of classical, quantum and subquantum physics*. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, ISAS – International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste, Italy.Google Scholar - Valentini, A. (1996). Pilot-wave theory of fields, gravitation and cosmology. In J. T. Cushing, A. Fine, & S. Goldstein (Eds.),
*Bohmian mechanics and quantum theory: An appraisal*(pp. 45–66). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Valentini, A. (2001).
*Pilot-wave theory: An alternative approach to modern physics*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar - von Neumann, J. (1955).
*Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics*. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar